WGA – 6th April 2004 Blocking the central foot / Validation

1. WGA – 6th April 2004Blocking the central foot / Validation Progress follow-up Validation process proposal Proposal for a first CM geometry stability criteria

2. Progress follow-up WGA workshop – 6th of april 2004 Presentation by Fabien Seyvet - Blocking the central foot/Validation

3. Progress follow-up WGA workshop – 6th of april 2004 Presentation by Fabien Seyvet - Blocking the central foot/Validation

4. Some information obtained Magnet 3065 adjusted to itp20 • No deformation of CM curvature during blocking • Transfer function accuracy remains within 15-20% • End cartography reliability WGA workshop – 6th of april 2004 Presentation by Fabien Seyvet - Blocking the central foot/Validation

5. Some information obtained • WP01 geometric measurement re-implemented because of differences between itp20 and after cryostating (effect of transport and/or cryostating) WGA workshop – 6th of april 2004 Presentation by Fabien Seyvet - Blocking the central foot/Validation

6. Some information obtained • During cryostating there has been some deformation imposed on CM • Procedure was changed (marked note* in follow-up table) • There might be other deformation effect as well WGA workshop – 6th of april 2004 Presentation by Fabien Seyvet - Blocking the central foot/Validation

7. Some information obtained • Other example (3111), magnet still NC WGA workshop – 6th of april 2004 Presentation by Fabien Seyvet - Blocking the central foot/Validation

8. Some information obtained • There exists an effect of transport (example on 3058) • It was studied based on previous data (geo. meas. at reception of CM), with the results that reshaped magnets only were affected by transport… WGA workshop – 6th of april 2004 Presentation by Fabien Seyvet - Blocking the central foot/Validation

9. Some information obtained • An other example of difference between geometry at industry and after cryostating • Plus warm magnetic measurement of Juan G. at warm -> correlation WGA workshop – 6th of april 2004 Presentation by Fabien Seyvet - Blocking the central foot/Validation

10. Validation process proposal • For >10 validation magnets • 3122,3111,1051,2063,1055**,3118, • 3119,2019,1073,3058,1088,3117, • 3129, at least • Evaluation of stability • With central foot blocked • Without central foot blocked • Comparison with one or several definite • geometry criteria at each step • **One cryodipole with all 3 support posts lubricated Plan CM transport Wp01 geometry meas. Cryostating Wp03 fiducialisation Blocking Cold test SM18 Wp08 fiducialsation. Cryodipole transport-> SMi2 Wp08b fiducialisation Tunnel WGA workshop – 6th of april 2004 Presentation by Fabien Seyvet - Blocking the central foot/Validation

11. Proposal for a first CM geometry stability criteria • dS (sagitta error) • Representative of CM curvature. This is directly related to eliminating CM center lateral DOF • Calculated by AT-MAS (Elena’s section) providing CM sagitta error when compared with theoretical value (“validated” information) • Available for each steps • cryodipole assembly • cold tests • Transport -> Would enable partial evaluation of effect of central foot blockage AND the shape graphs, of course, as a first approximation… WGA workshop – 6th of april 2004 Presentation by Fabien Seyvet - Blocking the central foot/Validation

12. Measurement of CM geometry and deformation, during cryogenic operation • Measurement from Juan G. on 1051 • Correlation of magnetic meas. with fidu geometric meas. obtained at room temperature • Method is still in validation period for cold meas. It seems not applicable for the validation process yet… • Measurement of cryostat fiducials during cool down • Missed on 1051 (planned for Monday and executed during WE without measurement running) • Next magnet should be identified… WGA workshop – 6th of april 2004 Presentation by Fabien Seyvet - Blocking the central foot/Validation