1 / 38

Multipole Magnet Design Selection and Permanent Magnet Material Selection

Multipole Magnet Design Selection and Permanent Magnet Material Selection. May 18, 2000 Stanford University Manufacturing Modeling Lab Shun Takai. Agenda. 1. Motivation 2. Cost-Specification Analysis Flow Down of the Product Targets Evaluation of the candidates

chuck
Download Presentation

Multipole Magnet Design Selection and Permanent Magnet Material Selection

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Multipole Magnet Design Selection and Permanent Magnet Material Selection May 18, 2000 Stanford University Manufacturing Modeling Lab Shun Takai

  2. Agenda 1. Motivation 2. Cost-Specification Analysis • Flow Down of the Product Targets • Evaluation of the candidates • Selection of the best candidate 3. Conclusion

  3. Motivation • Needs for multiple requirements satisfaction • NLC • Feature (physicists’ requirements) • Cost (Government’s requirements) • Cost-Specification Analysis highlights design and/or material candidate that satisfies both target specification and target cost

  4. Multipole Magnets Permanent Magnet Set • Quantity: 1500 quadrupole magnets in Main Linac system 6000 permanent magnet sets Current Design (Electro-Magnets) Proposed Design (Hybrid Magnets)

  5. Agenda 1. Motivation 2. Cost-Specification Analysis • Flow Down of the Product Targets • Evaluation of the candidates • Selection of the best candidate 3. Conclusion

  6. Targets Flow Down • Flow down of the product targets to the focus structures

  7. Focus of the Analysis - Structure • Focus: (1) Main Linac multipole magnet system (2) permanent magnet used in quads

  8. Specification Flow Down - VOC and Specs

  9. Cost Flow Down • Target cost of a structure • Calculated relative to the worth of the NLC Target cost of a structure Worth of a structure Worth of NLC = X Target cost of NLC How can I calculate the worth of a structure?

  10. Worth Allocation: Main Systems • Worth of NLC is equal to the total worth of VOC 1. Calculate worth of NLC specification from worth of VOC (Translate VOC to NLC specs) 2. Calculate worth of main systems from its contribution to achieve NLC specs (Larger the contribution, larger the worth)

  11. Worth Allocation: Main Systems 1. Calculate worth of NLC specification from worth of VOC (Translate VOC to NLC specs)

  12. Worth Allocation: Main Systems 2. Calculate worth of main systems from its contribution to achieve NLC specs (Larger the contribution, larger the worth)

  13. Worth Allocation: Main Linac Sub-systems • Calculate worth of Main Linac sub-systems

  14. Worth Allocation: Main Linac Sub-systems 1. Calculate worth of Main Linac specs from worth of NLC specs (Translate NLC specs to Main Linac specs)

  15. Worth Allocation: Main Linac Sub-systems 2. Calculate worth of Main Linac sub-systems from its contribution to achieve Main Linac specs (Larger the contribution, larger the worth)

  16. Specification Flow Down - Result

  17. Worth Allocation - Result

  18. Target Flow Down - Cost Calculation Target cost of a multipole magnet system 0.9 / 1500(Worth of a multipole magnet system) 9 (Worth of NLC) Target cost of NLC = X Target cost of a permanent magnet set 0.06 / 6000(Worth of a permanent magnet set) 9 (Worth of NLC) Target cost of NLC = X

  19. Agenda 1. Motivation 2. Cost-Specification Analysis • Flow Down of the Product Targets • Evaluation of the candidates • Selection of the best candidate 3. Conclusion

  20. Cost-Specification Analysis 3 Worst Electro 2 Relative Cost (Target Cost = 1) 1 Hybrid Best 0 0 1 2 Relative Performance (Spec = 1) Cost Evaluation • Select structure candidates with Actual Cost < Target cost or < 1 Actual cost Target cost Relative Cost

  21. Performance Evaluation • Overall performance of each candidate is measured by weighted average of individual spec satisfaction • Weighting is relative importance of each specto the customer material propertya material propertyb Relative Performance = weightinga x + weightingb x + ... speca specb Density (Material) = 1 lbs./in.3 Strength (Material) = 4 psi. Relative Performance 1 lbs./in.3 4 psi = 1.5 = x + x 0.5 0.5 1 lbs./in.3 2 psi Density (Spec.) > 1 lbs./in.3 Strength (Spec.) > 2 psi.

  22. Performance Evaluation - Weighting Calculation • Weighting of each spec is calculated by relative weight of each spec

  23. Performance Evaluation • Select structure candidates with Relative performance > 1

  24. Design Selection of Multipole Magnet System • Design candidates: Electro-magnet vs hybrid magnet (Strontium Ferrite)

  25. Material Selection of Permanent Magnet • Material candidates: Strontium Ferrite, Sm2Co17, Nd-Fe-B

  26. Trade-Off Analysis • Design can be optimized by trade-off analysis of each candidate

  27. Agenda 1. Motivation 2. Cost-Specification Analysis • Flow Down of the Product Targets • Evaluation of the candidates • Selection of the best candidate 3. Conclusion

  28. Conclusion • Cost-Specification Analysis enables an engineer to select the best candidate that satisfies both specification and cost targets • By applying Cost-Specification Analysis to all components and by selecting the best candidate, the final product can satisfy both required feature and cost simultaneously • Looking for second application in order to validate this approach

  29. Questions?

  30. Appendix

  31. Relative Performance: Multipole Magnet Systems

  32. Relative Performance: Permanent Magnet

  33. Next Linear Collider (NLC) • NLC is a 20-mile long linear collider that smashes electrons and positrons in order to create new particles • The goal is to produce 10 times higher energies than the present linear collider (SLC) • NLC is consists of three main systems • Injection(Beam injection) • Main Linac(Acceleration) • Beam Delivery(Collision and detection)

  34. Quadrupole Magnets (Quads) • Quadrupole magnets are used in order to focus electron and positron beams using magnetic field • Without focusing beams, we can not collide beams accurately

  35. Customer Needs Identification(Customer Value Chain Analysis & Priority Matrix) • US Gov. is the critical external customer and SLAC physicists are the critical internal customers • The priorities of SLAC and the Gov. are different • SLAC needs to satisfy both feature and cost USA Nation $&! Constraints US Gov. Optimize Accept ! $&! SLAC $&! $&! $&! ARD-A NLC $&! MML $: Flow of funds ! : Flow of information

  36. Future Study • Include lead time to Cost-Specification Analysis • Consider availability of each material • Trade-off analysis • High cost, high performance vs Low cost, low performance

  37. World Permanent Magnet Market

  38. Chemical Component of Permanent Magnets

More Related