protoDUNE APA Commissioning Lessons Learned (so far) Andrzej Szelc - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

protoDUNE APA Commissioning Lessons Learned (so far) Andrzej Szelc (Manchester) & Serhan Tufanli (Yale)

Introduction This talk is a summary of things we know about: ● Practicalities of commissioning the APAs in-situ ○ How the measurements work ○ What we can or cannot measure ○ How much we can realistically do in a short time frame ● What happens to the wire tensions after they travelled to CERN and have been hung in the clean room. Some things we are still in the process of ironing out. 2

“Inventory” Information So far 2 APA’s have arrived at CERN (both produced at PSL). We have examined both of them: ● APA 1: side B (active) + side A, after transport, side B (after cold box) ● APA 2: side B (active) after transport. Any measurements or detailed inspection can realistically be done only after the APA is suspended in the clean room (any change observed could be a combination of transport and changing orientation to vertical, more on that later). We have defined commissioning as visual inspection + taking photos of predefined regions (was found to be helpful in MicroBooNE) and measuring tensions of a subset of wires. 3

APA #2 Visual Inspection Take photos in predefined regions: All head, foot and side boards. Along combs, and in the central regions - photos taken with region label. “Found” known items - have not found anything new due to travel. APA #1 APA #1 4

Observations/notes on method(s) ● We used the laser tensioning device in two modes: ○ Connected to a guitar amplifier + tuner app on smartphone (consistent with method used at PSL) ○ Connected to laptop with LabView DAQ: calculates FFT and selects peaks, calibrated at Manchester . ● Amplifier + Tuner is really helpful in figuring out the mapping (sound is the key here). 5

Tuner vs LabView cross-calibration ● Plot of tension of same wires between labview and the tuner. ● LabView setup has been calibrated in MCR, see difference of O(1Hz) around 60 Hz (in tune with our observations) Estimated error of our measurement is O(1Hz), which means max 3% (depending wire length) systematics in tension of wires. 6

How the measurements actually Region 1 work Measure in Region 1 (use scissor lift) Horizontal bar needs to be installed Requires two people (one to operate laser head + one to keep track of mapping). 2 “experienced” operators can do Bo o(200) wires in ~4 hours. 7

Observations/notes on methods and APA geometry constraints ● Mapping G and X wire plane wires is almost impossible outside of regions 1 and 5. ● In each region there are 2 possible placements of tensioning bar. ● In region 5, lowest and middle positions are not usable due to bolts tethering the APA to ground. ● In region 1 the middle (and top?) position is not usable due to absence of M1 holes. ● Due to APA geometry, a set of wires in U and V planes are not possible to test (short wires). ● Level of difficulty grows inward (G, U, V, X), both because of trying to map what is being measured and reaching the wires to get them to vibrate. 8

Measurement numbers (to give a scale) ● APA #1 Plane A: 112 wires in total ( 43 G-plane, 14 X-plane, 27 V-plane, 28 U plane). ○ After first look at data, did a few extra cross-checks. ○ Measured a few G-plane wires in region 2. ○ *Did not* pay much attention to mapping or selecting outliers - focus on understanding the system and method. ● APA #1 Plane B: 188 Total wires (69 in plane G, 51 in plane U, 37 in plane V, 31 in plane X) ○ Relatively thorough measurement - measure wires around board boundaries (G-Plane) + selected outliers. ○ Result is a sample of random wires and outliers. Much faster to do adjacent wires than search for a single wire according to mapping. ● APA #2 Plane B: 241 Total Wires (72 G, 46 U, 99 V and 24 in X plane ) ○ Procedure as in plane B, APA #1 ○ Add set of wires in zone 5, with relatively low tension - difficult to remeasure tension - inspection. No sag observed. 9

APA #1 Side B - Plane X ● 31 wires were measured ○ Outlier wires: ■ Mean Tension-2.5*RMS > tension of the wire OR MeanTension+2.5*RMS < tension of the wire OR ■ Tension of the wire > 5.3N ○ Random wires from the end and beginning of boards ● Tension is 7% higher than the PSL measurements with 5% RMS 10

APA #1 Side B - Plane V ● 37 wires were measured ○ Outlier wires: ■ Mean Tension-2.5*RMS > tension of the wire OR Mean Tension+2.5*RMS < tension of the wire OR ■ Tension of the wire <4N OR tension of the wire>5.9N AND ■ Wirelength>600 ○ Random wires from the end and beginning of boards ● Tension is 14% less than the PSL measurements with 2% RMS 11

APA #1 Side B - Plane U ● 45 wires were measured ○ Outlier wires: ■ Mean Tension-2.5*RMS > tension of the wire OR Mean Tension+2.5*RMS < tension of the wire OR ■ Tension of the wire <4N OR tension of the wire>6N AND ■ Wirelength>600 ○ Random wires from the end and beginning of boards ● Tension is 5% more than the PSL measurements with ~5% RMS 12

APA #1 Side B - Plane G ● 69 wires were measured ○ Outlier wires: ■ Mean Tension-2.5*RMS > tension of the wire OR MeanTension+2.5*RMS < tension of the wire OR ■ Tension of the wire > 5.5N ○ Random wires from the end and beginning of boards ● Tension is 15% higher than the PSL measurements with 2% RMS 13

Calibration measurements on APA#1 Side A (plane G, Region 2) ● Region 2 seems to be less over-tensioned than Region 1 ○ (small sample size, though) 14

APA #2 Side B - Plane X ● 31 wires were measured ○ Outlier wires: ■ Mean Tension-2.5*RMS > tension of the wire OR MeanTension+2.5*RMS < tension of the wire OR ■ Tension of the wire > 5.3N ○ Random wires from the end and beginning of boards ● Tension is 14% higher than the PSL measurements with 1% RMS (previously 7%) 15

APA #2 Side B - Plane V ● 37 wires were measured ○ Outlier wires: ■ Mean Tension-2.5*RMS > tension of the wire OR Mean Tension+2.5*RMS < tension of the wire OR ■ Tension of the wire <4N OR tension of the wire>5.9N AND ■ Wirelength>600 ○ Random wires from the end and beginning of boards ● Tension is 6% less than the PSL measurements (previously 14% less) 16

APA #2 Side B - Plane U ● 45 wires were measured ○ Outlier wires: ■ Mean Tension-2.5*RMS > tension of the wire OR Mean Tension+2.5*RMS < tension of the wire OR ■ Tension of the wire <4N OR tension of the wire>6N AND ■ Wirelength>600 ○ Random wires from the end and beginning of boards ● Tension is 1% more than the PSL measurements (previously 5% but with large spread) 17

APA #2 Side B - Plane G ● 72 wires were measured ○ Outlier wires: ■ Mean Tension-2.5*RMS > tension of the wire OR MeanTension+2.5*RMS < tension of the wire OR ■ Tension of the wire > 5.5N ○ Random wires from the end and beginning of boards ● Tension is 26% higher than the PSL measurements with 2% RMS (previously 15%) 18

Observations Wires in vertical planes (G and X) go up in tension between PSL and CERN. And 16% and 26%(!) (G) 7% and 14% (X). U plane sees a slight rise in tension (but essentially close to zero). V plane sees a decrease in tension (14% and 7%). Not a very large data sample yet, but it might make sense to compensate for this effect during DUNE production. 19

Possible reasons for the measured difference ● Different APA orientation during the tension measurements ○ Horizontal at PSL ○ Vertical at CERN ● Systematics due to hardware and measurement method ○ Hardware: Different amplification hardware between PSL and CERN 20 ○ Method: Constraining wires with clips on combs

Other Considerations Traveller documents provided are extremely useful - defines the subset of wires to be measured. We are in the process of devising a traveller document - lite. Easier to streamline into ntuples and measurements. Easier to keep consistent columns. Would be useful to have a small application for data entry (a relatively small project). 21

Conclusions ● We have re-measured the tension of o(500) wires at CERN and commissioned 2 APAs. ● One side of APA takes about a day. And can only reasonably measure a fraction of wires in a part of the APA. ● Having a more automated method (e.g. electric) would allow a much more thorough examination. ● Observed ○ ~12% increase in tension for X layer wires ○ 10% decrease in tension of the V layer wires ○ 2-3% increase in the tension of the U layer wires ○ 20% increase in the tension of G layer wires ● Probably need a detailed FEA analysis and engineering if we would like to understand all the details. 22

Back up 23

APA #1First Measurements on Side A (plane X) ● All wires measured were in the higher half of spectrum. ● “Wire-by-wire” comparison indicates a systematic shift of 10% (note that mapping might not be exactly precise) 24

First Measurements on Side A (plane V) ● Tension looks visibly shifted down. “Wire-by-wire” comparison suggests a drop of 10-15% in tension.* * Note that here mapping here is not precise for all wires. Although, in these cases, the wires are same length, so general tension comments apply in region. 25