Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank TDIS WP14 – Internal review meeting 2016/12/01 David Carbajo Perez (EN-STI-TCD)

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Introduction Jaws material definition Loads scenarios overview RW heating Vacuum tank simulation Summary Annex: temperature distribution plots 2016/12/01

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Introduction Several simulations conducted to assess mechanical strength of the different jaw components against potential beam impacts. Base for such studies is the output of Fluka energy deposition analysis presented by Matthias Immanuel Frankl. In addition, thermal impact on the jaws due to impedance phenomena has been simulated. Last but not least, vacuum tank structural simulation results are presented 2016/12/01

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Material definition overview id Component Name Material Remarks 1 Absorbing block 1st / 2nd segments: Graphite R4550 3rd segment: Aluminum Alloy EN-AW-5083 O – H111 CuCr1Zr En 12420 annealed Alternative material for 1st / 2nd segments: 3D CfC 2 Clamp Stainless steel 304L EN 1.4306 3 Stiffener Aluminum Alloy EN-AW-5083 O – H111 Significant drop of mechanical properties is observed after bake-out phase (Yield strength ≈ 110 MPa) 4 Cooling circuit Copper Alloy UNS C70600 Alternative materials under investigation to improve cooling system thermal efficiency 5 Stiffener back plate 6 Compression spring Stainless steel EN 1.4310 Springs not considered in the simulation since thermal shock on them is not relevant 7 Cooling pipes support plate 8 Spring support plate Copper Alloy UNS C10100 8 5 6 7 4 3 2 1 TDIS Jaw cross-section view 2016/12/01

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Run3 Standard beam - 2mm orbit error Pulse bunches: 288 Pulse protons: 6.624E13 Pulse time: 8.175 µsec Loads scenarios overview P2 Direct impact on absorbing blocks Shower effect Large impact parameter Grazing impact Grazing impact (jaw misalignment) 1 sigma impact 1 sigma impact (jaw misalignment) Small impact parameter P8 Direct impact on absorbing blocks Shower effect Central (large) impact parameter Grazing impact Grazing impact (jaw misalignment) 1 sigma impact 1 sigma impact (jaw misalignment) Small impact parameter Same conditions as P2 2016/12/01

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Run3 Standard beam - 2mm orbit error Pulse bunches: 288 Pulse protons: 6.624E13 Pulse time: 8.175 µsec Loads scenarios overview – Shower effect on jaws case # jaw injection point impact type most stressed components thermal simulation structural simulation remarks 1 U P8 central impact parameter - shower cooling pipes / stiffener YES some plastic deformation is observed on both cooling pipes and stiffener although the amount of distortion expected to be negligible for the function. Further analysis required, including possible modifications on design. 2 M NO thermal shock comparable to case #1 3 D soft thermal shock 4 P2 5 6 7 0/1 sigma impact - shower Graphite absobing block Standard beam impact leads to lower temperature than BCMS beam 8 9 Alu/Cu absorbing blocks High-Z blocks length and materials under analysis 10 0/1 sigma impact jaw misalignment - shower 11 12 U – upstream / M- middle / D- downstream 2016/12/01

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Loads scenarios overview – Shower effect on jaws case # jaw injection point impact type most stressed components ANSYS simulation remarks 1 U P8 central impact parameter - shower cooling pipes / stiffener YES some plastic deformation is observed on both cooling pipes and stiffener although the amount of distortion expected to be negligible for the function. Further analysis required, including possible modifications on design Stiffener - Plastic strain ca. 0.3% Stiffener - Temperature distribution U – upstream / M- middle / D- downstream 2016/12/01

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Loads scenarios overview – Shower effect on jaws case # jaw injection point impact type most stressed components ANSYS simulation remarks 1 U P8 central impact parameter - shower cooling pipes / stiffener YES some plastic deformation is observed on both cooling pipes and stiffener although the amount of distortion expected to be negligible for the function. Further analysis required, including possible modifications on design Cooling pipes – temperature distribution Cooling pipes – plastic strain ca. 0.2% U – upstream / M- middle / D- downstream 2016/12/01

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Loads scenarios overview – Focus on blocks Applicable for both P2/P8 Studies in the framework of the LIU-TCDI are taken as reference given the equivalency of the beam parameters Graphite absorbing blocks Simulations done by Inigo Lamas in 02/2015 High-Z absorbing blocks 2016/12/01

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Loads scenarios overview – Focus on blocks Applicable for both P2/P8 Studies in the framework of the LIU-TCDI are taken as reference given the equivalency of the beam parameters Graphite absorbing blocks Simulations done by Inigo Lamas in 02/2015 High-Z absorbing blocks As indicated in the table 11, tensile stresses can reach up to 37 MPa (BCMS beam) in the case of the Graphite R4550. It must be noticed that measurements at EN/MME Mechanical Lab have revealed higher yield strength values that the ones shown there. In the case of 3D C/C the safety margin is larger For further details please refer to documents EDMS 1458583 (https://edms.cern.ch/ui/file/1458583/0.4/LHC-TCDI-ES-0004-00-04.pdf) TDI thermo-mechanical simulations: Boron Nitride versus Graphite 235th LHC Machine Committee 16/09/2015) 2016/12/01

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Loads scenarios overview – Focus on blocks Applicable for both P2/P8 Studies in the framework of the LIU-TCDI are taken as reference given the equivalency of the beam parameters Graphite absorbing blocks Simulations done by Inigo Lamas in 02/2015 High-Z absorbing blocks Since the yield strength of the block Aluminum alloy drops after the bake- out stage down to 110 MPa (at room temperature) the stress level highlighted in the analysis turns out to be too high. As alternative, Titanium was evaluated showing much better results. No weakness detected on copper blocks. 2016/12/01

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank RW heating Resistive wall heating effect takes place while the beam passes between the jaws. The considered input cycle is represented hereunder Estimated total power loss injection : 1250 W ( 30% higher in case of 3D C-C! ) Beam injection Beam circulation 5 hours 45 min. Temperature evolution of the graphite 2016/12/01

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank RW heating Resistive wall heating effect takes place while the beam passes between the jaws. It induces temperatures of 40°C in the graphite during injection and less than 30°C maintained over the beam circulating period. Cooling system water temperature: 27°C Estimated total power loss injection : 1250 W ( 30% higher in case of 3D C-C! ) Heat flux 2016/12/01

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Vacuum tank simulation Most critical conditions take place at bake-out stage. Max. stress level (63 MPa) is reached at the edges of the largest-area => lower than yield strength (100 Mpa) Material: AISI Type 304L Stainless Steel (grade 1.4306) 2016/12/01

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Vacuum tank simulation Displacement of the pins that support the platines with the jaws : Pin # Displacement [µm] (direction) x y z u1 -4 -11 -9 u2 -3 -16 u3 5 -22 -21 u4 -28 -27 l1 6 3 2 l2 1 13 -12 l3 -2 15 -19 l4 14 u1 u2 u3 u4 l1 l2 l3 l4 Material: AISI Type 304L Stainless Steel (grade 1.4306) 2016/12/01

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Summary Stresses at the stiffener are on the borderline. Reinforcement options are currently under analysis Cooling pipes expected to have a small amount of plastic deformation not critical for the function though. On the other hand, alternative materials such us pure nickel or pure copper will be assessed for thermal efficiency improvement Graphite R4550 shows sufficient strength to be used as material for primary absorbing blocks Aluminum absorbing blocks shall be upgraded to titanium ones (further simulations are in any case needed) RW heating lead to over-time maintained temperatures lower than 30°C No weakness detected on vacuum tank strength. Pins displacement below admissible threshold 2016/12/01

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION 2016/12/01

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Annex: temperature distribution plots P8 central impact. Upstream upper jaw stiffener

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Annex: temperature distribution plots P8 central impact. Middle upper jaw stiffener

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Annex: temperature distribution plots P8 central impact. Downstream upper jaw

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Annex: temperature distribution plots P2 central impact. Upstream upper jaw

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Annex: temperature distribution plots P2 central impact. Middle upper jaw

Thermo-mechanical simulations jaws + tank Annex: temperature distribution plots P2 central impact. Downstream upper jaw