1. Gabriel Palacios gpala001@odu.edu 03/17/17
Danny’s Shed
Gabriel Palacios
03/17/17

2. Comparing baseline vs shed mod 2.4 at -200kV: Danny’s model.
Side view cross-section.
Based entirely on Danny’s chamber diagram.
Shed model by Danny
Included plots of potential, E-fields on rubber-insulator interface
Included plots of E-fields on cathode-anode gap

3. Baseline (left) vs Shed mod 2.4 (right) -200 kV

4. Baseline (left) vs Shed mod 2.4 (right) -200 kV fields around edges

5. Baseline (left) vs Shed mod 2.4 (right) -200 kV fields on top of NEG’s

6. Baseline (left) vs Shed mod 2.4 (right) -200 kV fields triple point

7. Baseline (left) vs Shed mod 2.4 (right) -200 kV fields cusp

8. Baseline (left) vs Shed mod 2.4 (right) -200 kV fields cusp detail
Reaches E=5.4MV/m near y=28 but remains below this value along the cusp.

9. Baseline (left) vs Shed mod 2
Baseline (left) vs Shed mod 2.4 (right) -200 kV fields insulator interface

10. Baseline (left) vs Shed mod 2
Baseline (left) vs Shed mod 2.4 (right) -200 kV fields cathode-anode gap

11. Baseline vs Shed mod 2.4 -200 kV Potentials

12. Baseline vs Shed mod 2.4 -200 kV Electric field Ex

13. Baseline vs Shed mod 2.4 -200 kV Electric field Ey

14. Cathode-anode gap: Ey field

15. Cathode-anode gap: Ey field

16. Cathode-anode gap: Ey field

17. Cathode-anode gap: Ex field