[Solid_ec] Calorimeter dimensions
Zhiwen Zhao
zwzhao at jlab.org
Thu Mar 7 16:37:58 EST 2013
hi, Paul
If I reduce the radius to 85cm or 80cm, the total mass of endcap reduce
by about 10% or 15%
But the field saturation happens mostly at the endcap nose front tip,
not at the back where the EC is.
So I think it's ok to change to 85cm or 80cm if we need the room.
The endcap donut is only 15cm thick, I would like to keep it this way to
have its strength for bearing weight.
The field distribution plot is attached.
Thanks
Zhiwen
On 3/7/2013 1:44 PM, Paul E. Reimer wrote:
> Hello Zhiwen,
>
> Here is a hex layout. The arcs are at 90, 96 and 100 cm. You see that
> if we want to cover 96 cm with hex's of this size, we then have to
> violate the 90 cm boundary, even without a support structure. One could
> come close by selectively removing 3 of the modules. I fear that we
> will also have this problem with the outer radius as well.
>
> Another option is smaller modules, but that increases cost.
>
> Paul
>
> On 3/7/13 12:35 PM, Paul E. Reimer wrote:
>> Hello Zhiwen,
>>
>> For the FAEC, the flux return space at 90 cm and the calorimeter inner
>> radius are not leaving much room for support structures and for the
>> fact that the modules don't form a perfect radius. How much of the
>> flux return can we give up on? You can see that to get down to always
>> including a 100 cm radius some modules go down to 89cm.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3/7/13 12:05 PM, Zhiwen Zhao wrote:
>>> Hi, Paul and Vic
>>>
>>> I realize that the previous 100cm of forward angle EC inner radius is
>>> only to maintain the 7.5 degree polar angle for target center.
>>> For full 40cm target, number need to be a little smaller as 96cm
>>>
>>> here I summarize the dimension requirement for LAEC and FAEC
>>> **********************************
>>> refer to picture attached
>>>
>>> FAEC radius 96cm - 262cm
>>> Fluxreturn space 90cm - 270cm
>>>
>>> LAEC 92 - 140cm
>>> crystat inner radius 144cm
>>>
>>> Please note
>>> 1. The radius for LAEC and FAEC are just the range of minimum
>>> acceptance we want to cover. The actual physical size can be larger,
>>> but it's limited by available spaces.
>>> 2. the FAEC supporting structure is share between SIDIS and PVDIS
>>> experiments. While SIDIS needs from 96cm - 220cm and PVDIS needs
>>> 110cm - 262cm, the overall need is 96 - 262cm.
>>> 3. SIDIS FAEC needs to move upsteam 85cm to become PVDIS FAEC, so the
>>> supporting structure needs to allow the movement. Note at the before
>>> and after locations, the endcap nose shape changes. It's a concern if
>>> the supporting structure is connected to the endcap nose. If the
>>> supporting is only connected to the endcap donut (15cm thick iron),
>>> not the endcap nose, it won't be a concern any more.
>>> 4. LAEC needs to support on its own without put force on cryostat and
>>> its supporting may need to share with GEM to stay within the limited
>>> space inside the solenoid.
>>> 5. The LAEC 92cm is the limit for the 100cm2 size module only. Below
>>> that, we need to put in smaller size modules to fill the triangle
>>> area as much as possible, but not cross the hypotenuse line at 14.85
>>> degree.
>>>
>>> **********************************
>>>
>>> Please let me know for any question or suggestion
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Zhiwen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/5/2013 3:09 PM, Zhiwen Zhao wrote:
>>>> Hi, Paul
>>>>
>>>> Your EC layout has similar concept as Mehdi had before
>>>> http://hallaweb.jlab.org/12GeV/SoLID/download/ec/layout/small%20angle%20Babar_new.pdf
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Related to the LAEC layout
>>>> The endcap nose which is surrounded by EC has radius 90cm.
>>>> The EC starts at 100cm to cover 7.5 degree polar angle.
>>>> 8 degree corresponds to 106cm and the /Moliere/radius is 5cm, so it's
>>>> enough to have the shower.
>>>> If we want to keep the solid green modules, there won't be room for
>>>> anything else.
>>>> Is there additional supporting structure needs to go between the EC and
>>>> endcap nose?
>>>> I can made endcap 5cm smaller and hope it doesn't affect field much if
>>>> it's the last thing we can do.
>>>>
>>>> Related to the LAEC layout, see slide 8,9,10
>>>> http://hallaweb.jlab.org/12GeV/SoLID/meeting_coll/2012_12/UpdateOnCalorimeter.pdf
>>>>
>>>> You can see we plan to use one or two layers of smaller module (5x5cm)
>>>> to cover the triangle area.
>>>> It's doable for large and small square shape modules.
>>>> For hexagon module, maybe we can have smaller module with a
>>>> half-hexagon
>>>> shape?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Zhiwen
>>>>
>>>> On 3/5/2013 12:33 PM, Paul E. Reimer wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> So, Here are my calculations on calorimeter module dimensions:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> mm
>>>>> side length 62.50
>>>>>
>>>>> Block half height
>>>>>
>>>>> 54.13
>>>>> Black tape thickness (3M)
>>>>> 0.18
>>>>> Tape Layers
>>>>> 3.00
>>>>> total tape
>>>>>
>>>>> 0.53
>>>>> Al Foil (Wikipedia)
>>>>>
>>>>> 0.02
>>>>> Wrapping tolerance
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 0.20
>>>>> Block fabrication tolerance
>>>>>
>>>>> 0.50
>>>>> Total effect half height
>>>>>
>>>>> 55.38
>>>>> Effective Side Length 63.95
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The following is a possible layout, with a boundary example. The
>>>>> green outlined modules do not exist. The red and black modules are
>>>>> modules that are completely outside the r=100 cm boundary. The solid
>>>>> hexagons contain r=100, with solid red indicating that the center of
>>>>> the module is greater than 100 and green indicating the center of the
>>>>> module is less than 100. The three arcs are at 90 cm, 100 cm and 110
>>>>> cm. The proposal is to include all solid modules.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul
>>>>> --
>>>>> Paul E. Reimer +1-630-252-4037 (Argonne Office)
>>>>> Physics Division Bldg 203 +1-630-252-3903 (Argonne Fax)
>>>>> 9700 S. Cass Ave. +1-630-840-5709 (Fermilab)
>>>>> Argonne, IL 60439 +1-630-344-9207 (Cell)
>>>>> USAreimer at anl.gov
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Solid_ec mailing list
>>>>> Solid_ec at jlab.org
>>>>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/solid_ec
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> Paul E. Reimer +1-630-252-4037 (Argonne Office)
>> Physics Division Bldg 203 +1-630-252-3903 (Argonne Fax)
>> 9700 S. Cass Ave. +1-630-840-5709 (Fermilab)
>> Argonne, IL 60439 +1-630-344-9207 (Cell)
>> USAreimer at anl.gov
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Solid_ec mailing list
>> Solid_ec at jlab.org
>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/solid_ec
>
> --
> Paul E. Reimer +1-630-252-4037 (Argonne Office)
> Physics Division Bldg 203 +1-630-252-3903 (Argonne Fax)
> 9700 S. Cass Ave. +1-630-840-5709 (Fermilab)
> Argonne, IL 60439 +1-630-344-9207 (Cell)
> USAreimer at anl.gov
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: SoLID_CLEO_B100.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 131999 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/solid_ec/attachments/20130307/8b3b6381/attachment-0001.pdf
More information about the Solid_ec
mailing list