sPHENIX discussion of the superconducting solenoid

["Hock, Jonathan" <jhock AT bnl.gov>]

All,

 

The seismic loading I used for the carriage is .25g.

 

Regards!

 

From: Than, Yatming (Roberto) <ythan AT bnl.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2021 5:48 PM
To: Yip, Kin <kinyip AT bnl.gov>; Hock, Jonathan <jhock AT bnl.gov>
Cc: McIntyre, Gary T <mac AT bnl.gov>; Renuka Rajput-Ghoshal <renuka AT jlab.org>; sphenix-magnet-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: Re: seismic analysis

 

Jim and John must have used something for the carriage.

We also were given a acceleration load for cryo.

I cannot remember the value.

Need to check with Paul.

around 0.3 g??

---

From: Yip, Kin <kinyip AT bnl.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2021 5:44 PM
To: Than, Yatming (Roberto) <ythan AT bnl.gov>; Hock, Jonathan <jhock AT bnl.gov>
Cc: McIntyre, Gary T <mac AT bnl.gov>; Renuka Rajput-Ghoshal <renuka AT jlab.org>; sphenix-magnet-l AT lists.bnl.gov <sphenix-magnet-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Subject: RE: seismic analysis

 

Hi,

 

I misunderstood the question.

 

Renuka is actually wondering whether we at BNL have any design standard for seismic loads (for building a magnet) ?  If so, what is it ?

 

I wonder whether Jim Mills or Mike Anerella or anybody knows ?

 

Kin

 

 

 

-------- Original message --------

From: "Than, Yatming (Roberto)" <ythan AT bnl.gov>

Date: 1/26/21 17:20 (GMT-05:00)

To: "Yip, Kin" <kinyip AT bnl.gov>, "Hock, Jonathan" <jhock AT bnl.gov>

Cc: "McIntyre, Gary T" <mac AT bnl.gov>, Renuka Rajput-Ghoshal <renuka AT jlab.org>, sphenix-magnet-l AT lists.bnl.gov

Subject: Re: seismic analysis

 

Yes.

California seismic requirements is pretty hefty, compared to BNL.

They are in zone 4, and were are I think 2B?

R.

 

 

---

From: sPHENIX-magnet-l <sphenix-magnet-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> on behalf of Yip, Kin <kinyip AT bnl.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2021 3:51 PM
To: Hock, Jonathan <jhock AT bnl.gov>
Cc: McIntyre, Gary T <mac AT bnl.gov>; Renuka Rajput-Ghoshal <renuka AT jlab.org>; sphenix-magnet-l AT lists.bnl.gov <sphenix-magnet-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Subject: [Sphenix-magnet-l] seismic analysis

 

Hi,

Roberto once separated out this PDF file for Seismic analysis/report from Babar for PCSS review and I still leave it here:

https://www.c-ad.bnl.gov/kinyip/download/PCSS/SPHENIX%20SC%20SOLENOID%20SEISMIC%20Analysis.pdf

There were quite some analyses there.

 

From the TDR (Table 9-8), it's mentioned that the seismic load factors are

1.2 g (horizontal)  and  2.0 g (vertical) --- these were originally designed for the BaBar expt. in California of course.

 

Kin

On 1/26/21 12:58 PM, Hock, Jonathan wrote:

Kin,

 

Do you have any seismic calculations from the BABAR magnet? Please see below.

 

Thank You!

 

From: McIntyre, Gary T <mac AT bnl.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2021 12:54 PM
To: Mills, James A <mills AT bnl.gov>; Hock, Jonathan <jhock AT bnl.gov>; Chan, David <dchan AT bnl.gov>; Ilardo, Matthew <milardo AT bnl.gov>
Cc: Drees, Angelika <drees AT bnl.gov>; Witte, Holger <hwitte AT bnl.gov>; Renuka Rajput-Ghoshal <renuka AT jlab.org>; Anerella, Michael D <mda AT bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: BaBar magnet

 

Gentlemen:

I hope this finds you and your families doing well.

 

Do any of you have the seismic information that Renuka Rajput-Ghoshal of JLab is looking for? See message thread below.

 

"I need some information about the seismic load for the design purpose for the magnet at BNL.

Please let me know if you have the data for the seismic load requirement for magnet design.

 

Regards

Renuka"

 

I assume the information sought is of the IR8 experimental hall. 

Please let me know if you can help with this request.

Thank you.

Take care,

Mac

 

---

From: Renuka Rajput-Ghoshal <renuka AT jlab.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2021 9:28 AM
To: Anerella, Michael D <mda AT bnl.gov>
Cc: McIntyre, Gary T <mac AT bnl.gov>; Drees, Angelika <drees AT bnl.gov>; Witte, Holger <hwitte AT bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: BaBar magnet

 

Thank Mike,

I hope someone will have this information.

 

Regards

Renuka

---

From: Anerella, Michael D <mda AT bnl.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2021 8:48 AM
To: Renuka Rajput-Ghoshal <renuka AT jlab.org>
Cc: McIntyre, Gary T <mac AT bnl.gov>; Drees, Angelika <drees AT bnl.gov>; Witte, Holger <hwitte AT bnl.gov>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: BaBar magnet

 

Hi Renuka,

I do not have the information you requested.  I am copying Holger Witte, Gary McIntyre and Angelika Drees, my EIC technical contacts who may be of assistance.

Regards,

Mike

 

 

Michael D. Anerella, P.E.

Chief Mechanical Engineer

Superconducting Magnet Division

Brookhaven National Laboratory

17 Cornell Avenue

Building 902A

Upton, NY 11973

631-344-7291

mda AT bnl.gov

 

From: Renuka Rajput-Ghoshal <renuka AT jlab.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2021 1:30 PM
To: Anerella, Michael D <mda AT bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: BaBar magnet

 

Hello Mike,

Happy New Year to you.

I hope you are doing well.

 

I need some information about the seismic load for the design purpose for the magnet at BNL.

Please let me know if you have the data for the seismic load requirement for magnet design.

 

Regards

Renuka

---

From: Anerella, Michael D <mda AT bnl.gov>
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2020 6:56 AM
To: Renuka Rajput-Ghoshal <renuka AT jlab.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: BaBar magnet

 

Renuka,

You are of course welcome.  If I can be of any help going forward please ask.  Good luck.

Regards,

Mike

 

 

Michael D. Anerella, P.E.

Chief Mechanical Engineer

Superconducting Magnet Division

Brookhaven National Laboratory

17 Cornell Avenue

Building 902A

Upton, NY 11973

631-344-7291

mda AT bnl.gov

 

From: Renuka Rajput-Ghoshal <renuka AT jlab.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2020 11:25 AM
To: Anerella, Michael D <mda AT bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: BaBar magnet

 

sorry for typo!

Thank you so much!

---

From: Renuka Rajput-Ghoshal <renuka AT jlab.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2020 9:20 AM
To: Anerella, Michael D <mda AT bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: BaBar magnet

 

Thank you so mick Mike,

Yes, we all are doing well and hope you are well too.

 

About BaBAR magnet, yes, I noticed that the coil is divided in the 3 sections, and the end sections have higher current density (by narrowing the cable).

About the new magnet design, this is very preliminary design, I am still working to optimize the design.  I will surely consider the design ideology of BaBAR magnet too. Thanks for pointing this out.

 

Regards

Renuka

---

From: Anerella, Michael D <mda AT bnl.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2020 8:06 AM
To: Renuka Rajput-Ghoshal <renuka AT jlab.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] BaBar magnet

 

Hi Renuka,

I hope you are well - I enjoyed your talk yesterday. 

I have a question for you regarding the BaBar magnet.  It is not significant so as to change your plans, but I could not tell from your slides or your description.  I realize you/TJNAF have conducted significant research in this regard, but are you aware that the magnet coil has increased current density in the ends to extend the uniform field region?  This is accomplished by splicing conductor in the ends with half the amount of aluminum, providing a closer spacing of superconductor, i.e., without adding turns above as is shown in the new magnet design.  Maybe you know this already; if not, I hope it helps.

Regards,

Mike

 

 

Michael D. Anerella, P.E.

Chief Mechanical Engineer

Superconducting Magnet Division

Brookhaven National Laboratory

17 Cornell Avenue

Building 902A

Upton, NY 11973

631-344-7291

mda AT bnl.gov