hpl for the up-scope of the cms re low eta as per the 1997 tdr in cms

Ian Crotty HPL (Bakelite) Low Eta TDR Up-Scope 05 Feb 10

HPL for the Up-Scope of the CMS RE HPL for the Up-Scope of the CMS RE Low Eta as per the 1997 TDR in CMSLow Eta as per the 1997 TDR in CMSHPL for the Up-Scope of the CMS RE HPL for the Up-Scope of the CMS RE Low Eta as per the 1997 TDR in CMSLow Eta as per the 1997 TDR in CMS

Contents

Specification

Contingency

Supply Chain

Purchasing

QA & QC

Cutting, Packing & Transport

Production Rate

Scheduling

Conclusion


CMS End-cap RPC BakeliteCMS End-cap RPC BakeliteHigh Pressure Laminate (HPL) High Pressure Laminate (HPL) CMS End-cap RPC BakeliteCMS End-cap RPC Bakelite

High Pressure Laminate (HPL) High Pressure Laminate (HPL)

• Specification was taken from the Barrel RPCs• 1-6 x10^10 Ω.cm @ 20°C. • Average roughness (Ra) = <0.2micrometre, 2mm thick• Melamine surface paper with Phenolic Bulk• Sheet dimensions according to cutting plan• Temperature coefficient w.r.t resistivity is given by the raw material and obtained for normalisation during QC

It would be good to go back and check that we are still gettingthis value for the roughness


Contingency, Past & Present for RE4Contingency, Past & Present for RE4Contingency, Past & Present for RE4Contingency, Past & Present for RE4

Chambers

An Estimate of 10% for Chamber spares gives;

72 chambers/ station/ endcap + 10% = 160 Total.

Spares in ISR today = 11.

RE2, RE3 and RE4 = 432 chambers requiring 45 – 11 = 34

Rounding this up gives puts our needs at 200.

HPL

From previous experience we have found an increase in contingency of delivered HPL quantities from 43% to 50% was necessary. This value should be retained.

Using the original 1.3m x 3.2m dimensions we will therefore need 600 sheets.

Surface area ~ 3000m2 and weight is approx 5 tons.

Financial resources necessary range from 70 kEuro to 90 kEuro dependant on the manufacturer.


HPL and Gap Supply ChainHPL and Gap Supply ChainHPL and Gap Supply ChainHPL and Gap Supply Chain

HPL ManufacturerProduction and Initial

QA & QC

Cutting to form(Riva in Milano ?)

GT (Roma)Surface treatment

with MEK

Korean Gap AssemblyShipping by Air and/or Maritime

Order from CERNTo HPL source

Final QA and QC (in

Pavia ?)

Assembly Site or SitesAssembly Site

or SitesAssembly Site or Sites


PurchasingPurchasingPurchasingPurchasing

First step is the budget.

If CERN managed then tax free

As the amount 70kEuro is > 100kchf then a divisional request is needed.

No call for tender and time for suppliers to reply.

Justification for “single source” order.

All this takes some time , we should move ahead asap


Resistivity QC inhouseResistivity QC inhouseResistivity QC inhouseResistivity QC inhouse

This device could be used to do the pre-selection

before shipping for final QC

Also used to Calibrate the Resistivity table

http://www.pv.infn.it/~vitulo/LU/misure-panpla.ppt


The Phenix QC experience July 08The Phenix QC experience July 08The Phenix QC experience July 08The Phenix QC experience July 08

Colleagues from the US have successfully used the Resistivity table that was in the Pavia University.

Nine pneumatically actuated conductive rubber pads acting as electrodes applying 1kV


A production run from 2003A production run from 2003A production run from 2003A production run from 2003

Bakelite Sheets 1.6 x 3.2m

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200

Sheet No.

Res

isti

vity

x10

^10

[o

hm

.cm

]This a good run as few sheets are out side the acceptance limits of 2- 6 x 1010 Ω.cm .

Yield is 77%

Rejection rates can vary from 5 to 95% !


Yield for Phenix Yield for Phenix Yield for Phenix Yield for Phenix

There are now two levels of selection each of which will expect a certain loss. In the case of Phenix during July 2008;

1; Factory tests

Produced 410

Selected 317 Yield = 77%

2; Pavia University Jig

Received 317

Selected 262 Yield = 83%

Overall Yield = 64%

Production rates 24 – 48 sheets per day.

Only sheets that are within our spec are paid for.Phoenix and CMS use the same panel size 1.6 x 3.2m


Riva MilanoRiva MilanoCutting to FormCutting to Form

Riva MilanoRiva MilanoCutting to FormCutting to Form

CNC tooling

Cycle time 5mins/sheet HPL

QC on dimensions.

Tolerance +0mm and

-0.5mm

Checking cutting head and stability of panel

retention


Packing for International TransportPacking for International TransportPacking for International TransportPacking for International Transport

Fork lift damage

A simplified version

The Load is not attached to the base and has slipped

Looks fine but is heavy and expensive


Production or Throughput RatesProduction or Throughput RatesProduction or Throughput RatesProduction or Throughput Rates

• The production rate capability of PanPla was large.

• However the HPL has to stabilised in the Air-conditioned hall for QC were its humidity and temperature can be controlled to some degree.

• This limits the quantity per production batch to some 300 sheets, weighing in at approx 2.5 tonnes, it takes a few days to stabilise. This quantity was sufficient on occasions, if the yield was ~70%, for the 216 sheets required to build half a full station, with 30% contingency.

• Riva will take 2-5 days to cut this material and repack but will not want to work continuously as the main machine is occupied as is the floor space and personnel.

• This results in 2 boxes of some 600kg to ship to Korea where space is also limited.


ID Task Name Duration

1

2

3 Budget allocation 1 day?

4 "Single source" 10 days

5 Contract Pan Pla 10 days

6 1/4 batch delivery 20 days

7 QC in Pavia 1 5 days

8 Riva 1 5 days

9 GT 1 5 days

10 Shipping to Korea 1 10 days

11 Gap production 1 50 days

12 Shipping to assembly facility 1 10 days



15 Riva 2 5 days

16 GT 2 5 days






22 Riva 3 5 days

23 GT 3 5 days






29 Riva 4 5 days

30 GT 4 5 days

7/278/38/108/178/248/319/79/149/219/2810/510/1210/1910/2611/211/911/1611/2311/3012/712/1412/2112/281/41/111/181/252/12/82/152/223/13/83/153/223/294/54/124/194/265/35/105/175/245/316/76/146/216/287/57/127/197/268/28/98/168/238/309/69/139/209/2710/410/1110/1810/2511/111/811/1511/2211/2912/612/1312/2012/271/31/101/171/241/312/72/142/212/283/73/143/213/28July August September October November December January February March April May June July August September October November December January February March






29 Riva 4 5 days

30 GT 4 5 days




34

35 Assembly in Be, In and PK 1 50 days




39 QC 1 21 days

40 QC 2 21 days

41 QC 3 21 days

42 QC 4 21 days

43 Shipping 1 10 days




47 QC CERN 1 21 days




51 Installation YE+1 10 days

52 Installation YE-1 10 days

Installations possible in

September 09 and February 10

First HPL to Kodel in Early December 08 Four Gap

production periods

REplus 2

RE minus 2


ConclusionsConclusionsConclusionsConclusions

• The consequences of shipping around the world ,firstly within Italy then to Korea and on to the production site(s) and back to CERN are;

Many people involved, costs, errors and delaysDamage during transitLoss of control of environmental conditions.Very high lead time

• The initial outlay is high for the HPL contract• High transport costs especially by air freight.• Different QC stages require people and time.• Insurance should cover any losses but not the delay

We managed for the Baseline and we can do it again but with better organisation for the Up-scope

hpl for the up-scope of the cms re low eta as per the 1997 tdr in cms

Documents