NSTX Thomson Scattering and NB Analysis Update: Maxwell Generated EM Loads and ANSYS WB Static Stresses 01-19-11.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

FEA Reference Guide See additional material herehere.

Advertisements

Figure 1 – NSTX Upper Umbrella Assembly Upgrade Design: Version 4.

First Wall Heat Loads Mike Ulrickson November 15, 2014.

Disruption Analysis of PP, VV, and Components Model includes bracket conducting path on back of PPs Disruption cases: Mid plane fast disruption (1 ms)

WS11-1 VND101, Workshop 11 MSC.visualNastran 4D Exercise Workbook Bracket.

ME 450 Group Adrian Conrad Chris Cook Thomas Hylton Nathan Wagers High Pressure Water Fixture Conceptual Design Analysis December 10, 2007.

Two questions: (1) How to find the force, F on the electric charge, Q excreted by the field E and/or B? (2) How fields E and/or B can be created? Gauss’s.

Finite Element Model Generation Model size Element class – Element type, Number of dimensions, Size – Plane stress & Plane strain – Higher order elements.

EMA D Elements. Introduction 3-D elements have 3 degrees of freedom per node (u x, u y, u z ) The two fundamental shapes are hexahedral and tetrahedral.

Linear Buckling Workshop 7. Workshop Supplement Linear Buckling August 26, 2005 Inventory # WS7-2 Workshop 7 - Goals The goal in this workshop is.

Vacuum Vessel Production Readiness Review

Abstract/Objectives Better understand the effects of typical GD&T variations on Bolt Stresses in Torque Carrying Bolted Flanges Create Trend Curves for.

AT Pilot Plant EM and Structural Studies P. Titus.

Lecture 2 – Finite Element Method

J.Cugnoni, LMAF-EPFL,  Stress based criteria (like Von Mises) usually define the onset of “damage” initiation in the material  Once critical stress.

Update on ARIES-CS Coil Structural Analysis X.R. Wang and A.R. Raffray ARIES Meeting PPPL, NJ October 4-5, 2006.

Figure 1 – NSTX Upper Umbrella Assembly Upgrade Design: Version 3.

NSTX Center Stack Upgrade Workshop Brainstorming on Design Solutions for TF Joint C Neumeyer Jan 22, 2009.

Status of the Coil Structure Design and Magnetic-Structural Analysis Presented by X.R. Wang Contributors: UCSD: S. Malang, A.R. Raffray PPPL: H.M. Fan.

NSTX ARMOR PLATE 2/18/10 NEUTRAL BEAM ARMOR PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS.

MRI Magnets in MICE Initial Scoping Study Minfeng Xu Feb. 15, 2005.

Physics of fusion power Lecture 10 : Running a discharge / diagnostics.

1 THERMAL & MECHANICAL PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS ELM COIL ALTERNATE DESIGN Interim Review July 26-28, 2010 In-Vessel Coil System Interim Review – July 26-28,

RFCC Module Design Update  automatic tuners  cavity suspension  cavity installation Steve Virostek Lawrence Berkeley National Lab MICE Collaboration.

NSTX CSU Preliminary Assessment of PFCs Art Brooks December 8,

NSTX Center Stack Upgrade Workshop Requirements & Design Point C Neumeyer Jan 22, 2009.

KDEMO Structural Analysis P. Titus June ! KDEMO coil axisymmetric analysis pfcb 21 1, 1.52,0.70,.9,1.3,8,10 !CS1 2, 1.52,2.10,.9,1.3,8,10 !CS2.

NSTXU-CALC Vessel Port Rework for NB and Thomson Scattering

NSTXU-CALC TF Flex Joint and TF Bundle Stub

LAT-TD GLAST LAT Project Tracker Inner Shipping Container Analysis and Test Results Tracker Inner Shipping Container Analysis and Test Results August.

NSTX-U NSTX-U PAC-31 Response to Questions – Day 1 Summary of Answers Q: Maximum pulse length at 1MA, 0.75T, 1 st year parameters? –A1: Full 5 seconds.

ANSYS for MEMS by Manjula1 FEM of MEMS on ANSYS MEMS Summer 2007 Why FEM for MEMS? Features in ANSYS Basic Procedures Examples.

Figure 1 – NSTX Upper Umbrella Assembly Upgrade Design: Version 3.

Faraday’s Law and Inductance. Faraday’s Law A moving magnet can exert a force on a stationary charge. Faraday’s Law of Induction Induced emf is directly.

Image courtesy of National Optical Astronomy Observatory, operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, under cooperative agreement.

Magnets and Supports Bob Wands October 20, 2006 PPD/MD/Engineering Analysis Group Fermilab 4 th Concept Detector at Fermilab October, 2006.

1 R D Pillsbury Sherbrooke Consulting, Inc. OPERA Analyses of the In-vessel Coils for the IDR In-Vessel Coil System Intermediate Design Review –

ITER In-Vessel Coils (IVC) Interim Design Review Thermal Structural FEA of Feeders A Brooks July 27, 2010 July 26-28, 20101ITER_D_353BL2.

1 MME3360b Assignment % of final mark Each problem is worth 25% of assignment mark Unless otherwise stated, use SI units: displacement [mm] stress.

Results of Linear Stress Analyses for Modular Coils and Coil structure For 2T High Beta Currents at 0 Seconds and Initial Coil Shrinkage of in/in.

Figure 1 – NSTX Upper Umbrella Assembly Upgrade Design: Version 3.

Twin Solenoid Study Infinite and Short Models. Infinitive Twin Solenoid Induction in the Detector area B d = µ 0 (i d -i a ) with radius R d Induction.

1 HOW MANY ELEMENTS? How to choose element size? –Critically important in obtaining good results –Mesh refinement improves solution accuracy. –How small.

Update: TF Outer Ring and Clevis Design TF Outer Ring – Implemented recommendations from P. Rogoff. Modified Bolted Joint. Modified weldment to reduce.

issues 40 min. rep. rate Fabrication of flex sections –Water jet cut copper –Copper flat cable –Others – electroform brazed straps –Shape –OOP support.

NSTX Supported by NSTX Centerstack Upgrade Project Meeting P. Titus March Insulation Short Beam Tests – Failure Modes Ripple Loads on PF PF4/5.

Nonlinear Analyses of Modular Coils and Shell structure for Coil Cool-down and EM Loads Part 1 – Results of Shell Structure and Modular Coils H.M. Fan.

Figure 1 – NSTX Upper Umbrella Assembly Upgrade Design: Version 4

AWB NSTX TF Flag Joint Design Review April 10, 2003 Art Brooks.

Final_Bellows.ppt. The purpose for these analyses was to justify and select the appropriate NSTX Center Stack Update project VV Bellows. The bellows should.

Evaluating Impact of TF Coil Deformations Under EM Load on Magnetic Field Quality Coil Deformations provided by Len Myatt’s ANSYS Structural Analysis of.

Analysis of TF Load Paths and Vacuum Vessel Loading H. M. Fan Jan. 22, 2009.

NSTX Supported by NSTX Centerstack Upgrade Project Meeting P. Titus March F.

NSTX Supported by NSTX Centerstack Upgrade Project Meeting P. Titus Feb 3, 2010 Dome Rib Tab Weld Stress Removing TF OOP Support to the Vessel.

A PROPOSED TF JOINT DESIGN FOR THE NSTX CENTERSTACK UPGRADE Robert D Woolley 25 February 2009.

NSTX TF outer leg analysis Because the stress on umbrella structure is too high, there are some ideas to reduce it, like adding a case to enhance the stiffness.

Disruption Analysis of PP, VV, and Components. Opera 3D Model – Transient ELEKTRA Solver Fast mid-plane centered disruption 2 MA/ms Back ground field.

Unstructured Meshing Tools for Fusion Plasma Simulations

ANSYS Workbench 9.0 Electromagnetics Paul Lethbridge

LINEAR COLLIDER WORKSHOP SiD Solenoid Status

Two questions: (1) How to find the force, F on the electric charge, Q excreted by the field E and/or B? (2) How fields E and/or B can be created?

WORKSHOP 11 PRESS FIT CAT509, Workshop 11, March 2002 WS11-1.

Maxwell 3D Transient.

Produktentwicklung und Maschinenelemente

JLAB MEETING FDR – April 23-24th 2013

Mechanical Modelling of the PSI CD1 Dipole

Maxwell and Ansys simulations for the CAPP detector

Workshop 2.1 ANSYS Mechanical Basics.

Welding Jig Redesign CATIA Project

Two questions: (1) How to find the force, F on the electric charge, Q excreted by the field E and/or B? (2) How fields E and/or B can be created?

Presentation transcript:

NSTX Thomson Scattering and NB Analysis Update: Maxwell Generated EM Loads and ANSYS WB Static Stresses

Steady-State Maxwell EM Analysis: PF and TF Coil Loads: Current Scenario #79 with 10% Headroom

ANSYS WB Solid Model of Simplified Coil Assembly Exported to Maxwell

ANSYS WB Solid Model of Simplified Coil Assembly Exported to Maxwell (2)

Maxwell Solid Model with Vacuum Enclosure

Maxwell Results: Magnetic Flux Density on Y-Z Plane Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Maxwell and Opera Field Results Agree within 3%

Maxwell Results: Magnetic Flux Density on Coil Surfaces Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom

Maxwell Results: Magnetic Flux Density on Coil Surfaces(2) Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom

Maxwell Results: Current Density on Coil Surfaces Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom

ANSYS WB Full Model Mesh Hex Dominant Mesh Element Size = 5 cm # Nodes = # Elements =

TF Outer Leg OOP Torque and Force, Fixed Ends, No Clevis Load Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom TF OOP Torque = 1.271E06 ft-lbf TF OOP Force = 12 x 24,103 lbf = 2.892E05 lbf

TF Inner Leg OOP Torque, OOP Force/ Flag: Fixed Ends Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom OOP Torque = 9.99E04 ft-lbf OOP Force/Flag = 9.99E04 ft-lbf/ (1 ft x 36) = 2.775E03 lbf

Maxwell/ANSYS WB EM Generated Loads: Half Plane TF OOP Torque Current Scenario #79w/ Headroom

Maxwell/ANSYS WB EM Generated Loads: PF1AU Vertical Force Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom

Maxwell/ANSYS WB EM Generated Loads: PF2U Vertical Force Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom

Maxwell/ANSYS WB EM Generated Loads: PF3U Vertical Force Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom

Maxwell/ANSYS WB EM Generated Loads: PF5U Vertical Force Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom

Transient Maxwell EM Analysis: Vacuum Vessel Disruption Load: Centered-Plasma Disruption Scenario

For the current quench mode, five cases shall be assessed by simulating the linear decay of current at the rate specified for the five locations. For the VDE/Halo mode, four cases shall be assessed. In each case the current in the centered plasma shall be decreased as indicated while the current in the offset plasma shall be increased as indicated to simulate plasma motion. Forces due to induced currents shall be added to forces due to halo currents.

ANSYS WB Solid Model of Simplified Coil and VV w/ Ports Exported to Maxwell

Maxwell Solid Model with Vacuum Enclosure: w/ Ports

Maxwell Vacuum Vessel w/ Ports Mesh: VV Mesh Settings: Element Length = 3 cm, Faceting Angle = 5 degrees # Elements = 3.32E06

Magnetic Flux Density on Y-Z Plane: VV w/ Ports: End of Quench Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Maxwell and Opera Field Results Agree within 3%

Magnetic Flux Density on Vacuum Vessel w/ Ports: Start of Quench 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field

Eddy Current Density on Vacuum Vessel w/ Ports: Start of Quench 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field

Magnetic Flux Density on Vacuum Vessel w/ Ports: End of Quench 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field

Eddy Current Density on Vacuum Vessel w/ Ports: End of Quench 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field

Eddy Current Density on Vacuum Vessel w/ Ports: End of Quench 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field

ANSYS DM Solid Model: Vacuum Vessel w/ Port Extensions

ANSYS WB Static Structural Model w/ Ports: Mesh VV Mesh Settings: Automatic Sweep, # Div. = 3; Element Size = 2 cm; No Mid-side Nodes # Nodes = # Elements =

ANSYS Static Structural Model: Loads and Boundary Conditions Fixed Face Face Radial Displacement = 0 OOP Torque = 2.85E06 ft-lbf Pressure =14.7 psi

ANSYS Static Structural Results w/ Port Extensions: Force Density 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field Force Anomalies Results for 2/3 Required Maxwell Mesh Density

ANSYS Static Structural Results w/ Port Extensions: von Mises Stress 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field Results for 2/3 Required Maxwell Mesh Density

ANSYS Static Structural Results w/ Port Extensions: von Mises Stress (2) 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field Results for 2/3 Required Maxwell Mesh Density

ANSYS Static Structural Results w/ Port Extensions: von Mises Stress (3) 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field Results for 2/3 Required Maxwell Mesh Density

ANSYS WB Solid Model of Simplified Coil and VV Exported to Maxwell

Maxwell Solid Model with Vacuum Enclosure: w/o Ports

Maxwell Vacuum Vessel w/o Ports Mesh: VV Mesh Settings: Element Length = 2 cm, Faceting Angle = 1 degree # Elements = 2.50E06

Magnetic Flux Density on Vacuum Vessel w/o Ports: Start of Quench 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field

Eddy Current Density on Vacuum Vessel w/o Ports: Start of Quench 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field

Magnetic Flux Density on Vacuum Vessel w/o Ports: End of Quench 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field

Eddy Current Density on Vacuum Vessel w/o Ports: End of Quench 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field

Eddy Current Density on Vacuum Vessel w/o Ports: End of Quench 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field

ANSYS Static Structural Results, Ports excluded from EM Solution: Force Density 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field

Static Structural Results, Ports Excluded from EM Solution: von Mises Stress 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field

Static Structural Results, Ports Excluded from EM Solution: von Mises Stress (2) 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field

Static Structural Results, Ports Excluded from EM Solution: Margin of Safety 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field Factor of Safety = 1.0 Max. Stress = 26,000 psi

Static Structural Results, Ports Excluded from EM Solution: Margin of Safety (2) 1ms Centered-Plasma Disruption: Current Scenario #79 w/ Headroom Background Field Factor of Safety = 1.0 Max. Stress = 26,000 psi

1st