MCBXFB Short Orbit Corrector Prototype:
collaring test
P. Abramian, J. Calero, J. A. García Matos, P. Gómez,
J.L. Gutierrez, D. Lopez, J. Munilla, F. Toral (CIEMAT)
N. Bourcey, J. C. Pérez (CERN)
WP3 Meeting – 22nd February 2017
Index
 Collaring test
 Update on project status
 Conclusions
2
Magnet and cable specifications
MCBXFB Technical specifications
Magnet configuration
Integrated field
Minimum free aperture
Nominal current
Radiation resistance
Physical length
Working temperature
Iron geometry
Field quality
Fringe field
Combined dipole
(Operation in X-Y square)
2.5 Tm
150 mm
< 2500 A
40 MGy
< 1.505 m
1.9 K
MQXF iron holes
< 10 units (1E-4)
< 40 mT (Out of the Cryostat)
Cable Parameters
No. of strands
18
Strand diameter
0.48 mm
Cable thickness 0.845 mm
Cable width
4.37 mm
Key-stone angle
0.67º
Cu:Sc
1.75
Radiation resistance
requires mechanical
clamping
Working point < 65%
3
Short mechanical model: concept
•
•
•
Essential to validate the
assembly process and the
mechanical simulations.
A 120 Tm press available at
CIEMAT workshop will be used
to this end.
A 150-mm long set of collars will
be closed. Aluminium dummy
coils will be used for first tests.
4
Short mechanical model: design
Outer collars tooling
Inner collar tooling
5
Short mechanical model: instrumentation
Four strain gauges per
collars: on both sides
of the collars and
noses
Strain gauges: three
sections are monitored
Four displacement
gauges: micrometric
precision
6
Short mechanical model: inner dipole assembly
Shim
[mm]
Average
displacement
gauge
[mm]
Average strain
gauge [μe]
Average stress
[MPa]
Press
force
[ton]
Comments
0.7
0.45~0.51
100
21
-
Once there is contact at all the points of the
structure, the displacement gauges are set to
0 again, as reference for the next steps.
0.6
0.1
189
40
28
0.5
0.2
247
52
26
0.4
0.3
337
71
34
0.3
0.4
429
90
40
Nominal gap is reached with no problems
0.2
0.5
507
106
40
As expected, the pins can be introduced
without effort
Spring
back
N/A
343
72
N/A
•
•
•
At the minimum gap of 0.2 mm, expected
strain at the collar nose was about 530 μe,
very close to the average of the
measurements of the gauges (507 μe).
The pressure is relieved so the inner dipole
is left in its “spring-back” position.
Calculated strain was 350 μe and the
average of all measures is 343 μe.
The collapsible mandrel is retired without
effort form the inner dipole aperture.
7
Short mechanical model: outer dipole assembly
Shim
[mm]
Average
displacement
gauge
[mm]
Average strain gauge
[μe]
Average
stress
[MPa]
Press
force
[ton]
1.4
0.25
32
7
4
1
0.4
109
23
-
0.7
0.69
234
49
22
0.5
0.9
367
77
35
0.4
0.98
416
87
30
0.5
0.9
361
76
33
0.4
1
427
90
38
0.3
1.095
502
105
40
0.2
1.18
590
124
40
Spring
back
N/A
424
89
N/A
•
•
•
At the minimum gap of 0.2 mm, expected strain at the collar nose was about 550 μe, not far
from the average of the measurements (590). However, gauges in the lower half measured
about one half of the upper ones.
The coils have not tried to collapse inwards. Gaps are correct.
Strain gauges are not equilibrated at the “spring back” position. Lower/male gauges
indicate approximately twice the pressure than the upper/female ones. However the
average is 424 μe, very close to the 385 μe expected from the simulation results.
8
Short mechanical model: outer dipole assembly
•
•
•
A mistake was detected in the geometry, at the contact between the male and female
collars.
When simulated in Ansys, the strain at the male and female collars is very different, 500
and 50 μe, respectively. It could explain the previous test results.
We decided to exchange the instrumented collars, so collar packs were fully
disassembled.
9
Short mechanical model: 2nd outer dipole assembly
•
•
•
Shim
[mm]
Average
displacement
gauge
[mm]
Average strain gauge
[μe]
Average
stress
[MPa]
Press
force
[ton]
1
0
0
0
10
0.7
0.27
98
20
-
0.5
0.47
181
38
-
0.5
0.45
189
41
-
0.3
0.68
322
67
40
0.2
0.78
398
83
50
0.2
0.78
405
85
50
Spring
back
N/A
272
57
N/A
Comments
Once there is contact at all the points of the
structure, the displacement gauges are set to 0
again, as reference for the next steps.
We release completely the press, and set again
zero at the gauges.
Some unbalance in the measurements of the
displacement gauges. The back ones move
first and touch the hard stops.
The assembly is centered with the press and
contact surfaces are cleaned to remove some
glue residues.
The keys are inserted without effort and
pushed by the screws easily. The press is
released.
Surprisingly, the strain gauges measure similar values, but lower than expected (550).
Assembly procedure was a bit different, which could explain the difference.
For the time being, we plan to disassemble again the collar packs and repeat the test.
10
Index
 Collaring test
 Update on project status
 Conclusions
11
Summary of last actions

Fabrication techniques:
◦ CTD101K will be used instead of CTD422.
◦ Curing of binder at high temperature (120 ºC) allows stability dimension of
the cable stacks.

Winding machine:
◦ All the components for the brake and wind-up machines are at our premises,
ready for assembly.
◦ The beam and tilting system parts are under fabrication. Delivery foreseen in
two weeks.
◦ Winding tooling: 3D model finished, drawings under revision.

Coil components:
◦ Copper wedges are fabricated by machining, expected by mid-March.
◦ End spacers are under fabrication, problems with the laser parameters.


Binder mould: 3D model finished, drawings ongoing. Some
parts are common for both dipoles.
Impregnation mould: 3D model ongoing.
12
Conclusions
 The inner dipole test was completely successful. The measured
and calculated values were very close. The assembly procedure
was easy to follow and no difficulties were detected.
 In the first outer dipole test, measurements were close to the
calculations in average, but large differences between the lower
and upper halves were detected. When analysing the results, a
mistake in the geometry was detected which could explain the
behaviour. We decided to disassemble the collar packs and repeat
the test. Surprisingly, the measurements are now well balanced,
but they should not.
 In summary, the configuration to hold the torque of the MCBX
magnet is validated but some further tests are still necessary.
13
Final remark
 In fact, we are developing two magnets in one.
 The size of the apertures is impressive.
14
Back-up slides
15
Inner collar outer diameter = 230 mm (Thickness = 27 mm)
Outer collar outer diameter = 316 mm (Thickness = 33 mm)
1
Outer Keys
Handling
supports
Rivets
3 Interference
2
Torque
locking
Inner
keys
4 Titanium
Torque
locking
tube
Press
supports
16
Assembly gaps evolution
A
G
B
H
I
C
Inner collars play = 0,12 mm
Outer collars play = 0,1 mm
J
F
All values in mm
D
E
Gap
Original
gap
ID
Press
ID Spring
Back
Before
OD Press
OD
Press
OD Spring
back
Cooldown
108%
Power.
A
0,2
-
-
opens
0,13
opens
opens
0,08
B
0,1
-
-
opens
0,08
0,08
0,085
contact
C
0,5
-
-
opens
0,47
opens
opens
0,4
D
0,55
0,42
opens
opens
opens
opens
opens
opens
E
0,3
0,18
opens
opens
opens
opens
opens
opens
F
0,03
≅0,03
contact
contact
contact
contact
contact
contact
G
0,7
-
-
opens
0,55
opens
opens
opens
H
0,6
-
-
opens
0,45
opens
opens
opens
I
0,03
-
-
contact
contact
contact
contact
contact
J
0,5
-
-
0,43
0,47
0,46
0,465
opens
17