1. Stave Core Thermo-mechanical and Electrical Performance Requirements (Tim) 10/07/2013Liverpool WP4 Meeting (11/7/13)1

2. Why & What ? Why? – It’s a WP4 deliverable M4.1 (2013/Q3) Draft stave thermo-mechanical and electrical performance requirements documented – It might be useful! What? – What do we mean by ‘stave’ Stave core / Stave core + EOS / Stave core + EOS + modules ? – What do we mean by ‘performance requirements’? Geometrical Thermo-mechanical Electrical – Don’t worry – It’s only a DRAFT! 10/07/2013Liverpool WP4 Meeting (11/7/13)2

3. Format? (Stolen from Ian) Scope – Brief description ? Assumptions – Co-cured face sheets, titanium tube, Allcomp foam, honeycomb core, Hysol 9396 Essential Requirements – Keeps modules cool, allows insertion and puts modules roughly in the right place and keeps them there – Capable of supplying correct voltages & signals to/from modules as viewed through EOS connector(s) Desirable Requirements – Staves should have similar properties & performance characteristics (module noise, cooling performance, stiffness, geometry) – Stave properties should not make module mounting and insertion harder than it needs to be. Target Parameters – Mass < g – %X0 < % – Noise < e – Cost < £ 10/07/2013Liverpool WP4 Meeting (11/7/13)3

4. Examples …. Mechanical – Geometric tolerances ParameterToleranceImpact of Violation Stave Length+0.1mmRisk of clash with interlink? Stave Width+0.5mmCompatibility with insertion tooling? Stave Thickness+0.1mmRisk of envelope clash? Bracket Z positions+/-0.5mmRisk of poor engagement into on-cylinder part? Stave bow+/-0.1mmInability to insert & extra stress on cylinder Stave roughness0.05mmGlue layer thicker than optimal & risk of glue seepage 10/07/2013Liverpool WP4 Meeting (11/7/13)4

5. Examples #2 Thermal ParameterValueQualification Temperature range+40 to -50CThermal integrity retained within operating range Operational temperature -35 +/- 5CRequired thermal performance attained within operational temperature range Input PowerxxWElectrical power of modules, EOS, Power, etc.. Exhaust temp. sens. Accuracy +/- 0.5CError might lead to miss-firing of interlock Exhaust temp. sens. Response time < 1sExcessive time lag may lead to too high module temperatures if cooling fails. Peak stave surface temperature with simulated power load < 5CViolation may lead to too high module temperatures and (possible) thermal runaway 10/07/2013Liverpool WP4 Meeting (11/7/13)5

6. Examples #3 Electrical ParameterValueQualification All traces break-freeYes/NoBreaks (may) lead to inability to run modules. Pull strength for sample bonds > ?gPoor pull strength may reveal contamination issues. EOS?Collection of tests to verify communications, interlock temps, LV, HV power OK Exhaust temp. sens. Accuracy +/- 0.5CError might lead to miss-firing of interlock Exhaust temp. sens. Response time < 1sExcessive time lag may lead to too high module temperatures if cooling fails. Peak stave surface temperature with simulated power load < 5CViolation may lead to too high module temperatures and (possible) thermal runaway CF to stave GND resistance < x.xx OhmViolation may lead to extra noise in final operation? Tube resistance to Stave face sheet > x.xxGOhmViolation may lead to extra noise in final operation? 10/07/2013Liverpool WP4 Meeting (11/7/13)6

7. How do we (I?) Proceed? Draft of a draft? – Please comment (by e-mail) and I’ll collate – Produce draft Timescale ~ 2 weeks? Scope as shown on page 3 – Discussion in UK first – E-mail out to Lynn, Haber et al.. Should aim for final draft version (!) by end September 2013 10/07/2013Liverpool WP4 Meeting (11/7/13)7