Star-fst-l mailing list

["Capotosto, Michael (CONTR)" <capotosto AT bnl.gov>]

Gerard,

Cable size should not be an issue, as the custom cable will almost certainly 
be smaller in diameter than three separate shielded cables. 

As far as requirements go, it is my understanding that the cables should be 
the same size as the test stand cables, coming in at 8' long +/- 1". Assuming 
we follow the quote from the IST cables: The cable will have 16 pairs of 
28AWG solid 2 conductor cabled together, at a minimum of 16 twists per foot. 
The cable will also have 4 individual conductors, size 22AWG stranded (7/30). 
The cable will be shielded with an aluminum/mylar tape, with a 25% minimum 
overlap, and a 22AWG stranded (7/30) drain wire. Is this correct? Are there 
any preferences for pair colors and outer jacket color?

Do you know if FEP was a requirement for this cable? When assembling the 
T-Boards we had issues with the jacket beginning to melt, shrinking back, or 
splitting - would we be able to switch to an insulation with a higher melting 
point such as Teflon/PTFE?

Zhenyu, 
Does the 48 cable count include spares? If not, how many spares do you need? 

Thanks,
Mike Capotosto


-----Original Message-----
From: Gerard Visser <gvisser AT indiana.edu> 
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2019 12:03 PM
To: Capotosto, Michael (CONTR) <capotosto AT bnl.gov>
Cc: star-fst-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: Re: [Star-fst-l] Cost Estimate for Production FST Inner Signal 
Cables // Fwd: Re: integration of sTGC and Si

Hi Zhenyu, Mike,
        I send here below the info on the *IST* inner cable. Also the third 
attachment here (not part of the forwarded message below but following a few 
days later) was a refreshed quote for that.
        For *FST*, I think we will revise slightly (fewer pairs)... Also if 
necessary I think the power wires could be reduced from 22 AWG to 24 AWG as 
the current will be 2/3 that of IST and the length also less than IST. But 
someone should make some estimation of voltage drop. Of course 22 AWG is 
better if the diameter is OK.
        If I remember right, BNL purchased from Meunier for one of our past 
projects, and they have good pricing, so when you contact Alpha for the new 
cable design & quote you may want to suggest procurement through Meunier, 
unless BNL can buy direct from Alpha of course.
        Sincerely,

                Gerard


On 7/2/2019 9:57 AM, Zhenyu Ye wrote:
 > Hi Mike,
 >
 > Can you please make a cost estimate for the actual FST inner signal 
 > cables, based on the work you have done for the FST test cables? We will 
 > need 48 of actual cables. The cost should include the cable itself (Gerard 
 > had a quote for it. Gerard, can you please share it with Mike), 
 > connectors, and external assembly work for the cable+T-board.
 >
 > Thanks,
 > Zhenyu
 > _______________________________________________
 > Star-fst-l mailing list
 > Star-fst-l AT lists.bnl.gov
 > https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fst-l
 >

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: integration of sTGC and Si
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2018 14:15:12 -0400
From: Gerard Visser <gvisser AT indiana.edu>
To: Ye, Zhenyu <yezhenyu AT uic.edu>
CC: Aschenauer, Elke <elke AT bnl.gov>, Scott W. Wissink <wissink AT indiana.edu>

hi Zhenyu,
        I was wrong, sorry. That was not the latest quote, there was some 
design change after that one. I don't know the details but it drove up the 
cost. The actual last quote is attached here. We ordered 1500 ft on MIT PO # 
4501543228. I do not have a copy of the PO. The final spec sheet signoff for 
partnumber 518222 is also attached here. If/when we get a new quote, we have 
to reference that.
        I hope this gives you enough info for now, apart from a requote which 
again I am happy to as for once I'm told the length.
        Sincerely,

                Gerard


On 10/25/2018 1:53 PM, Gerard Visser wrote:
> Hi Zhenyu,
>      I think I found the latest version of the quote that we ordered 
> against. I attach it here. I am still looking for some email thread about 
> the actual order.
>      If you know how much you would like to buy, I can request a new 
> quote. I believe the min is 1000 ft and increments must be 500 ft 
> (possibly must be 1000 ft).
>      Just FYI, this quote partnumber is not the actual partnumber, 
> which is set only after the first order. New quote I presume will be 
> showing the actual partnumber. (Which is I believe 518222.)
> 
>      Gerard
> 
> 
> On 10/25/2018 11:23 AM, Gerard Visser wrote:
>> hi Zhenyu,
>>
>> We should be able to re-use the patchpanel boards I hope? (Do you 
>> have them, or have located them?) These have (at least in IST they 
>> had) the voltage regulators on them, it is more than just a 
>> patchpanel. Who will design your frontend electronics boards?
>> If it is necessary, same person can hopefully deal with patchpanels too I 
>> think?
>>
>> Probably some discussion is needed on scope of work for me for FST. 
>> It is likely I should not be volunteered to make the patchpanel board 
>> (and so better if he/she who will make it costs it now for you). I 
>> hope the frontend boards with APV are being costed by someone in 
>> detail now. Sorry that I may just not know about the state of this.
>>
>> I am of course able to help with design issues for the FEE, as I did 
>> help Ben Buck in the IST case. I will do my best to assist to have a 
>> good design, but am counting on your angineer(s) to do the most of this 
>> work.
>>
>> As to cable costs, I can find the old costs, I promised to do that 
>> but I haven't tracked it down yet, sorry. Probably if I put in a RFQ 
>> to same company I can get an updated cost from them with little 
>> effort - so for sure I don't mind to ask. A new quote will be much 
>> better for budget justification than the old one and a guess about 
>> inflation. But you have to give me a length, how much would you need 
>> in total? And connectors for the cable I hope you guys can cost? the 
>> partnumbers should be in Ben's documentation.
>>
>> Have all the long cables (between rack and patchpanel) been saved? 
>> (I.e. we don't have to cost replacing those?)
>>
>> I'll make an estimate for firmware and integration support manpower 
>> here. I've been dealing with FCS materials estimates first, but 
>> manpower for FST and FCS coming up now.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>      Gerard
>>
>>
>> On 10/25/2018 10:53 AM, Ye, Zhenyu wrote:
>>> Hi Gerard,
>>>
>>> Thank you. Can you please send me the cost (including cables, new 
>>> patch panel boards, and manpower for possible firmware change)?
>>>
>>> Zhenyu
>>>
>>>> On Oct 18, 2018, at 12:01 PM, Gerard Visser <gvisser AT indiana.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> hi Zhenyu,
>>>>     Sorry this is late...
>>>>     Cable mass by a weighing of 92 cm sample is   *97 g/m*  .
>>>>     I have to look for old costing info still but I wanted to get 
>>>> at lest this out this morning.
>>>>
>>>>         Gerard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10/17/2018 11:52 AM, Ye, Zhenyu wrote:
>>>>> Hi Gerard,
>>>>> Can you please tell me the mass of the cables, as well as the cost per 
>>>>> cable?
>>>>> For the bulk cable, what would be the cost?
>>>>> I am trying to put together the budget and cost, and will send 
>>>>> around and discuss with you once I have all the information.
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Zhenyu
>>>>>> On Oct 8, 2018, at 10:19 PM, Gerard Visser <gvisser AT indiana.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Zhenyu,
>>>>>>     Ok if it is still TBD like that I think it is best to plan 
>>>>>> for 72 such cables, indeed.
>>>>>>     But this matter should be made more clear in fwd-upgrade 
>>>>>> meetings, e.g. we should have had it more clear in last weeks 
>>>>>> meeting. There is no problem from the readout side to go up to 
>>>>>> 864 chips, although the max rate will be a little lower I think 
>>>>>> we can still get what is needed by a combination of fewer 
>>>>>> timebins and more ARC-II/crates/PC's. However, everybody needs to 
>>>>>> be on the same page about all the options being considered, this 
>>>>>> must especially affect the MRI proposal and budget I would think. 
>>>>>> Please inform everyone more clearly what the range of options are.
>>>>>>     I will try to get a cable mass on wednesday. (The cable I 
>>>>>> have has a connector on it, but if I recall right it isn't really 
>>>>>> terminated, so I can remove it. But first I have to check that, 
>>>>>> and if it is really terminated I may not want to remove it, but 
>>>>>> rather try to estimate/account for the connector.) Tomorrow I will 
>>>>>> have to work from home, kids off school.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     - Gerard
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/8/2018 9:20 PM, Ye, Zhenyu wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Gerard,
>>>>>>> Thanks for the quick reply. The final number of APVs may be a 
>>>>>>> factor of
>>>>>>> 1-3 of 288, so between 288-864 APVs (from the simulation 288 
>>>>>>> APVs gives an ok tracking resolution, but we may want to 
>>>>>>> increase the number of channels to see if we can improve the 
>>>>>>> performance). I will just tell John that there are 72 7.29mm diameter 
>>>>>>> cables, is that ok?
>>>>>>>> On Oct 9, 2018, at 8:53 AM, Gerard Visser <gvisser AT indiana.edu> 
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Zhenyu,
>>>>>>>>     Yes I think that is a good assumption. Beware though, that 
>>>>>>>> was a custom made cable. If we will be able to afford it, I 
>>>>>>>> think that same sort of cable can be used. I'm pretty sure we 
>>>>>>>> do not have enough leftover bulk cable, but it could maybe work to 
>>>>>>>> re-use IST cables.
>>>>>>>>     I have a short piece here at Indiana and I measure the 
>>>>>>>> diameter is
>>>>>>>> 7.29 mm. There is one cable per 12 APV group, that was 72 
>>>>>>>> cables in IST and will be 24 cables in FST. (BTW, this is a 
>>>>>>>> good time to ask to be sure, 288 APV is pretty well certain, is 
>>>>>>>> it?)
>>>>>>>>     I can get you a mass estimate on the purple cable too, but 
>>>>>>>> not today. Please let me know if that is needed.
>>>>>>> Yes please send it to me when you get time.
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Zhenyu
>>>>>>>>     Sincerely,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>         Gerard
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 10/8/2018 8:23 PM, Ye, Zhenyu wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Gerard,
>>>>>>>>> For the FST cables inside the supporting cone, I think for now 
>>>>>>>>> we can assume they are of similar size as IST purple cables. 
>>>>>>>>> What do you think? I am away from the University this week and 
>>>>>>>>> thus can’t measure the cables by myself. Can you please tell 
>>>>>>>>> me what size of the IST purple cables is?
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Zhenyu
>> ...