Concept for Tracker Inner Barrel with Tilted Modules

1. Concept for Tracker Inner Barrel with TiltedModules 19.6.2013 Forum on Tracking Detector Mechanics at Oxford Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

2. Abbaneo, Duccio • Conde García, Antonio • Honma, Alan • Mersi, Stefano • Onnela, Antti • Postema, Hans Contributors Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN 4.6.2013

3. Benefits of tilting the modules • How it works (modelling) • Challenges with this geometry • Mid-section • Ring sections • Few words on rods and end disks (if we have time) Outline Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

4. Tracker Base-line layout 2S modules PS modules S. Mersi Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

5. Tracker Base-line layout • Traditionally implemented with rods Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

6. Layout Option with Tilted Modules 2S modules PS modules S. Mersi Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

7. Base line concept • Distinct barrel and end gap geometries • Relatively small surface area of the PS modules not used to greatest extent -> more modules • Tiltedmoduleconcept • Gradual transformation from barrel to end cap –like geometry • PS module surface area better utilized -> less modules Quickcomparison of the twolayouts Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

8. Some degree of modularity • Reasonable assembly, structures, etc. • Reduce the number of modules Main goals Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

9. Ideal case: module faces always perpendicular to particle tracks • PS module shape facilitates compact inner rings (closest to the beam line Optimization of the tilted geometry Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

10. Number of modules in the barrel section: 2836 vs. 4164 • Less modules -> less material.. • Less power consumption • Less material in active volume • Fewer services required.. • Lower cost Main benefits Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

11. Coordinates generated on an excel table (Duccio Abbaneo, Stefano Mersi) • Copied to a design table in Catia • Adjustment by eye (at this stage) How it works? (modelling) Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

12. ..And we get a CAD model How it works? (modelling) Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

13. How it works? (modelling) Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

14. Avoid clashes: some geometries simply impossible • Staying ‘close’ to optimal coordinates • Routing of services, cables.. • Different support structure needed as compared to rod assemblies, not much experience Main challenges Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

15. Ideal solution.. modules are always optimally aligned ..but Perpendicular modules Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

16. Clashes, clashes and clashes • Deviation from optimal coordinates required to avoid clashes Perpendicular modules Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

17. The modulepositionscanbeadjusted in variousways: • (Radius) Each module ring can be adjusted individually – but the adjacent ones have to compensate • (Angle) Module pairs – upper and lower modules on the same ring – can also be adjusted • Other adjustments include: coverage and gap Adjustment Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

18. Deviations from optimal positions and angles necessary to avoid clashes Module ‘pairs’ beamline Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

19. Other adjustments • Upper layer provides hermiticity (one hit) • Lower layer modules can then be tuned for best clearance (with limitation) Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

20. Three layers • Layer 1 has less modules than 2 and 3 • But is also more packed due to smaller radius • Layer 3 has the most modules • But is slightly ‘easier’ to populate Layers Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

21. Rings • Divide the modules into easy and not so easy sections • For example, most congested modules could form a group.. Sectioning Mid section Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

22. Mid-section Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

23. Mid-section Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

24. Rods including a number of modules could form a ring-like structure to cover the mid-section Rods Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

25. ..And they could be assembled something like this.. Rods Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

26. Let’s add some connectors Rods Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

27. Mid-section Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

28. Modules after the midsection in +/- direction • Larger gaps between modules • More clearance • More minimalistic support structure so save in mass? (Individual) rings -section Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

29. Cooling pipe between the layers Ring structures –one approach Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

30. Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

31. Some cooling inserts.. Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

32. Support structure for cooling and modules Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

33. Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

34. Combines both layers into one ring unit • Only one cooling pipe • Limited weight for the support structure Benefits Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

35. We can fit the modules but.. • How optimal are the coordinates, tilt, coverage.. • Support structures (weight, rigidity) • Services (cooling, routing cables) • Dark clouds.. • Can the PS module be cooled effectively Future Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

36. Back up Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

37. Few words on other sections of the tracker Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

38. We have done preliminary layout exercises with rods and 2S modules • Relying on past experience • Cooling under research: pipe, inserts, contact area.. Rods for the outer barrel Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

39. Few words on other sections of the tracker Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

40. Research done by Nick Lumb in Lyon • Modules arranged into cocentric disks or into D’s • Space required depends on the height of components • Cooling and services also affect the thickness of the disks End disks Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

41. Nick is also battling with clashes • Especially in the transition from PS to 2S modules End disks Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN

42. Thank you! Aleksis Chávez Niemelä, CERN