1 / 6

Target Specifications & History (to avoid reinventing a broken wheel!)

Target Specifications & History (to avoid reinventing a broken wheel!). 2 nd December 2009 Chris Booth The University of Sheffield. Original Specification (2003). Enter last 1-2 ms of beam Not disturb next injection Variable dip depth Required entry into beam unknown, but ~5 mm

december
Télécharger la présentation

Target Specifications & History (to avoid reinventing a broken wheel!)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Target Specifications & History(to avoid reinventing a broken wheel!) 2nd December 2009 Chris Booth The University of Sheffield

  2. Original Specification (2003) • Enter last 1-2 ms of beam • Not disturb next injection • Variable dip depth • Required entry into beam unknown, but ~5 mm • Beam shrinkage 17.8 mm • Travel 25 mm • Reproducibility ~0.2 mm • Accurately synchronised to ISIS, drift/jitter < 0.2 ms • Frequency 1 Hz or faster • Target titanium 1 mm across beam, 10 mm along • Slit across beam pipe 2 mm wide max. • Radiation hard, UHV materials • Resonant system disfavoured. On-demand actuation preferred.

  3. Considered solutions1) Rotating arm A • Axis  beam (motion // beam) • Single arm (plus counterweight) • 5 mm and 2 ms entry into beam •  = 12.6 mrad •  = 2 (1 Hz) • Arm length R = 63 m (!) • Target velocity 396 ms-1 (!) • Multiple spokes makes R even greater • Target position & adjustability – see next slide  R 5 mm

  4. Considered solutions2) Rotating arm B • Axis // beam (motion across beam) • 1 (or n) spokes • Cross ~ 30 mm in 2 ms • V = 15 ms-1;  = 2/n; R = 2.4 n m • N.B. Slot across beam-pipe (not allowed!) • Source of particles moves significantly • Axis of rotation must be adjustable vertically (to control depth) • Rotary motion – bearings in vacuum R 30 mm

  5. Considered solutions3) Linear motor options • Fixed coils, moving magnet • Brushless, easier to cool coils, ... • Bearing-free design – shaft supported on diaphragm springs • Required travel  large springs (~150 mm diameter) • Designed fatigue-free • Tests: unstable. Did not align shaft when extended. • Non-lubricated bearings • Ceramic on titanium • Brass on titanium • Leaded bronze • DLC on DLC

  6. Considered solutions4) Linear motor variations • External linear drive • Transmission through diaphragm/bellows to vacuum region • Caburn designers/engineers could not guarantee lifetime • Linear drive + lever • Smaller amplitude drive + mechanical advantage • Fail-safe (falls out of beam) • Possibly combined with diaphragm? • Stiff enough lever (I-beam)  too much inertia for required acceleration • Bearing again (with lateral forces) drive target

More Related