Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
Status Brussels GANTRY
O.Bouhali, J.D’Hondt, C.Vandervelde, L.Van Lancker, J.Wickens TEC meeting Lyon – January 2004 Try to assemble modules with good precision different calibration plates (Karlsruhe and Bari) determination of pin positions relative to markers on plate Control methods for precision compare measurements in Brussels and Aachen compare measurements in 3 different positions of the plate Plans for the near future Test to glue stiffeners is OK
2
Comparison of different calibration plates
We have 2 calibration plates : Karlsruhe plate (measured in Karlsruhe) Bari plate (measured in Bari and Dusseldorf) Bari the plate was only partially measured (500 of 625 points) At Dusseldorf we measured the complete Bari plate at the temperature equal to that in the GANTRY clean room (21.5 oC) The measurements were performed by a Mitutoyo high precision machine (resolution ~2mm) and with some pattern recognition Two measurements : fit with circle fit with cross no difference (~1-2 mm)
3
Comparison of different calibration plates
Before calibration After calibration Y X operator
4
Comparison of different calibration plates
Karlsruhe on GANTRY Bari on GANTRY Y X operator
5
Comparison of different calibration plates
Karlsruhe calibration defined as perfect Bari calibration Y X operator
6
Comparison of different calibration plates
Karlsruhe calibration defined as perfect Dusseldorf calibration Y X operator
7
Comparison of different calibration plates
Dusseldorf calibration defined as perfect Bari calibration Y X operator
8
Comparison of different calibration plates
Y axis Dusseldorf calibration defined as perfect Bari calibration X axis X axis Y axis Y X operator
9
Comparison of different calibration plates
DY(Bari – Dusseldorf) Y Line 1 Line 10 X Line 20 operator
10
Comparison of different calibration plates
DY(Bari – Dusseldorf) Y Line 1 Line 10 X Line 20 operator
11
Comparison of different calibration plates
DY(Bari – Dusseldorf) Y Column 25 Column 10 Column 1 X operator
12
Comparison of different calibration plates
DX(Bari – Dusseldorf) Y Line 1 Line 10 X Line 20 operator
13
Comparison of different calibration plates
DX(Bari – Dusseldorf) Y Column 25 Column 10 Column 1 X operator
14
Comparison of different calibration plates
Differences up to ~20 mm For all the rest we will use the Dusseldorf calibration file Pins have been re-measured Pin positions are determined relative to the fiducial markers on the plate Once determined they can be calculated everytime with a translation and rotation of the reference system (should be simple procedure) + +
15
Procedure to determine the pin positions
Pin positions are determined relative to the fiducial markers on the plate + + Measure both fiducial markers on the plate Take ~8 points around the circle of each pin hole Fit a circle through them Repeat the above at least 10 times Look if the fits are stable (small residuals)
16
Fits to determine the pin positions
17
Comparison modules measured in Aachen and Brussels
We assembled 3 real modules on our GANTRY and re-measured them in Aachen DY( [measured – nominal]GANTRY – [measured – nominal]Aachen ) verified that nominal positions are identical !! 60 55 34 37 54 57 49 42 23 30 37 28 44 44 23 22 37 41 32 30 17 19 24 18 + Pos.1 + Pos.2 Pos.3 All can be explained by a rotation and a translation of the module between GANTRY position and Aachen position measured shape of module is the same Assuming that the sensors didn’t move on the frame during transportation, we have to conclude that the pin positions are not the same in both cases
18
Comparison modules measured in 3 different positions on the GANTRY
A dummy module has been measured in the 3 GANTRY positions DY( [measured – nominal]Pos.X – [measured – nominal]Pos.X’ ) assuming position 1 is perfect : [meas – nom] = 0 -22 -17 17 20 -20 -8 8 12 -17 -13 10 11 -14 -9 4 + + Pos.1 Pos.2 Pos.3 smaller residuals than one month ago All can be explained by a rotation and a translation of the module between GANTRY positions measured shape of module is the same Same conclusion (transportation issue excluded), the pin positions used by the GANTRY are not the true ones…
19
Conclusion and outlook for the future
Precision of modules is good according to GANTRY Large disagreements with Aachen Large disagreements in different positions (smaller than before) The problem can probably be allocated to the position of the pins Outlook : go back to the ‘old’ procedure of assembling modules Revise the soft-ware which uses the calculated pin positions Some delay for R5 and R3 due to above problems R5N : pick-up tool for sensors should be ‘aligned’ R5S and R3 : soft-ware in development R5 plates are ready and successfully tested for vacuum
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.