Star-fst-l mailing list

["Ye, Zhenyu" <yezhenyu AT uic.edu>]

> On Jul 31, 2020, at 7:49 AM, Yi Yang <yiyang AT ncku.edu.tw> wrote:
> 
> Hi Zhenyu,
> 
> Please find my reply inline. 
> The updated slides are in the same link (v4).
> (https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/event/2020/07/27/star-forward-silicon-tracker-meeting/module-mechanical-structure)
> 
> Cheers,
> Yi
> 
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Yi Yang, Associate Professor 
> Department of Physics 
> National Cheng Kung University 
> Tainan, 701 Taiwan 
> E-Mail: yiyang AT ncku.edu.tw 
> Tel: +886-6-2757575 ext.65237 
> Fax: +886-6-2747995
> Group Web: 
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://phys.ncku.edu.tw/*yiyang__;fg!!P4SdNyxKAPE!QnL2xXwDJZ8pgkLeQBVFTrNpbWhihEL6tO3PrxdTSgDSB9Cwzw92Y3xn6dcF6M3jV37WnG0$
>   
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 10:25 AM Ye, Zhenyu <yezhenyu AT uic.edu> wrote:
> Hi Yi,
> 
> Please find some comments/questions below.
> 
> Slide 3:
> Thermalrigh TF8 2G, Loctite EA 9359.3 AERO, Araldite 2011 -> I remember you 
> said the glue you are using have been used for CMS HCAL. Which one(s) are 
> these? Can we get the ES&H checked before the review? 
> 
> >> Actually I don't know how to do it. Can someone help us?

I guess you could ask Rahul

> I agree with Gerard that probably these can be shown in the safety review, 
> but it is up to you.  

I don’t know when the safety review will take place, but we certainly need 
the ES&H clearance before the actual production starts, because we can’t have 
all the modules produced and then learn some of them do not meet the 
requirement.

> Thermalrigh TF8 2G: rad testing -> Does this mean a test is ongoing?
> 
> >> Yes, we are preparing samples for the radiation hardness test. The basic 
> >> idea is to test the thermal conductivity before/after irradiation.  
> 
> 
> Slide 4: 
> In the thermal simulation, what temperature do you use for NOVEC? Is it 25 
> degree C?
> 
> >> This updated simulation is to set the liquid at 22 C, not the outer 
> >> surface. 

The surface temperature is extremely uniform 25.235-25.236. 
Did you assume the ambient air is 25 degree C? Is this number coming from 
Rahul?

> In the experiment using cooling water, I guess you put 8 resistors, each 
> generating 0.25W, to simulate APVs?
> 
> >> This is correct.  
>  
> Slide 8:
> Goal: quickly produced prototypes for sensor testing 
> -> As I wrote in my previous email, I was not aware of this goal. And even 
> this was the case, we clearly failed the goal, because we did not test the 
> inner sensor until this month. 
> 
> >> In my understanding to complete this kind of complex detector, first we 
> >> have to test the individual parts, then to test the integrated one to 
> >> make sure the design is working, and the final step is to optimize 
> >> everything. 
> If you recall at that moment, we were still suffering from the non-flat 
> PEEK, we even tried to move the injection point at center and cut the 
> center part out (see FST-001 and FST-002). We knew that we needed more time 
> to improve the quality, but you also finished the sensor testing and were 
> waiting for us. So I told you that we will try to make prototypes for you 
> to see if they can perform the sensor testing, but the PEEK and procedure 
> were not ready. 
> 
> I didn't mention that they were made by AIDC. I think it is not fair to 
> them since I didn't provide them enough information and time, also they 
> have a reputation to protect as a leading aerospace company in Taiwan. 
> 
> It is clearly a failure, so I listed all the issues we found. 
>  
> -> Do you want to mention the connector issue and now you have added the QA 
> step?
> 
> >> I don't think so since no one took pictures before they were found to be 
> >> broken, so we don't know the actual reason. I think this QA step is 
> >> needed even if we didn't have this issue. 

In my opinion, connector was a main cause for the delay. As you can see, Xu 
has this in his presentation. I feel it will be consistent if you include it 
in your talk, but I will leave it up to you.

>  
> 
> Slide 21:
> Be prepared to answer questions like, what is the thickness of the glue 
> layer, and that of the thermal geese
> 
> >> Ok.
> 
> Slide 22:
> (1) Mainly due to the guide pin and this will be fixed after using the 
> recommendation from Rahul’s team
> -> I am not convinced that the guide pin is the main cause (the statement 
> itself is unclear. Reading the sentence, it is unclear what it means by the 
> guide pin is the main cause. Moreover, I think besides using bushing+pins, 
> you are also going to change the procedure, i.e. to eliminate an 
> intermediate step to correlate inner and outer together. You may want to 
> mention both here.
> 
> >> Yes, the dominated contribution should come from the guide pins. I 
> >> modified this sentence to be "Mainly due to the precision of the guide 
> >> pin (+threaded holes) and the two steps gluing procedure. This will be 
> >> fixed after using the recommendation from Rahul’s team and modified 
> >> procedure." 
>  
>  
> Slide 24:
> Is it going to work with bushing with an inner diameter of 6-6.008 and a 
> pin with an outer diameter of (6-6.008)?
> What if the bushing is at its lower limit 6.000 and pin at its upper limit 
> 6.008, both are within their tolerance, but pin is larger than the bushing. 
> -> I am waiting for the updated slides before asking Fermilab engineers. I 
> note the tolerance of your pin is different than the pin we use for module 
> assembly. For the latter we use JPLRM4-P6-B10 from 
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://us.misumi-ec.com/vona2/detail/110302194870/__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!QnL2xXwDJZ8pgkLeQBVFTrNpbWhihEL6tO3PrxdTSgDSB9Cwzw92Y3xn6dcF6M3j3B1OiBQ$
>   
>  
> >> I discussed it with the company. I told them that we want the "press-fit 
> >> bushing and pin", and they said they know what to do. So they change the 
> >> tolerance a bit (if you compared to the early one). 
> Probably Rahul can confirm it is okay. I will send him another email about 
> this. 
> 
> Slide 29:
> You are making 60 but we only need 48. Some explanation or adjustment to 
> the number/schedule is needed. 
> 
> >> We will pick the best 48 in the end.  

This is reasonable. I suggest that you put this statement in the slide. 

Do you think you need more than 60 sets of hybrids? Maowu needs this number 
for his talk.

> 
>  
> Slide 30:
> The last two statements "Some small adjustments are needed”, “Ready to 
> start production” seem to contracting each other. Do you mean "Ready to 
> start production” on September 9?
> 
> >> Yes. It has changed.  
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Zhenyu
> 
> > On Jul 30, 2020, at 10:54 AM, Yi Yang <yiyang AT ncku.edu.tw> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Please find the updated version (v3) in the same link 
> > (https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/event/2020/07/27/star-forward-silicon-tracker-meeting/module-mechanical-structure).
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Yi
> > 
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > Yi Yang, Associate Professor 
> > Department of Physics 
> > National Cheng Kung University 
> > Tainan, 701 Taiwan 
> > E-Mail: yiyang AT ncku.edu.tw 
> > Tel: +886-6-2757575 ext.65237 
> > Fax: +886-6-2747995
> > Group Web: 
> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://phys.ncku.edu.tw/*yiyang__;fg!!P4SdNyxKAPE!QnL2xXwDJZ8pgkLeQBVFTrNpbWhihEL6tO3PrxdTSgDSB9Cwzw92Y3xn6dcF6M3jV37WnG0$
> >   
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 
> > 
> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 10:22 PM videbaek <videbaek AT bnl.gov> wrote:
> > Hi Zhenyu,
> > 
> > very good, then its all consistent.
> > And thanks for the confirmation that they confirm the schdule with the 
> > risk due to
> > covid and low priority
> > 
> > best Flemming
> > 
> > 
> > On 2020-07-30 10:14, Ye, Zhenyu wrote:
> > > Hi Flemming.
> > > 
> > >> On Jul 30, 2020, at 8:58 AM, videbaek <videbaek AT bnl.gov> wrote:
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> Hi Sun and Zhenyu
> > >> 
> > >> thanks for the update -
> > >> Looks overall good now.
> > >> - Please take Gerads comment into account.
> > >> 
> > >> I have a comment on on the slide 17;
> > >> 
> > >> between some of the steps at FNAL you will check connectivity before 
> > >> going on to the next step as shown on
> > >> slide 3. How does this add to the time estimate? Will you bring the 
> > >> modules back and forth to UIC?
> > > 
> > > The time for the module test (0.5 hour/module, shown on slide 8)
> > > should not add to the total time, which is dominated by the overnight
> > > curing of each gluing step. We plan to set up the test stand at FNAL,
> > > and so no back and forth between FNAL/UIC for production.
> > > 
> > >> In total you have set aside 4 month for the assembly i.e. ~ 88 
> > >> workdays so there is about
> > >> 2 workdays available per module. Can you confirm.
> > > 
> > > Below is the initial statement from SiDet manager a few days ago. I am
> > > in the process of discussing the technical details (setting up the
> > > test stand, making a new assembly tooling set, etc)
> > > 
> > >>  Yes, i think we can complete this work near your schedule if there 
> > >> are no snags or unforeseen circumstances. Please remember that lab 
> > >> projects have priority, but we haven’t had too many issues thus far 
> > >> except COVID. Rick
> > >> 
> > >>> On Jul 27, 2020, at 6:22 PM, Ye, Zhenyu <yezhenyu AT uic.edu> wrote:
> > >>> 
> > >>> Can you comment on the schedule, i.e., can Bert/Michelle/Gary 
> > >>> complete the production of 48 modules in March-June 2021?
> > >>> 
> > >>> Best
> > >>> Zhenyu
> > > 
> > > Zhenyu
> > > 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> On 2020-07-30 00:08, Xu Sun wrote:
> > >>> Hi Flemming,
> > >>> Sorry for the late reply. Please find my updated slides in the
> > >>> following link:
> > >>> https://drupal.star.bnl.gov/STAR/system/files/FstReviewAug2020_v7.pdf
> > >>> Comments and suggestions are welcome.
> > >>> Best,
> > >>> Xu
> > >>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 1:55 PM videbaek <videbaek AT bnl.gov> wrote:
> > >>>> Hi
> > >>>> Here are some comments to what should be in the talk: Rahul, Sun,
> > >>>> Maowu
> > >>>> the comments are also in word document
> > >>>> best
> > >>>> Flemming
> > >>>> Assembly UIC/FNAL
> > >>>> There has to be a slide on the Q&A done during production as we talk
> > >>>> about on Monday
> > >>>> // slide 11
> > >>>> Test to be performed –
> > >>>> Amount on time –
> > >>>> Tracking of outcome (how recorded)
> > >>>> Check of temperature of APV chips with infrared sensor/camera. With
> > >>>> cooled water
> > >>>> Maybe done at UIC or at BNL -TDB
> > >>>> Mentioned that this will be repeated when they arrive/assembled in
> > >>>> at
> > >>>> BNL
> > >>>> Need a slide that details just in words the step for assembly
> > >>>> You can keep the summary,
> > >>>> But on slide before take the assembly tasks – put into a 3 column
> > >>>> table
> > >>>> with col 2 == time
> > >>>> (days () , -- also is there no steps for curing time and column 3
> > >>>> with
> > >>>> institution/man power
> > >>>> Repeat the number of assemblies to make; what can be done in
> > >>>> parallel
> > >>>> This is important information to evaluate the 3 months
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Add an ESH slide describing the additional materials used in
> > >>>> assembly
> > >>>> (like glue, epoxy for encapsulation)
> > >>>> Add statement that you follow UIC guidelines for working safely in
> > >>>> the
> > >>>> lab.
> > >>>> Hybrid & T-boards
> > >>>> Slide 5 ; reformulate the waiting for .. as we discussed.
> > >>>> I assume we agreed we would not change mechanics for the T-board,
> > >>>> but
> > >>>> move the capacitor on the board. Add a week for that task, (design +
> > >>>> signoff by group)
> > >>>> You got my estimate for connectors-
> > >>>> I suggest the make production slide into two
> > >>>> One for hybrid and one for T-board – you might indicator vendor
> > >>>> –
> > >>>> Based on experience with prototype.
> > >>>> Give the quantities being made
> > >>>> One slide with ES&H
> > >>>> Materials proper (is there a standard that is being followed
> > >>>> --- non flammable PCB ?
> > >>>> Work at lab at SDU minimal. Follows University work rules.
> > >>>> Integration
> > >>>> Rahul
> > >>>> Please add a slide on ES&H
> > >>>> That we follow BNL rules
> > >>>> There will be safety review (before actual production?)
> > >>>> Certainly, one before installation
> > >>>> Any specific concern that you pay attention to on this
> > >>>> Also if you can add a slide where you discuss your response to
> > >>>> Charge
> > >>>> questions?
> > >>>> (Those relevant  like installation schedule)
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Flemming Videbaek
> > >>>> senior scientist
> > >>>> videbaek @ bnl.gov [1]
> > >>>> Brookhaven National Lab
> > >>>> Physics Department
> > >>>> Bldg 510D
> > >>>> Upton, NY 11973
> > >>>> phone: 631-344-4106
> > >>>> cell     :
> > >>>> 631-681-1596_______________________________________________
> > >>>> Star-fst-l mailing list
> > >>>> Star-fst-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > >>>> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fst-l
> > >>> Links:
> > >>> ------
> > >>> [1] http://bnl.gov
> > >> 
> > >> --
> > >> Flemming Videbaek
> > >> senior scientist
> > >> videbaek @ bnl.gov
> > >> Brookhaven National Lab
> > >> Physics Department
> > >> Bldg 510D
> > >> Upton, NY 11973
> > >> 
> > >> phone: 631-344-4106
> > >> cell     :  631-681-1596
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> Star-fst-l mailing list
> > >> Star-fst-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > >> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fst-l
> > 
> > -- 
> > Flemming Videbaek
> > senior scientist
> > videbaek @ bnl.gov
> > Brookhaven National Lab
> > Physics Department
> > Bldg 510D
> > Upton, NY 11973
> > 
> > phone: 631-344-4106
> > cell     :  631-681-1596
> > _______________________________________________
> > Star-fst-l mailing list
> > Star-fst-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fst-l
>