1. ALICE-LHCC Review May 14, 2001 Thomas C. Meyer/EP-AIT1 TPC Field Cage Progress Report Project Schedule Technical Progress & Prototyping Contractual Matters

2. ALICE-LHCC Review May 14, 2001 Thomas C. Meyer/EP-AIT2 Field Cage: Project Schedule

3. ALICE-LHCC Review May 14, 2001 Thomas C. Meyer/EP-AIT3 Tests & Prototyping HV –High ionization behavior ( 83 Kr) Temperature stabilization –Resistor chain cooling Construction material –Compatibility and leaks Electrical network –“From strip to central electrode”

4. ALICE-LHCC Review May 14, 2001 Thomas C. Meyer/EP-AIT4 High Voltage Stability History: –Field cage was exposed to >16 x expected average charged particle intensity in CERES beam (~ 6000/cm 2 s). –Field cage was operated at 1.78 x nominal drift field (~700 V/cm) in pure CO 2. Surface charge phenomena appearing at 60 kV (≥ 400 V/cm). –Insulation gap safe at ≥ 100 kV.

5. ALICE-LHCC Review May 14, 2001 Thomas C. Meyer/EP-AIT5 High Intensity 83 Kr Test Inject 83 Kr with 300 MBq total intensity into field cage (May 2001) Separate tests for drift and insulation volume.

6. ALICE-LHCC Review May 14, 2001 Thomas C. Meyer/EP-AIT6 Temperature Stability History: –Require:  T everywhere ≤ 0.1 ºC –Resistor rod produces 60 W waste heat. –Liquid cooling (H 2 O) proven very efficient with negligible gradient inside rod but…  H 2 O unsuitable at HV (dissociation),  Inert liquids dangerous in case of leaks. New approach: Gas cooling

7. ALICE-LHCC Review May 14, 2001 Thomas C. Meyer/EP-AIT7 Resistor Rod: Gas Cooling Unlike liquid cooling,  T inside rod always > 0.1 ºC. –--> must insulate rod!  Foam for test  Double wall for ALICE. T [ºC] z [m] Ambient level 2.5

8. ALICE-LHCC Review May 14, 2001 Thomas C. Meyer/EP-AIT8 Gas Cooling: Results Inside of rod achieve  t min of 7 ºC with 20 m 3 /h of air: T in = 16 ºC 7 ºC

9. ALICE-LHCC Review May 14, 2001 Thomas C. Meyer/EP-AIT9 Gas Cooling: Results Outside of rod achieve required  T of ≤ 0.1 ºC within a few cm from rod: Numbers are given in units of 1/100 ºC; Blue numbers indicate zone around rod with  T < 0.1 ºC

10. ALICE-LHCC Review May 14, 2001 Thomas C. Meyer/EP-AIT10 Material tests Drying  L/L [µm/m] T[ h] Macrolon Carbon Fiber Kevlar Fiber Glass Fiber Wet Leak test of full-size end plate sector with “CERES” gasket Humidity tests of FC material

11. ALICE-LHCC Review May 14, 2001 Thomas C. Meyer/EP-AIT11 Voltage Divider: Central Electrode Focus on “stretched foil” version High modulus carbon-fiber frames NA48 Example

12. ALICE-LHCC Review May 14, 2001 Thomas C. Meyer/EP-AIT12 Voltage Divider: Rods & Strips Ongoing prototyping of all rod types –Resistor rod –HV supply rod –Laser rod –Regular support rod Verification of strip tension and mounting scheme –Vertical or horizontal?

13. ALICE-LHCC Review May 14, 2001 Thomas C. Meyer/EP-AIT13 ToolingTooling Modification of DELPHI support frame –Needed for construction & assembly of FC –Major handling tool for all operations –Finished by end of 2001

14. ALICE-LHCC Review May 14, 2001 Thomas C. Meyer/EP-AIT14 Infrastructure: SXL2 Preparation of dedicated clean area for TPC assembly in LHC interaction region 2: –Finished by December 2001 Clean zone in hall SXL2

15. ALICE-LHCC Review May 14, 2001 Thomas C. Meyer/EP-AIT15 Contracting: FC Cylinders First „Invitation to Tender“ (IT-2726) was launched on schedule in 2000, but... –all offers (4) were above funding level. Changed scope of tender: –Only production of individual parts (panels & flanges) –Procurement by and assembly at CERN New tender (IT-2999) sent April 2001 –6 months delay in schedule

16. ALICE-LHCC Review May 14, 2001 Thomas C. Meyer/EP-AIT16 Contracting: End Plates First „Price Inquiry“ was made in 2000. –Lowest bid exceeded funding by large factor. Try to achieve savings by… –splitting production process (raw material, welding, machining), and –design changes. New tenders to be launched this month –only if expected savings materialize! Overall production delay ≥ 6 months.

17. ALICE-LHCC Review May 14, 2001 Thomas C. Meyer/EP-AIT17 Contracts: Consequences for CERN Higher manpower load on CERN (TA2) Higher risks in terms of… –technical failure,  quality control, liability, warrenty! –schedule slippage, –capital loss. We expect to catch up on the baseline schedule during the internal assembly of the FC (2002/3).