Rod adaptors for module tests Module positioning studies 2S Module meeting, Tracker week, 16 July 2012 Rod adaptors and studies on module positioning Refers to work by Tristan Falcy, Luc Kottelat, Aleksis Chávez Niemelä and Riikka Häsä Rod adaptors for module tests Module positioning studies On-going + Next tasks Summary 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Rod adaptors for module tests 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

TOB Rod with 2S modules 2S module Adaptor Existing TOB rods (tens available) can be used for first module tests E.g. cooling tests But, new module dimensions do not directly match the rod Need adaptors TOB Rod frame 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

TOB Rod with 2S modules 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Adaptor design 3 connection bars in carbon-fibre composite Support and alignment of the 2S module Support and alignment on the rod 4 support/cooling contacts in aluminium 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Adaptor production 2 adaptors have been produced Completed adaptor 3 connection bars in carbon-fibre composite 4 support/cooling contacts in aluminium 2 adaptors have been produced More adaptors can now easily be made, if/when needed. 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Rod + Adaptor + 2S module mock-up 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Module positioning studies 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Barrel rod with 2S modules 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Studies on module positioning Study on combining module positioning inserts and captive screws (for improved module handling) Module placed on supports Module Positioning Screws tightened Support structure 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Study on module positioning Aluminium dummy module placed on a support plate Small brass positioning inserts and captive screws Optical measurement of module positioning Positioning inserts + captive attachment screws and nearby optical targets “Module” in aluminium Support plate in aluminium Attachment screws 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

H7 tolerance on Ø2.5 and Ø3 holes: 0 - +10 μm 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Study on module positioning Module positioning insert (brass) and captive M1.6 screw with a spring h8 tolerance on Ø2.5 and Ø3 axis: -14 – 0 μm 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Precision (repeatability) of the positioning σ = 10 μm Dummy module installed and removed 8 times, with its position measured after each installation. Optical measurement accuracy: +/- 2µm Mean value of results normalized to zero σ = 17 μm σ = 11 μm 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Conclusions from these positioning studies Precision of ~ 10-20 μm (1 sigma) in module positioning can be rather easily obtained with such small 2 mm high positioning inserts. If necessary, the precision can be increased by tighter manufacturing tolerances on the components Precise ‘slot’ hole is more difficult to produce than a precise round hole. Note: For sufficient cooling contact the module attachment screws must be well tightened. Therefore, the long-term stability is better than the initial precision of such module positioning system. Captive screws work nicely, but they are space-consuming, need a ‘high’ support insert Problems with available space and added mass on the final rod assembly Simple screws are now considered 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

On-going + next tasks 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Module support design Used as base-line: Rod with modules upside up. Space for module supports, positioning and screws? Combine support of two modules? Modules upside up + Radial distance between adjacent sensors is minimized + Connectors are well exposed Total thickness is potentially rather big (here 24 mm). Thickness depends directly on the biggest components Tight space for module supports and thermal contacts Modules upside down + Total thickness minimized (here 15 mm), allowing compact barrel layers + Components are not exposed (= better protected) in the final assembly + Good space for module supports and thermal contacts Radial distance between adjacent sensors is big. Difficult access to connectors on the module 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Thermal design of the module supports According to preliminary calculations ΔT of ~5 ˚C expected in the module Allowing total of 10 ˚C ΔT from silicon to coolant leaves ΔT max 5 ˚C for the module support – cooling pipe – fluid (CO2) Analysis and preliminary optimisation on module supports on-going Optimisation between mass and thermal performance of the module support insert ΔT: 5-7 ºC ΔT: ~5 ºC Module analysis (Andreas Mussgiller) Support insert analysis (Riikka Häsä) 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Module and rod overlaps Module supports and Cooling contacts at the rod overlap area? 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Module holders Module holders to allow safe access to module front and back sides. During module assembly work During bonding During testing During transports Can one single holder do all, or are different holders for different steps necessary? Images of preliminary concept studies 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Summary Adaptors for mounting 2S modules on TOB rods have been designed and 2 first adaptors made. When planning for module thermal tests see if the adaptor + TOB rod could be a solution. More adaptors, possibly with different geometries, can be produced. Module positioning studies done with very dummy modules. Reasonable positioning precision achieved with small positioning inserts. Precision can be improved if needed. Work on-going with module supports. Need to make them small, for mass and also for limited space available. Thermal performance needs to be sufficient. Particular challenges in the rod-to-rod overlap area First concepts of module holders for assembly, tests, transports 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Thank you for your attention. 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Spare slides 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

2S module, Jan 2012 version 3D models by A. Conde Garcia / CERN 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Module positioning: TIB Inputs from A. Basti / INFN Pisa Precision insert Slot insert Inserts with clearance 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Module positioning: TEC Inputs from M. Wlochal / Aachen 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Module positioning: TOB 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Module support and positioning: TOB Support structure (Rod) 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Module support and positioning: TIB Support structure (Cylinder) 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Module support and positioning: TEC Support structure (Petal) 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

And the net result with TK precision? Already after first cosmic runs the total residuals with Track Based Alignment are at ~50um rms, and improve within 2008 to ~30um. Much better than what the mechanics can (reasonably) do! 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

Choice of module positioning concept? All used module positions solutions in the present Tracker have shown to be sufficiently precise, especially after track-based software alignment. TIB / TEC module positioning is more compact and lighter than the TOB solution. Use the TIB / TEC solution as basis in the 2S module Try to also include captive screws, which do not need to be handled individually during module testing and assembly phases. 2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN

2S module meeting, 16 July 2012, indico: 197203 Antti Onnela, CERN