Concept for Tracker Inner Barrel with Tilted Modules

1Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

19.6.2013 Forum on Tracking Detector Mechanics at Oxford

Concept for Tracker Inner Barrel with Tilted Modules

4.6.2013

24.6.2013Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

Contributors

Abbaneo, Duccio Conde García, Antonio Honma, Alan Mersi, Stefano Onnela, Antti Postema, Hans


Benefits of tilting the modules

How it works (modelling)

Challenges with this geometry

Mid-section

Ring sections

Few words on rods and end disks (if we have time)

Outline

4.6.2013


Tracker Base-line layout

4.6.2013

PS modules

2S modules

S. Mersi


Tracker Base-line layout

4.6.2013

Traditionally implemented with rods


4.6.2013

Layout Option with Tilted Modules

PS modules

2S modules

S. Mersi


Quick comparison of the two layouts

4.6.2013

Base line concept Distinct barrel and end gap geometries Relatively small surface area of the PS

modules not used to greatest extent -> more modules

Tilted module concept Gradual transformation from barrel to

end cap –like geometry PS module surface area better utilized ->

less modules


Some degree of modularity Reasonable assembly, structures, etc.Reduce the number of modules

Main goals

4.6.2013


Ideal case: module faces always perpendicular to particle tracks

PS module shape facilitates compact inner rings (closest to the beam line

Optimization of the tilted geometry

4.6.2013


Number of modules in the barrel section: 2836 vs. 4164

Less modules -> less material.. Less power consumption Less material in active volume Fewer services required..

Lower cost

Main benefits

4.6.2013


Coordinates generated on an excel table (Duccio Abbaneo, Stefano Mersi)

Copied to a design table in Catia Adjustment by eye (at this stage)

How it works? (modelling)

4.6.2013


..And we get a CAD model

4.6.2013



4.6.2013



Avoid clashes: some geometries simply impossible

Staying ‘close’ to optimal coordinates

Routing of services, cables.. Different support structure needed

as compared to rod assemblies, not much experience

Main challenges

4.6.2013


Ideal solution.. modules are always optimally aligned ..but

4.6.2013

Perpendicular modules


Clashes, clashes and clashes Deviation from optimal coordinates

required to avoid clashes

Perpendicular modules

4.6.2013


The module positions can be adjusted in various ways:

(Radius) Each module ring can be adjusted individually – but the adjacent ones have to compensate

(Angle) Module pairs – upper and lower modules on the same ring – can also be adjusted

Other adjustments include: coverage and gap

Adjustment

4.6.2013


Deviations from optimal positions and angles necessary to avoid clashes

Module ‘pairs’

4.6.2013

beamline


Other adjustments

4.6.2013

Upper layer provides hermiticity (one hit)

Lower layer modules can then be tuned for best clearance (with limitation)


Three layers Layer 1 has less modules than 2

and 3 But is also more packed due to smaller

radius Layer 3 has the most modules

But is slightly ‘easier’ to populate

Layers

4.6.2013


Divide the modules into easy and not so easy sections

For example, most congested modules could form a group..

Sectioning

4.6.2013

Mid section

Rings


Mid-section

4.6.2013


4.6.2013

Mid-section


Rods

4.6.2013

Rods including a number of modules could form a ring-like structure to cover the mid-section


..And they could be assembled something like this..

4.6.2013

Rods


Let’s add some connectors

4.6.2013

Rods


4.6.2013

Mid-section


Modules after the midsection in +/- direction

Larger gaps between modules More clearance More minimalistic support structure so

save in mass?

(Individual) rings -section

4.6.2013


Cooling pipe between the layers

Ring structures –one approach

4.6.2013


4.6.2013


Some cooling inserts..

4.6.2013


Support structure for cooling and

modules

4.6.2013


4.6.2013


Combines both layers into one ring unit

Only one cooling pipe Limited weight for the support

structure

Benefits

4.6.2013


We can fit the modules but.. How optimal are the coordinates, tilt,

coverage.. Support structures (weight, rigidity) Services (cooling, routing cables)

Dark clouds.. Can the PS module be cooled effectively

Future

4.6.2013


Back up

4.6.2013


Few words on other sections of

the tracker

4.6.2013


We have done preliminary layout exercises with rods and 2S modules

Relying on past experience Cooling under research: pipe,

inserts, contact area..

Rods for the outer barrel

4.6.2013


Few words on other sections of

the tracker

4.6.2013


Research done by Nick Lumb in Lyon

Modules arranged into cocentric disks or into D’s Space required depends on the height of

components Cooling and services also affect the

thickness of the disks

End disks

4.6.2013


Nick is also battling with clashes Especially in the transition from PS to 2S

modules

4.6.2013

End disks


Thank you!

4.6.2013

Concept for Tracker Inner Barrel with Tilted Modules

Documents