220 likes | 231 Views
Explore the methods and models used to predict and manage deformation in the PETRA3 slab, considering temperature fluctuations and accuracy requirements. Various analytical approaches are discussed to ensure precision in alignment and movement control. The study indicates challenges and solutions for monitoring the structural changes accurately.
E N D
Initial Deformation of the PETRA3 slab Markus Schlösser IWAA 2010, 13.-17. September 2010
accuracy requirements (components) old octants: s = 300µm / 150m (transverse & height) new octant: magnet – magnet s = 50µm girder – girder s = 100µm (transverse and height) s = 500µm (longitudinal) (TDR, 2004) • introduction
floor of new experimental hall • introduction • Monolithic floor slab made from reinforced concrete • 300m length • 30m width • 1m thickness • (without joint)
making of concrete slab concrete delivery and filling of pump • introduction pouring of concrete smoothing of concrete surface
cross section of slab top layer, epoxy, t = 15 mm 34.37 34.36 1 (reinforced) concrete with steel fibres (approx. 1% fibers) 49 33.87 1.00 reinforced concrete C30/37 bitumen gliding sheet, t = 3 mm 50 subconcrete 33.37 5 05 3 equalizing layer base layer, concrete-mineral mixture
temperature of concrete (2007 – 2009) • temperature setting of concrete 4th epoch 1st epoch 2nd epoch 3rd epoch
temperature of concrete (2008) daily variation • temperature 2nd epoch activation of air-condition 1st epoch start of survey in the new hall
thermal expansion of concrete slab aconcrete = 10 · 10-6 / K (theoretical value) l = 300m dl = 3mm / K dT = 22°C – 16°C = 6K dL16 = 18mm • Problem: • Installation starts at 16°C, final temperature at 22°C • predicted movement is 18mm • accuracy is at the 100µm level • coarse alignment mechanics of most components can notbe moved by more than a few mm • analytical models • Solution: • introduce analytical model • predict position of each network fiducial at 22°C • stakeout coordinates are not affected • independent from the actual temperature
models for expansion of slab • 1st approach • network measurement taken at 16.2°C • estimate position of each monument at 22°C from analytical model (linear / circular) • 2nd approach • network measurements taken at 16.2°C and 20.4°C • estimate parameters for analytical model from combination of measurement epochs • 3rd approach • network measurements taken at 16.2°C and 20.4°C • extrapolate position of each monument at 22°C from empirical model • 4th approach • network measurement taken at 22°C • no model necessary • analytical models
1st approach • network measurement taken at 16.2°C • estimate position of each monument at 22°C with analytical model (linear / circular) Each monument gets radial and tangential shift component, Dr = h (r) Dj = x (j) aconcrete from literature • analytical models line of no tangential movement line of no radial movement
2nd approach • network measurements taken at 16.2°C and 20.4°C • estimate parameters of analytical model by combining two measurement epochs Each monument gets radial and tangential shift component, BUT Dr = h (r,j) Dj = x (r,j) estimate aconcrete line of no tangential movement • analytical models line of no radial movement
3rd approach • network measurements taken at 16.2°C and 20.4°C • extrapolate position of each monument at 22°C from empirical model lines of identical tangential movement Each monument gets radial and tangential shift component, Dr = hh (r,j) Dj = xx (r,j) estimate aconcrete • analytical models lines of identical radial movement
movements 05/2008 -> 02/2009(16.2 -> 22.0°C) 11.5 3.3 • measure-ments 10.0
modell errors 05/2008 -> 02/2009 2.0 3.1 • measure-ments 3.6
movements 08/2008 -> 02/2009(20.4 -> 22.0°C) 3.2 0.9 • measure-ments 2.5
modell errors 08/2008 -> 02/2009 0.5 0.6 • measure-ments 0.5 (0.8)
movements 02/2009 -> 05/2009(22.0 -> 22.0°C) 1.3 • measure-ments 1.2
tangential shifts • measure-ments
radial shifts • measure-ments
height changes • measure-ments
Summary • empirical thermal expansion coefficient (longitudinal)aconcrete = 12 · 10-6 / K • center line of no radial movement is not in the middle of the slab • height change 05/2008 – 05/2009 approx. 1.5 bis 2.0 mm • deformation seems not to have finished after reaching the final temperature of the slab • result