[Dsg-ltcc] ltcc leakage rates.

[Patrizia Rossi]

Dear Amrit,

thank you for the very useful information. Indeed, it would have been interesting to compare your numbers with the leakage rate before the installation.
Concerning the RICH, the plan is to replace sector 2 of LTCC, which seems being one of the best. I don’t know what are the implications to replace, instead, sector 1,3 or 6. 

Cheers
patrizia
---------------------------------------------------
# Patrizia Rossi
# Jefferson Lab 
# 12000 Jefferson Avenue
# Suite 5
# Newport News VA 23606 (USA)
# e-mail: rossi at jlab.org
# phone: +1 (757) 269 7740
# fax: + 1 (757) 269 5800
# cell: +1 (757) 528 7606




> On 26/apr/2017, at 14:52, Amrit Yegneswaran <yeg at jlab.org> wrote:
> 
> brian, marc, and george measured the leakage rates of the ltcc sectors  over an extended period of time.
> based on these measurements the results are
> sector 
> C4F10
> L/day
> C4F10 kg/day
> 1
> 95
> 1.06
> 2
> 32
> 0.36
> 3
> 118
> 1.32
> 4
> 38
> 0.43
> 5
> 27
> 0.30 
> 6
> 101
> 1.13
> 
> sectors 2, 4 and 5 are best.
> sectors 1, 3, and 6 are worst.
> 
> as we have 155 kg of C4F10, and it takes 73 kg  to fill a sector we could in principle use any of the sectors for a 30 day run period, e.g. engineering run.
> of-course best would be to select a sector from 2,4,and 5.
> 
> we advise against the removal of the good sectors (2,4, and 5), as it appears the leaks are caused during the process of installation and/or removal.
> 
> for physics runs, if the RICH could be installed in sector 1 we could run run with sectors 2, 4, an 5 at a cost of:
> filling: 3*73kg =219kg -> cost = 219kg*170 $/kg = $37230.
> leakage(ops) : (0.36+0.43+0.30) 1.1kg/day -> cost 1.1kg/day*170 $/kg= 187$/day
> 
> 
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/dsg-hallb_ltcc/attachments/20170426/eefadf6f/attachment-0002.html>