1. MQXFS6 assembly and loading
Eelis Takala
on behalf of the MQXF collaboration
22/02/2018
CERN

2. Acknowledgments CERN US Accelerator Upgrade Project (AUP)
A. Ballarino, H. Bajas, M. Bajko, B. Bordini, N. Bourcey, J.C. Perez, S. Izquierdo Bermudez, S. Ferradas Troitino, L. Fiscarelli, J. Fleiter, M. Guinchard, O. Housiaux, F. Lackner, F. Mangiarotti, A. Milanese, P. Moyret, H. Prin, R. Principe, E. Ravaioli, T. Sahner, S. Sequeira Tavares, E. Takala, E. Todesco
US Accelerator Upgrade Project (AUP)
BNL: M. Anerella, P. Joshi, J. Muratore, J. Schmalzle, P. Wanderer
FNAL: G. Ambrosio, M. Baldini, J. Blowers, R. Bossert, G. Chlachidze, L. Cooley, S. Krave, F. Nobrega, V. Marinozzi, I. Novitsky, C. Santini, S. Stoynev, T. Strauss, M. Yu
LBNL: E. Anderssen, D. Cheng, M. Marchevsky, H. Pan, I. Pong, S. Prestemon, G. Sabbi, G. Vallone, X. Wang
NHMFL: Lance Cooley
Paolo Ferracin
Paolo Ferracin

3. MQXFS6 Coil Size Coil Max(um) Min(um) Mean(um) Assumed(um) 208 151 -3864 50
209
-113
-227
-174
-150
210 34
-59
-15
212 -5
-61
-50

4. Coil Size Summary MQXFS4 MQXFS5 MQXFS6 C108: L+R = - 100 µm

5. Nominal Configuration
MQXFS4 and MQXFS5
MQXFS6
GPI, Kapton:
125 µm
Collar Radius:
114 mm
Impreg. Radius: mm
Kapton Shims:
GPI, Kapton:
125 µm
Collar Radius:
115 mm
Impreg. Radius: mm
Kapton Shims:
8 x 125 um
Kapton
Total nominal radial shimming: 625 µm

6. Total nominal radial shimming: 625 µm
30/06/2017
Shimming Options (1)
Total nominal radial shimming: 625 µm
G. Vallone

7. MQXFS6 Assembly Shimming view from Lead End
8 x dmidplane = 2 p x dROR
4 x (L+R) = 2 p x dROR
L+R (µm)
dROR(µm) 50
31.831
100
63.662
150
95.493
200
250
300
125 µm
2 x 50 µm Kapton g
100 µm
50 µm
25 µm
C212
C209
C208
C210
8 x 125 µm Kapton
208: L+R = 50 µm
209: L+R = µm
210: L+R = 0 µm
212: L+R = -50 µm
Note: 1) Azimuthal shimming increases radial size 32 µm compared to the nominal.
2) Earlier experience suggests that 125 µm should be reduced from radial size
=> 150 µm to be reduced with respect to the nominal shimming.
Total radial shimming: 3*125 µm + 2*50 µm = 475 µm
=> Total radial size reduction 118 µm (nominal is 625 µm - 32 µm = 593 µm)

8. Layout Summary MQXFS4 MQXFS5 MQXFS6 C108: L+R = - 100 µm
2 x 50 µm Kapton g
100 µm
50 µm
25 µm
C212
C209
C208
C210
8 x 125 µm Kapton
C108: L+R = µm
C109: L+R = µm
C110: L+R = µm
C111: L+R = µm
C203: L+R = µm
C204: L+R = µm
C205: L+R = µm
C206: L+R = µm
208: L+R = 50 µm
209: L+R = µm
210: L+R = 0 µm
212: L+R = -50 µm
WRT Nominal Radial Size:
Coil pack -63 µm
Shimming µm
Tot µm
WRT Nominal Radial Size:
Coil pack +63 µm
Shimming µm
Tot µm
WRT Nominal Radial Size:
Coil pack +32 µm
Shimming µm
Tot µm

9. MQXFS 6 Pole gap measurement
Average gap average over length is about mm
=> 180 um wider than the expected (14.82 mm)

10. Clearance per side
Average clearance average over length is about 300 um
=> 90 um wider than the expected (210 um)
Collar
Key
Δ 𝑡 collars
0.125 mm
0.125 mm
𝑡 clearance/side = Δ 𝑡 collars −13.9−4⋅ mm
13.9 mm

11. Layout Summary MQXFS4 MQXFS5 MQXFS6 C108: L+R = - 100 µm
2 x 50 µm Kapton g
100 µm
50 µm
25 µm
C212
C209
C208
C210
8 x 125 µm Kapton
C108: L+R = µm
C109: L+R = µm
C110: L+R = µm
C111: L+R = µm
C203: L+R = µm
C204: L+R = µm
C205: L+R = µm
C206: L+R = µm
208: L+R = 50 µm
209: L+R = µm
210: L+R = 0 µm
212: L+R = -50 µm
WRT Nominal Radial Size:
Coil pack -63 µm
Shimming µm
Tot µm
WRT Nominal Radial Size:
Coil pack +63 µm
Shimming µm
Tot µm
WRT Nominal Radial Size:
Coil pack +32 µm
Shimming µm
Tot µm
Clearance per side: 200 µm
Clearance per side: 100 µm
Clearance per side: 300 µm

12. Azimuthal Preload Transfer Function
MQXFS4
MQXFS5
MQXFS6
Min
Max
Avg
Shell 56 62 59
Coil
-94
-69
-90
Min
Max
Avg
Shell 90 94 92
Coil
-112
-82
-99
Min
Max
Avg
Shell 62 70 67
Coil
-113
-77
-83
Clearance per side: 200 µm
Clearance per side: 100 µm
Clearance per side: 300 µm

13. Azimuthal Preload Transfer Function 2
MQXFS4
MQXFS5
MQXFS6
Min
Max
Avg
Shell
129
136
133
Coil
-150
-103
-118
Min
Max
Avg
Shell
178
184
182
Coil
-125
-110
-118
Min
Max
Avg
Shell
107
128
113
Coil
-130
-115
-121

14. MQXFS6 Azimuthal Stress
Eelis Takala

15. MQXFS6 Rod Longitudinal Stress
Eelis Takala

16. Delta Stress Comparison – Coil, Shell and Rods
Thick vs thin laminates
G. Vallone et. Al., “Mechanical Analysis of the Short Model Magnets for the Nb3Sn Low-β Quadrupole MQXF”, Trans. Appl. Supercond., 28(3), April 2018

17. MQXFS4 and MQXFS6 mechanical behavior
Conclusions
MQXFS4 vs MQXFS6
Mechanically similar except thin vs thick iron laminates
Clearance per side
200 um, 300 um
Shell/Coil stress
(58 MPa/-90 MPa, 67 MPa /-96 MPa)
MQXFS4 and MQXFS6 mechanical behavior
Similar in contrast to MQXFS5
Delta rod stress different
Thin vs thick iron laminates => different stiffness (or different friction)
Eelis Takala

18. APPENDIX
Eelis Takala

19. MQXFS4 Coil Size 30/06/2017 Coil size within ±50 𝜇𝑚
Impact of additional polyamide layer?
Why 110 is so regular?
G. Vallone

20. 15/02/2017
MQXFS5 Coil Size
Coil
Mould
L+R 𝝁𝒎
Thickness
203 2 40
204 1
-94
-68
205
-28
-45
206
100 32
There may be some effect of the mould on the coil shape
As the smaller shim that we are using is 25 𝜇𝑚, we cannot correct less than 50 𝜇𝑚
Why: if we shim on the mid plane we need two shims. On the azimuthal direction we need to apply 4 2𝜋 𝐿+𝑅 , with similar results.
Coil
Mould
L+R 𝝁𝒎
Thickness
203 2 50
204 1
-100
-68
205
-50
-45
206
100 32
G. Vallone

21. MQXFS4 Second Layout – Final?
30/06/2017
MQXFS4 Second Layout – Final?
8 𝑥 𝑑𝑚𝑖𝑑𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑒 = 2 𝑝 𝑥 𝑑𝑅𝑂𝑅
4 𝑥 (𝐿+𝑅) = 2 𝑝 𝑥 𝑑𝑅𝑂𝑅
𝐿+𝑅 (µ𝑚)
𝑑𝑅𝑂𝑅(µ𝑚) 50
31.8
100
63.6
150
95.4
200
127.3
250
159.1
300
190.9
View from the Lead End
C108: L+R = µm
C109: L+R = µm
C110: L+R = µm
C111: L+R = µm
Note: The coil pack is 65 µm smaller than the nominal size. 125 µm removed in an attempt to improve the coil/collar contact.
G. Vallone

22. MQXFS5 Coil Pack Layout 15/02/2017 View from the Lead End
C203: L+R = µm
C204: L+R = µm
C205: L+R = µm
C206: L+R = µm
Because of some concerns on the preloading test results, we decided to remove 100 𝜇𝑚 of radial shimming on the final assembly.
No more fuji paper. The mid-plane shim thickness is the same.
G. Vallone