MEASUREMENTS FROM THE SPL TUNING BENCH POA Meeting – 19/05/2015 Szabina Horvath-Mikulas, Sotirios Papadopoulos, Ercan Pilicer

MONOCELL TUNING BENCH SETUP Compression Setup Traction Setup sensor sensor

SENSITIVITY RESULTS Different sensitivity for each state Possible reasons -Deformation of the beam pipes -Different positioning of sensors and possible deformation of the tuning bench plates. -Different deformation shape, compared to the 5-cell traction due to absence of stiffening rings. A comparison between traction and compression follows in order to reveal the cause of this difference in sensitivity and investigate the assumptions.

RELATION BETWEEN PLASTIC AND ELASTIC DEFORMATION Almost the same relation between plastic and elastic deformation. y = α x 3 curve to show symmetric relevance

RELATION BETWEEN DEFORMATION AND PRESSURE ON TUNING BENCH

RELATION BETWEEN FREQUENCY AND PRESSURE ON TUNING BENCH ΔF : frequency difference with plastic + elastic deformation Same behaviour for traction and compression. -deformation shape is more or less the same. -possibly no or very small beam pipe deformation

CONCLUSIONS Same plastic-elastic relation between states and also same pressure and frequency change relation. These lead to the conclusion that the displacement sensors during traction gave unreliable results something that is supported from all the measurements. New sensor setup needed. The results that can be compared with the 5-cell case are the compression state results as the sensors were placed at the extremity plates. For the compression state, the tuning bench went to its limits for 1.4 mm plastic+elastic giving 0.23 mm plastic. For traction we did not reach the mechanical limits and we obtained a final deformation of 1mm but we need to conclude whether these results are influenced by the different sensor and/or tuning setup. Thank you!

ALL THE RESULTS

MEASUREMENT RESULTS TABLE