Login

WP4 Crab Cavities: support and alignment system

→ Europe/Zurich
376/1-020 (CERN)

376/1-020

CERN

16
Show room on map
Hide

Tom inputs and analysis and Carlo analysis suggest that supporting the dressed cavities with blades is optimal under the mechanical point of view:

  • Rods can be non-vertical, but do not have a strong effect on the 1st mode (which Tom suggests should be bigger than 20-25 Hz) and on the stiffness. Besides, they introduce stresses during cool down.
  • Blades have the disadvantage of the vertical orientation, but can stiff the cavity more than rods and, if oriented towards the FPC, do not introduce stresses during cool down.
  • Tubes are midway between the two options.

Teddy says that for the DQW the vertical blades can probably be positioned towards the extremities of the tank, without big issues for integration. RFD will be more tricky.

Both Tom and Carlo highlighted that there’s margin on the heat load with respect to the cross sections used in the calculations.

Mateusz asked that the lateral stiffness is carefully assessed as it’s a critical quantity for alignment. However, the blades approach is supposed to be stiffer than what previous calculations showed happens using rods (which don’t introduce big deformations when a lateral load is applied, already).

Next actions:

  • Define a baseline configuration for the blades -> Teddy
  • Investigate how the mechanical performance change in the RFD if the blades are moved towards mid tank -> Tom
  • Estimate the lateral stiffness in the DQW -> Carlo

Detailed calculations will follow the final configuration.

There are minutes attached to this event. Show them.
Powered by Indico v3.3.3-pre