Lyon Gantry Status TEC meeting Dec D. Contardo Module production in Lyon Rigidifier test on R4 Frame tolerance effect on assembly plates Short term plan

Plates status 2 R1 ==> were either N or S, now must be dedicated due to ridigifier 1 R1S + 1 R1N 1 R3 ==> new, validated 2 R4 ==> gluing with ridigifier tested in one position - operation OK no precision loss - some touch up needed 5 R7 ==> all ready All plates are validated (but one R7) and need to be machined for rigidifiers implementation Bias glue works well Calibration plate at the Metrology Group at Cern : should be ready before Christmas Sensor handling tool received Lyon plate status

Assembly statistic 8 R4, 2 in December NEW 18 R7 2 R1N full modules done in November 2 R1S full modules done in November 7 R3 done in December NEW All 11 last modules are valid in the DB and show precisions as good as those presented at last meeting (Oct 21, 2003) for the 18 R7 1 R4 WITH RIDIFIER NEW Lyon module production

Lyon R4 with rigidifier Rigidifier position on the plate Back of the R4 prototype after gluing

- Rigidifier positioning to close to the frame, less than the 100mu specified, will be modified - Walls around the rigidifier too thin, will be modified - Vacuum below the rigidifier ok - Position precision of sensor and hybrid positioning not affected - Positioning of the hybrid so that spacers half on the frame cross piece half out to be better defined. Present R4 prototype : the distance between pitch and sensor edge is 100mu (for a loose specification of 100 to 300mu). Given this, the spacer is out of the frame by 1.4mm and not 1.5 still it is close to the spacer positioning precision ~ 500mu No principle problem observed to glue the rigidifiers at the gantry for R1-R3-R4. Needs more statistics to understand if tolerances can affect the process. Lyon R4 with rigidifier

Effect of frame thickness tolerances Present status of plates : distance from frame (bottom) to sensor (bottom) R1-R3-R4 : 750 (frames) (kapton + glue) + 50 (tolerance) R5-R6-R7 : 650 (frames) (kapton + glue)

Effect of frame thickness tolerances Measured graphite thickness : 740 mu to 800 mu mean 770 mu (plus peak above 800mu) Measured Kapton thickness : 160 to 220 mu mean 190 mu Measured thickness at the glue pocket : 750 mu to 860 mu mean 820 mu R1-R3-R4 : 970 (mean pocket) compared to 1000 (plate) with 940 min 1000 max Space between sensor and kapton top at 30 mean 60 max 0 min R5-R6-R7 : 820 (mean pocket) compared to 850 (plate) with 750 min 860 max Space between sensor and kapton top at 30 mean 100 max -10 (leak) Measurement : we can slide a 100 mu foil in between the legs and the sensors for R3 and R6 Conclusion : - Similar situations for all plates we don’t modify them before further investigation : - try to increase thickness of small geometry frames (simulated with calibrated spacers up to apparition of leaks below sensors. - Do more measurements - Try to measure effect on cooling

Short term plan - Produce 4 R1N + 4R1S for petal integration with rigidifiers glued by hand - Modify plates R4 and R7 for rigidifiers in priority (ready for mid-january) then R1S/R1N/R3 * Proposal to track frames as anyother componant : Put the module 1D labels at the frame assembly and register the frames as modules in the central DB. (difference between assembled and empty modules (frame) possible In DB Browser).