LH2 Absorber Program and Plans

Mary Anne Cummings

NIU

Mucool LH2 Absorber Collaboration E. L. Black, M. Boghosian, K. Cassel D. M. Kaplan, W. Luebke, Y.

TorunIllinois Institute of Technology

S. Ishimoto, K. YoshimuraKEK

M. A. Cummings, A. Dyshkant, D. Hedin, D. KubikNorthern Illinois University

D. Errede, M. HaneyUniversity of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

M. Reep, D. SummersUniversity of Mississippi

Y. KunoOsaka University

G. Barr, W. LauOxford University

C. Darve, C. Johnstone*, A. Klebaner, B. Norris, M. Popovic, S. GeerFNAL

* also research faculty at IIT

Thin Window Design

Minimize window thickness:

ANSYS Finite Element Analysis, Zhizing Tang, FNAL.

Title:

Creator:

Preview:This EPS picture was not savedwith a preview included in it.Comment:This EPS picture will print to aPostScript printer, but not toother types of printers.

Title:

Creator:

Preview:This EPS picture was not savedwith a preview included in it.Comment:This EPS picture will print to aPostScript printer, but not toother types of printers.

beam axis beam axis

displacementdisplacement

R

r

r

Hemispherical: t = 0.5PL / (SE - 0.1P) s = 0.5D Ellipsoidal: t = 0.5PD / ( SE - 0.1P) s = .25DTorispherical: t = 0.885PD / ( SE - 0.1P) s = .169D

t = min. thickness s = sagitta

r

s

D

r

L

R

Minimum thickness depends on shape (ASME Standard)

Variable thickness near window edges can further reduce the minimum window thickness near beam:

Absorber Window Design

Modified Torispherical integrated window and flange design (tapered detail at left).Machine parameters shown.

Precision measurement of window and flange with CMM at FNAL Industrial Center.

R

r r

Window manufacture (U of Miss)

Backplane for window pressure tests

Flange/window unit machined from aluminum piece

Overpressure Window Test

Safety review requires overpressure and destructive tests of thin windows.

Tests to confirm Finite Element Analysis predictions for window performance.

Window Test Setup

Test setup at NIU for window over-pressure and rupture, front view

Backplane with connections,and with window attached

Strain gages applied to window

Pressure test setup at NIU

Strain Gage Measurement• Measure the strain on window with strain

gages• Use Finite Element Analysis program

(ANSYS) to relate vessel pressure to maximum window strain – confirm this with strain gages applied to window surface

Rosette gage(three dir.)

Uniaxial gage

FEA mesh for calcs. on the window-flange unit

Instrumented window

Two different gages

Testing of strain gages on aluminum 6061strips … verifying correct strain/stressRelationship, I.e. Young’s Modulus

Test setup to stress aluminum “coupons”with strain gages (below)

Strain Gage Calibration

Photogrammetry

• Non-contact measurement of strain by calculating displacement

• Compare with strain gage readout and FEA calculations

FEA calc. fordisplacement

Photogrammetry measurements during pressure test.Note the projected dots!

Rupture test

Leaking appeared at 31 psi (predicted rupture ~ 34 psi)… outright rupture at 44 psi!

130 window:

330 window:

Burst at ~ 120 psiNew FEA predicted rupture at 110 psi – old FEA predicted at ~ 90

Strain GageMeasurements

Rosette at 12mm showing yielding..

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

-20.00 0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00

PSI

mic

rost

rain

Rosette at 12 mm Left gage

Rosette at 12 mm Middle gage

Rosette at 12 mm Right gage

Strain vs time - can see that rosette did not return to 0 ustrain after experiencing ~80psi

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Time (s)

Mic

rost

rain

-2.00E+01

0.00E+00

2.00E+01

4.00E+01

6.00E+01

8.00E+01

1.00E+02

1.20E+02

PS

I

Uniaxial at 132mm

Rosette at 12 mm Left gage.

Pressure

Strain gage data 330m window

Strain vs. time – the gage ceases to return to resting position after ~ 80 psi

Rosette Gage at 12 mm yielding..

130 micron window

Photogrammetry

New “screens” for projectorWill provide better coverage ofCenter and radial geometry

•330 micron window (W. Lau)•Non-elastic region included•Three dimensional analysis

FEA Calculations

Stress distribution when first yield developed at 77.7psi (0.536 MPa) pressure

Forced-Flow Absorber Design

Mucool ~ 100W (E. Black, IIT) Large and variablebeam width =>large scale turbulence

Establish transverseturbulent flow withnozzles – complicated, hard to simulate

External Heat Exchange:

Flow Tests

Three test modes:

1. Absorber manifold , two plastic windows:Absorber filled with water at room temp. – the pattern of flow will be photographed by circulating water from inlet to outlet using a luminous die injected at inlet

2. Absorber manifold , one plastic windows, one aluminum windowAbsorber subjected to a heat source. Infrared pictures taken (for forced-flow and convection absorber type.

3. Absorber manifold , two thin Al windows, cryogenic:Absorber integrated into a cryo system, operating in test mode with extreme temperature and pressure variations considered for safety.

Room Temperature Flow Test Setup

“STUDY I” 13 cm 15cm 9.2 liters 91 W 1.2 atm 17oK

SFOFO 21 cm 11 cm 9.2 liters 147 W “ “

(1.65)

SFOFO 35 cm 18 cm 35.6 245 W “ “

(2.75)

DOUBLE 39 cm 20 49 273 W “ “

FLIP

MINICOOL 1.75 m 30 495 1.2 kW “ “

ICE 35 (?) 15 31 245 W “ “

Prototype LH2:length radius volume heat dep. Press. Temp.

Parameters for various absorber design