1 / 29

ALIGNMENT TESTS Review of CLIC Two Beam Module lab program

ALIGNMENT TESTS Review of CLIC Two Beam Module lab program. On behalf of CLIC pre-alignment team. 06/11/2013. Summary. 4 main tasks/objectives of the alignment tests on TBTM: Validation of measurement methods for the alignment tests Validation of the pre-alignment strategy on short range

dard
Download Presentation

ALIGNMENT TESTS Review of CLIC Two Beam Module lab program

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ALIGNMENT TESTSReview of CLIC Two Beam Module lab program On behalf of CLIC pre-alignment team 06/11/2013

  2. Summary • 4 main tasks/objectives of the alignment tests on TBTM: • Validation of measurement methods for the alignment tests • Validation of the pre-alignment strategy on short range • Inter-comparison between alignment systems on short range • Study of the alignment of supports and components when the conditions change: • Additional constraints like waveguides, connection to vacuum pipes, vacuum • Thermal tests • Conclusion : resources needed and next tasks Initially foreseen on an independent mock-up

  3. Validation of measurements methods for the alignment tests • Objectives: • To have a range of tools: • Allowing precise and accurate measurements • Allowing cross check of measurements • Taking into consideration the small space available around the module • Several instruments qualified using CMM measurements as reference (Leitz Infinity: 0.3 μm + 1 ppm) Micro-triangulation AT401 Romer arm Performances (over 2 m) ~ 5 µm ~ 10 µm ~ 5 µm Displacement of the prism, contact with the object Limited range Drawbacks Needs permanent stations

  4. Validation of measurements methods for the alignment tests • Inter-comparison between micro-triangulation and AT401: • Two MB girders equipped with both types of fiducials and measured on CMM • Alignment of girders measured by the two instruments and compared

  5. Validation of measurements methods for the alignment tests • Other methods to be considered for the alignment tests: • Photogrammetry • This could be very interesting for thermal tests as it is very quick: a series of pictures is needed on site, then analysis can be performed far from the module. • Not ready for such an accuracy, targets need to be adapted (R&D needed) • Other methods to be considered for integration purposes: • 3D scans • To solve the problems of integration that were met (3D models did not correspond to what was installed  a lot of time lost) Postponed due to lack of time Postponed due to lack of time

  6. Validation of the pre-alignment strategy on short range Strategy of pre-alignment: Fiducialisation of components Fiducialisation of their common support Alignment on a common support Whole assembly ready to be aligned

  7. Validation of the pre-alignment strategy on short range • Budget of alignment errors • Requirements: • The zero of each component will be included in a cylinder with a radius of a few microns: • 14 µm (RF structures & MB quad BPM) • 17 µm (MB quad) • 20 µm (DB quad) • Budget of error: The combination of the 3 first steps is the object of PACMAN

  8. Validation of the pre-alignment strategy on short range • Determination of the position • Reference network: layout and configuration of sensors • Comparison of the alignment of the mean axis of the Ves by AT401 and alignment sensors Difference between coordinates of mean axis extremities calculated by 2 different methods

  9. Validation of the pre-alignment strategy on short range • Re-adjustment • Two solutions studied in parallel: Ok when no constraints Linear actuators Cam movers Not ready • Algorithms of re-positioning: relative ok, absolute to be tested

  10. Validation of the pre-alignment strategy on short range • Case of the supports: • Girder: • Mean axis of the V-shaped supports: • Boostec: radius of the cylinder containing the center of the V-shaped support : 6μm and 4μm • Micro-Contrôle: radius of the cylinder containing the center of the V-shaped support: 7.5 μm and 5.5 μm • Girder + cradle: • Measurements out of the range of the CMM: accuracy ~ 15 µm, some faults detected. • Total length above 2 m • Different types of fiducials implied different types of measuring devices sometimes outside the range of measurement. • Articulation point: • Not sobadat the beginning • Degradationalong time (shocks, loads, constraints)

  11. Validation of the pre-alignment strategy on short range • Case of the components: • 2 steps: • Determination of the position within a few microns • Alignment on the support • PETS: • Assembly ok • No problem on alignment (on V-shaped supports) • DB quad: • System of adjustment not ok, no stability of the position (offset of 200 μm w.r.t. theoretical position) => new system under design • AS: • Assembly not ok

  12. Inter-comparison between alignment systems • oWPS versus cWPS: • Summary of sensor performances • Accuracy of measurement of oWPS is ~ 20 µm and needs to be improved • Accuracy of measurement of cWPS is ~ 5 µm thanks to new benches and new procedures of calibration. • Noise of cWPS is a serious drawback for active alignment and needs to be understood.

  13. Inter-comparison between alignment systems • cWPS versus NIKHEF alignment systems: • 2 main systems installed by NIKHEF (+1 in longitudinal) RasNik RasDif Integration in 3D models Development of sensors Installation & analysis of data Qualification (@ NIKHEF) • Longitudinal position of cradles not good • Interferences with other systems • One cradle with problem • Exchange of 3D models • Length between girders not the same • Use of oWPS interface • Choice of the components • Software, preparation of database • Influence of T° • Necessity of thermal shielding

  14. Inter-comparison between alignment systems • Need to develop an inclinometer that is absolute: • To avoid 2 wires per beam, 4 wires per module, as in lab and CLEX • Difficulty: absolute measurement combined with kinematic interface • Development of a special measurement bench and special tool, to be tested on TBTM • Next step: development of a rad hard version (manufacturers are not interested to do this  in-house development)

  15. Alignment of components & supports when conditions change • Test of DOF of girders along 3 steps of installation: • Step 0: components installed • Step 1: connection of the bellows of the vacuum tank with PETS and AS • Step 2: connection of the waveguides between AS and PETS • Step 3: connection of the vacuum network between TANK and AS.

  16. Alignment of components & supports when conditions change • Nb of days: 26 • Stations: 165 • Measurements: > 18 000 • Thermal tests: introduction • First tests performed between 20°C and 40°C to check that the performed measurements are correct: • Network all around the room on the concrete beams of the ceiling and walls • Fiducials of the girders considered as reference of measurement (low thermal expansion of the girder): best fits were performed with measurements performed at 20°C by CMM, to check the coefficient of thermal expansion.) • Redundancy of measurements and study of the residuals • Special care for all the measurements: • Nobody else inside • Station < 45’ • Use of a heavy tripod • Warm-up of instruments • Cross-check with other methods (photogrammetry, micro-triangulation under study)

  17. Alignment of components & supports when conditions change • Thermal tests: some particular cases • Repeatable measurements • Warm-up of DB components has no impact on MB components • The initial misalignment of components that is important in some cases makes the displacements more difficult to be understood

  18. Alignment of components & supports when conditions change • Vacuum tests • Displacement of girders • Roll: • DB: ~ 1mrad (T0-1), ~ 0.1 mrad (T0-2) • MB: 0.327 mrad (T0-1), 0 (T0-2) • Displacement of cradles

  19. Alignment of components & supports when conditions change • Vacuum tests • Displacement of cradles versus girders • Non repeatability • Consequences: • Fiducialisation lost: no possibility to perform again absolute measurements  re-measure on CMM needed • ZTS vvu Kosice has copied this solution for CLEX  same problem for CLEX  no possibility to align the components in an absolute way • Articulation point lost

  20. Alignment of components & supports when conditions change • Vacuum tests • Independence of girders • Impact on components: • Less than 10 μm for PETS and DBQ1 • Longitudinal displacements of 678 μm for DBQ2 • Displacements of 115 μm in radial for AS1

  21. Next tasks • Validation of measurements methods: • Measurements of 1 module take ~ 1 day: to improve the speed if needed up to 30’, R&D needed [0.2 FTE] • Development of photogrammetry and micro-triangulation (if possible to have permanent stations) [0.2 FTE] • Implementation of 3D scans [0.2 FTE] • Validation of the pre-alignment strategy: • Validation of absolute repositioning algorithm (if module re-fiducialised) • DB quad support: • Validation of the prototype • Design of the support • Qualification on DB type 1 • Inter-comparison between alignment systems: • Cross-check measurements of RasNik, RasDif and cWPS • Re-installation of oWPS once recalibrated and comparison between cWPS and oWPS • Impact of temperature on sensors.

  22. Next tasks • Alignment and fiducialisation of components • Type 0-1: • Transport tests (and re-alignment of all components and girders if needed) • Any additional tests • Refiducialisation of the module • Type 0-2: • Control of assembly and fiducialisation of components AS and PETS • Control of their alignment on girders • Alignment of the 2 modules type 0, tests of actuators, tests of articulation point, etc. • Tests with constraints, T°, vacuum • Type 1: • Control of assembly of PETS, AS • Fiducialisation of DB quad, PETS, AS • Design, order, assembly of the cradle linking MC girder to Boostec girder (MB) • Assembly of articulation + cradles on Epucret girder • Alignment cradle versus girder on MB and DB side • Fiducialisation of girders + cradles • Fiducialisation of supports + stabilization system + MB quad

  23. Next tasks • Alignment and fiducialisation of components • Type 1: • Assembly of cam movers • Installation and validation of cam movers (+ control/command system) • Installation and validation of alignment sensors (on cradles and MB quad) (+ acquisition system + software + database) • Aligment of all the supports • Tests of actuators and cam movers • Tests of absolute repositioning • Tests with constraints? • Transfer Type 0- Type 1: • Study of the new configuration (longitudinal problem to be solved) • Design of new parts, procurement, assembly,… • Fiducialisation of new cradles • Dismounting, marking on the floor, drilling, reinstallation of the new solution • Alignment of the new configuration

  24. Next tasks • Alignment and fiducialisation of components • Type 4: • Assembly, fiducialisation of DB girder • Manufacturing (redesign?) of articulation point • Fiducialisation of components: DB quad • Design of supporting system (and sensor interfaces), procurement, fiducialisation • Control of assembly of MB quad, MB quad + stabilization system, MB quad + stabilization system + supporting system • Preparation of the algorithms of repositioning • Installation and validation of cam movers (+ control/command system) • Installation and validation of alignment sensors (on cradles and MB quad) (+ acquisition system + software + database) • Alignment of type 4 • Tests of actuators and cam movers • Tests of relative, absolute repositioning • Tests with constraints?

  25. Resources linked to the TBTM in lab TBTM in lab CLIC • Study of cam movers • 1 FTE (PhD student) 0.4 FTE in 2014 ? • Mechatronics • 0.7 FTE (PJAS student) 0.3 FTE in 2012 • 0.3 FTE in 2013 • 0.3 FTE in 2014 • Fiducialisation, alignment • 1 FTE (fellow) 0.8 FTE in 2013 • 0.8 FTE in 2014 • Sensors, actuators • 1 FTE (fellow –PJAS?) 0.6 FTE in 2012 • 0.6 FTE in 2013 • 0.4 FTE in 2014 • Mechanics, prototypes • 0.5 FTE (FSU) 0.3 FTE in 2013 • 0.3 FTE in 2014 • Supervision • M. Sosin: 0.3 H. Mainaud Durand: 0.6 • Help from ABP/SU (oWPS, photogrammetry, scans, second operator)

  26. Summary of the situation Alignment tests on TBTM Alignment tests on CLEX Development and qualification of sensors Mechanical designs Design of articulation points & cradles Development and qualification of actuators Study of new methods of measurements Integration of alignment systems Development of acquisition system, databases, analysis scripts Fiducialisation with the metrology lab Implementation of a measurement lab

  27. List of publications • IPAC 2011: • Theoretical and practical feasibility demonstration of a micrometric remotely controlled pre-alignment system for the CLIC linear collider, H. Mainaud Durand et al. • Validation of micrometric remotely controlled pre-alignment system for the CLIC test setup with 5 DOF, H. Mainaud Durand et al. • MEDSI 2012: • Issues & feasibility demonstration of positioning closed loop control for the CLIC supporting system using a test mock-up with 5 DOF, M. Sosin et al. • CLIC MB quadrupole active pre-alignment based on cam movers, J. Kemppinen et al. • FIG 2012: • Augmentation of total stations by CDD sensors for automated contactless high precision metrology, S. Guillaume • IWAA 2012: • Validation of the CLIC alignment strategy, H. Mainaud Durand et al. • oWPS versus cWPS, H. Mainaud Durand et al. • IPAC 2012: • Strategy and validation of fiducialisation for the pre-alignment of CLIC components, S. Griffet et al.

  28. List of reports • 1096126: Evaluation du laser tracker AT401 par 1 CMM • 1096127: Simulation d’un réseau applicable à un module CLIC • 1096130: Fiducialisation & pre-alignment • 1096133: Pre-alignment solutions applied to girders • 1097661: Fiducialisation & dimensional control • 1098660: Poutres Boostec: tolérances à contrôler sur site • 1100438: Poutres Epucret: tolérances à contrôler sur site • 1103378: Contrôle des poutres Boostec sur site • 1106507: Evaluation des performances du prototype de micro-triangulation • 1108528: Evaluation des performances du bras de mesures Romer Multi Gage • 1108692: Contrôle des poutres Micro-Contrôle sur site • 1131579: Emplacement des fiducielles et interfaces capteur sur les poutres de la maquette TM0 • 1137443: Measurements of MB supporting systems, fiducialisation • 1141392: Qualification of linear actuators from ZTS vvu Kosice • 1142857: Contrôle de la position des poutres Micro-contrôle au bâtiment 169 • 1146050: Evaluation du laser tracker AT401 par des mesures du banc de micro-triangulation • 1155733: Inter-comparison of measurements performed on the micro-triangulation bench • 1163017: Mesures laser tracker sur les poutres TM0 de la maquette CLIC • 1166274: Coordonnées des fiducielles des composants de la maquette CLIC • 1171946: Alignement des DBQ sur la maquette TM0 • 1175924: Contrôle des PETS à l’aide du bras Romer Multi Gage, confrontation aux mesures CMM • 1218458: Inter-comparaison par des mesures sur la maquette CLIC TM0: micro-triangulation et laser tracker AT401

  29. List of reports • 1209967: Influence de l’installation des DB quad et PETS sur l’alignement des poutres • 1218458: Procédure de fiducialisation des 4 premières structures accélératrices et calendrier associé • 1227067: Fiducialisation des 4 premières structures accélératrices: résultats et analyse • 1233948: Fiducialisation du 2èmestack TM0: résultats et analyse • 1242279: 1er et 2èmestack TM0:alignement avant EBW, contrôle sur poutres après • 1246581: Rattachement des plaques aux extrémités de la maquette CLIC • 1247059: Test T-Scan CS • 1257114: Mesures de la maquette avant RFN • 1273476: Rapport de test à réception du bras Romer Multi Gage 12/12/12 • 1308072: Dimensional control and fiducialisation of DB girder (Epucret) for the TM1 of the lab • 1308123: Influence of different factors on the mock-up (connection between the different components and thermal test) • 1308128: Control of the position of the components during the assembly steps • 1308603: Tests des nouveaux supports photogrammétriques • 1309127: Tests des nouveaux supports 1.5’’ amagnétiques aux aimants amovibles • 1322106: ZTS linear actuators test report • 1325401: Historique des décalages des points d’articulation sur la maquette test module • 1325402: Variations des lectures des capteurs lors du changement de température de la maquette du test module • 1325403: Impact du vide sur l’alignement de la maquette CLIC Test Module • 1325404: Test de contrainte lié aux connexions entre le MB et le DB de la maquette CLIC test module

More Related