TDR Update - APA Chapter · 7/8/2019 · TDR updates: QA • Section 3: Quality Assurance-Will...

TDR Update - APA Chapter

APA Consortium MeetingJuly 8, 2019

David Schmitz

Schedule to final TDR• The FINAL DUNE TDR is to be submitted to the LBNC on

July 26. Which means we need to wrap up our Chapter by next week!!

- Many thanks to the people who have worked hard to provide new material and updates in the past few weeks!

- Still working now to merge and edit everything.

- A few missing pieces and questions.

DUNE TDR - APA Chapter2

TDR updates: Design• Section 2: Design

- New figure and description for SS APA-to-APA link design in Section 1.2.6 (thanks Lee Greenler!)

- All new Section 1.2.7 APA Structural Analysis describing all the FEA work done to test the APA frame in all of its configurations (thanks Dan Wenman!)

• The section describes the studies done with successful results.

• I think we should also mention in a sentence that there was an external review of the analysis and what the results were.

3

TDR updates: QA• Section 3: Quality Assurance

- Very nice new summary plots showing all the tensions as measured at production sites for all 6 ProtoDUNE APAs (thanks Adam Lister!)

- We then show comparison plots of tensions at production sites (horizontal) to tensions at CERN (vertical and after some weeks/months). These are shown on the next slide. I think we need to say something about the differences that are clear in the plots on the next page. Where do they come from? Wire relaxation? Vertical vs horizontal? I had hoped APA #7 would shed some light, but it’s still in the box at CERN.

4

Tensions: CERN vs Production?

5

Tensions: After cold cycle• This one shows no noticeable changes (how many wires

were tested, doesn’t look like many?)

6


- Section 1.3.2.2 Effect of Electron Diverters on Charge Collection is all new (thanks Tom Junk!)

• Shows that data look ~stable in case of properly powered diverter or with no diverter, but grounded diverter has a noticeable negative impact on the signals near the gap.

• Do we want to include an event display for tracks crossing the grounded diverter? Displays are shown for a powered diverter and no diverter, so it seems to be missing from the presentation.

- Section 1.3.2.3 Effects of Wire Support Combs on Charge Collection is also all new (thanks Tom Junk!)

- Section 1.3.2.3 Wire Bias Voltage Scans and Electron Transparency is an all new section that validates the nominal bias voltages and shows how transparency is reduced if they are ran lower (thanks Xin Qian!)

7


- Will soon have a final draft of text describing the issue with the disconnected grid on APA #3 (thanks Stefania Bordoni!)

- Section 1.3.3 Final Design Prototyping and Test Assemblages is the place to report any successes or findings from the Ash River tests that are on-going.

- Current text reads: • “A top and bottom version of the new supporting APA frame design were built in

spring 2019 at PSL and shipped to Ash River for a full test of the APA pair assembly procedure. The routing of the CE cables through the APA side beams will also be tested, following preliminary cable routing studies carried out at PSL. The Ash River setup will also be used to test the routing of the PDS prototype cables inside the APA frames and the cable connections between the lower and upper APAs. These tests are expected to be completed by October 2019.”

- Are we ready to add anything new about the Ash River tests? Photos?

8


- Section 1.3.2.1 Dead Channels needs updating. Still just the original statement about 42 channels identified in the cold box, but no update about what was observed in later data.

- Also, the Table caption says dead channels “due to the APA themselves”. But what does this mean? What sorts of failures were actually seen?

9

TDR updates: Production Plan• Section 5: Production Plan

- Section 1.5.1 Assembly Procedures and Tooling. I was sent updated text and photos on wiring head updates that I have not yet merged in (thanks Alan Grant!)

- Section 1.5.4 Quality Control in APA Production

- Section 1.5.4.1 APA Frame Acceptance Tests expanded to discuss the geometric tolerances on bare support frames and how they derive from plane separation requirements (thanks Lee Greenler!) I’m still working to merge in the text from Lee.

- Section 1.5.4.2 Material Supply Inspections probably needs to be expanded some to describe how university groups in the US and UK will be responsible for pre-assembly and QC of all parts that go into making APAs at the factories. Stress the importance of parts staying on schedule and showing up confirmed ready for use on an APA.

10

TDR updates: Production Plan• Section 5: Production Plan

- Section 1.5.4 Quality Control in APA Production

- Section 1.5.4.3 Wire Tension Measurements and Continuity and Isolation Checks is an all new section detailing the electrical method for tension measurements and the testing plan (thanks Sebastien Prince!)

• I’m still working on edits and confirming consistency of new text with rest of document.

- We are currently missing a dedicated discussion of the planned 10% sample cold tests to be carried out using the PSL cold box. Maybe add a short section.

- Section 1.5.4.5 Documentation is somewhat thin.

11

TDR updates: Transport & Install• Section 6: Handling and Transport

- Jeff N. is working on new text with more detail on shipping and handling requirements, logistics, and the design.

- New transport box drawings from Peter S.?

- Updates to Section 1.6.3 APA Quality Control During Integration and Installation (thanks Roxanne Guenette!)

• would be nice if we as a group could clarify a few details:

- “When all tests are successful and more than 99% of the channels are confirmed functional, the APA can be prepared for integration with the other components.”

- why 99% and what criteria determine “functional”?

- “A set of final checks, following installation in the cryostat, will definitely be performed to confirm the function of the APAs in their final positions.”

- what more can we say about these checks? what was done for ProtoDUNE?

12

TDR updates: Other• Section 7: Safety Considerations

- New, much improved text (thanks Duane Newhart!)

- Is more still needed?

• Section 8: Management and Organization

• Section 9: Cost, Schedule, and Risks

13

old slides with to-dos…

14

TDR updates neededThis list is reproduced from Alberto’s presentation at the May collaboration meeting, with some annotations.


item who will deliver comments/notes

Add cost estimate Alberto also needed for NSF proposal for US production, so need to ensure consistency

Update all interface documents Alberto, Dan Wenman, Lee Greenler

Update Milestones Alberto Revisit milestone dates and add intermediate milestones to measure production progress

Summary of APA structural analysis Dan Wenman

Longevity of wire tension Lee Greenler How well is this really understood? Will we make ProtoDUNE measurements when removed?

TDR updates needed (ProtoDUNE)



PD: monitoring of disconnected channels

Adam Lister

PD: dependence of APA performance on wire tension

Adam Lister

PD: APA transparency Xin analyzed bias voltage setting data

PD: Performance of electron diverters Task Force Report

PD: problem with the disconnected grid on APA #3

Stefania Bordoni short paragraph

PD: effect of combs Tom Junk study shown at January collaboration meeting?

LBNC have expressed their displeasure over the lack of results and clear statements of lessons learned from ProtoDUNE data. So it needs to be a priority to do a good job with this in final version.

TDR updates needed



Results from new winding head tests Alan Grant feedback indicated a more detailed description of the winder head was needed in general.

Results from Ash River tests● APA doublet assembly● cabling

Bill Miller / Dan Wenman from discussion at Coll. meeting sounds like results may come a little late, first week of July. Will have to summarize what we know then.

QA/QC: concept and results for electrical tension method

Roxanne / Sebastian this is the baseline now, so really need to demonstrateput in risk register

QA/QC: describe procedures for final checks during installationneed schedule for these

Roxanne Guenette

TDR updates needed



Update on transport box design● box cost

Peter Sutcliffe

Transport logistics● from factories to SD storage● SD storage to SURF● storage requirements & plans

at SD● transport costs

Jeff Nelson (US) Peter Sutcliffe (UK)

Is a box test at SURF planned? add to milestone schedule?

● prototype to Ash River for loading two APAs

● then send to SURF

Update on safety procedures ● general winder safety● local factory safety summary● where safety for handling at

SURF● other

Alan Grantfactory managersDuane Newhart

This has always been a weak spot in our Chapter. Focus is on safety of the equipment, rather than people. This needs fixed. We may need help from experts!

Updated APA-APA link design Dan Wenman new design and some more detail needed (see note later)

TDR updates needed (schedule)

19

these need updating to match schedule in NSF proposal

LBNC CommentsSome things emphasized in the first LBNC review (Jan.):


What the LBNC requested What we did What we need to do

much more detail on the schedule and the construction steps within a factory and overall

improved text that describes origin of “40 shifts” estimate

maybe add a Table and 25/50/75/etc milestones

Production Readiness and Factory Readiness Reviews shown on the schedule

added these reviews to milestone table

confirm review dates

to know what institutions are doing what, and that everything is covered

added table of institutions in the US/UK and what they are responsible for (next slide)

Table okay?

to see the management structure of the whole production effort laid out, not just the Consortium

nothing craft a new org chart or table (old one in two slides)

us to address/consider a few design questions (drift length, diverters) and to document how we ensure long-term (20-30 years!) reliability of the detector

nothing on drift lengthhedged on diverters

drift length? NOG-layer? NOdo need to decide about diverters

22

Org chart needs expanding• need names

• production/project manager(s)

• project engineer(s)• QA/AC manager• safety manager• SURF installation manager• factory managers• work package managers for

all the feed-in efforts• … • Check with Tim and Sam

and Ed and Stefan for how to handle this

APA vs. Technical Coord.• Not clear where to describe certain things: APA Chapter or

Technical Coordination Chapter or both?

• installation equipment for the APAs (e.g. the actuator)?

• transport from SD storage to SURF?

• handling and trip down the shaft?

23

Feedback on 2nd versionThe following are just a sample, but are the comments where more input from the Consortium is needed

• The use of Mill-Max pins and sockets and irrecoverable damage is a bit disconcerting. Perhaps a bit more discussion on why this was chosen over other alternatives and mitigation of risk is appropriate (Andy).

• Insufficient description and images for how two APAs are attached. Maybe an exploded view of two APAs. Also, discuss load requirements and engineering analysis verifying the suitability of the connection (PSL).

- Will be tested at Ash River (include photos).

• A discussion of the physics impact of the 45 mm cold gap between APAs should be included as well as the reasons it cannot be reduced.

- Electron diverters Task Force

24

Feedback on 2nd version• Should establish specific acceptance criteria and short of that a

discussion of how they will be established is required.

• QA discussion is a bit weak

• In tension plots comparing measurements at production sites and CERN, the CERN measurements are systematically lower. This means the measurements made in vertical orientation are lower than in horizontal position. Do we understand this?

- at production, measure tensions one layer at a time. at CERN, all layers were in place AND vertical.

- with APA #7, measured after all layers in place - saw a decrease (horizontal). can measure in vertical at CERN (Nicola, Christos).

• Not clear which groups are responsible for assembly and installation. Need to address APA Consortium role.

• Electron diverters mentioned by all. Are we on track to make a clear decision by the TDR submission?

25

Summary

• INPUT DUE BEFORE JUNE 28!!

26

older slides with LBNC comments from January

27

LBNC Comments• Production Planning- “Similar upgrades” should actually be IDENTICAL!! Local variations,

even to exploit local conditions should be forbidden, I think plug-compatibility should be the goal!

• When discussing the modifications to the wire winder at Daresbury, the text says, “Similar upgrades will be implemented, by middle of 2019, on the winding machine at PSL.” This prompted the above comment.

- There needs to be a discussion [in the TDR] of the comparative risk/benefit analysis for the multiple (4) production sites.

- What are the requirements of the factories? should be tabulated and costed.

- There needs to be a discussion of Production Readiness Reviews and their integration in the plan.

- Is there a plan for Factory Readiness Reviews?


LBNC Comments• QA/QC- Surely Consortium input to TC on transport from ITF to SURF is

required! Likely ~3 hours road travel.

- Has the QC narrative here been developed into a schedule? Let’s see some charts.

- The “final checks” should be described in as much detail as possible to inform scheduling.

• this refers to the APA once it is installed inside the cryostat

- Is there a construction data base design? Have you thought of to what extent, and how such data will need to interface to the DAQ and/or offline software?

- For the “travelers” (accompanying documents), are you sure that Tablets should not replace paper?


LBNC Comments• Schedule- There are too few milestones in the schedule table to allow the

LBNC to judge progress, e.g. three years production when all manner of stuff will happen, has no milestones??

- I think a quite detailed schedule is needed for the LBNC to say that the milestones can provide sufficient measure of progress.

- “Each APA will require approximately 50 shifts (8 hour intervals) of effort to construct.” Can this be broken down? Does this include procurement and delivery, QA? What was the longest APA production for ProtoDUNE and the shortest?

- Does the math work out? 50 shifts (days) * 150 APAs / 50 weeks per year / 5 work days per week / 9 sites = 3.33 years.

- Where do we find a detailed schedule, GANTT chart??


LBNC Comments• Design Choices

- What are the negative consequences of enlarging the frame tubes?

- Do the PD cables routed up the sides (and not inside) the frame pose a problem for light losses to the PDS?

- Diverters? Are these part of the plan? What is the plan for determining the need? What is the plan for prototyping an testing?

- Where do you address the choice of drift distance? With the ProtoDUNE performance, could you consider longer drift? Are there alternative APA/CP configurations you could consider or have considered?


LBNC Comments• Long-term Reliability

- How do we estimate/ensure the reliability over two decades?

- Do we have any experimental studies that support the hope implicit in these words?

• “To further mitigate wire slippage and its effect on detector performance, each wire in the APA is anchored twice at all end points with both solder and epoxy”

- Was an FEA analysis conducted [of the frame]? What can we cite about longevity of maintenance of tension?


LBNC Comments• Organization

- I think what is provided is too thin

- For example, one would expect to see the individual factories and their reporting chains

- How will inventory and supply be managed? Is there a central management?

- Is there a plan/schedule for identifying the supplier institutions?

- The contributions from the university groups need identification


TDR Update - APA Chapter · 7/8/2019 · TDR updates: QA • Section 3: Quality Assurance-Will...

Documents

Transcript of TDR Update - APA Chapter · 7/8/2019 · TDR updates: QA • Section 3: Quality Assurance-Will...