Bill Wisniewski SuperB Frascati Meeting September 30, 2010 Integration Bill Wisniewski SuperB Frascati Meeting September 30, 2010
Technical Issues Items for resolution for the TDR: Tungsten shield support. This is the ‘800 pound gorilla’: Tungsten shield is critical for functioning of the detector There is no engineered solution for supporting these shields forward and backward. Even notions for supporting these items cause headaches: Direct support: might be done by locally thickening the DCH end walls (not nice for calorimetry, FPID). But still has the problem of extra load for the DIRC CST and SST. Cantilevered? Forward end: From outside the detector? Interference with SVT removal? From the barrel steel between the barrel and endcaps? From the EMC forward endcap? All notions are unpleasant. Page 2
Technical Issues Ship vs Disassemble/ship/reassemble for EMC barrel Best solution is to be able to ship the EMC barrel, preferably by airplane, from SLAC to SuperB Needs credible engineering verification that it is possible to ship without the 280 cantilevered carbon fiber modules dancing into each other destructively, driven by vibrations due to the method of transportation (air, sea, land where needed). FEA for this. Fortunately barrel EMC has a set (completeness?) of 3D drawing files. Is there a way to stabilize the modules (assuming that this is needed from the FEA)? Evaluation of risks for removal of inner wall, etc. Transport investigation. Page 3
Technical Issues Flux Return iron: Effects of modifications of steel to accommodate the accelerator Needs analysis of changes to the field, with consequent changes to the forces on the superconducting coil and its supports. Would be best to have details in hand for the TDR. Need more clearance to put in outermost layer. Alternative support of the steel sextants Needs completion of analysis, check/review. Is all the info needed available? May require redesign of the support arches. Details being worked by Massimo Benettoni Page 4
Technical Issues Flux Return iron: General support structure. The steel/floor separation is likely to be larger to make it easier to work around the detector. Level of development needed for the TDR is not full detailed analysis…’notional’ carried forward a bit is probably enough (engineering note, not detailed design) Page 5
Technical Issues SVT installation/removal scheme: Progress continues here (Filippo Bosi) Detailed engineering ongoing. Issue is, how does this fit with the steel. TDR needs at least a credible process, as well as tooling conceptual design. Forward PID Tied up with issue of need (task force) Engineering progress here on notions of structure by Sandry Wallon and Frederic Bogard. Consequences of added mass on the performance of the DIRC CST/SST system if attached to the DCH. Page 6
Technical Issues EMC Endcaps: Forward Endcap: Backward Endcap: Can the forward endcap be a monolith, or is it split-able like the BaBar forward EMC? Need to work out the consequences and choose by the TDR Backward Endcap: Subject of task force scrutiny Consideration of monolith vs parts to accommodate access to the DCH backward end electronics Concepts for support: off the plug, so that access to DCH is speedier; off the DIRC SST? Solutions will likely need additional engineering for the magnet steel plug. Page 7
Technical Issues Services: Expect that the solutions for BaBar are applicable to SuperB Slots for services to travel to the core should be ok Complications for cantilevered new systems Complications for extra DCH cables may be a issue Notions for TDR should be sufficient. Services on the outside of the core can be dealt with later Page 8