# Presentation: 509066

## Structure UpdateInstallation & Building UpdateRevisions OutlinedCosts Revisited(since given to Gina)

- Jeff Nelson
- Fermilab

## Reminder of current scintillator detector concepts and alternatives
What’s different in liquid vs solid?
Installation Update
Value engineering summary
Cost summaries

- What’s different in liquid vs solid?
- Installation Update
- Value engineering summary
- Cost summaries

## Basic Object

- For either scintillator use same structure
- Liquid needs 3cm gaps instead of 1.7cm gaps
- Simple adjustment in structure
- Alternating view every 8”
- Strips 4cm wide

**readout**

**readout**

**readout**

**14.5 m**

**14.5 m**

**180 m**

**885 planes**

**14.5 m**

## A detector “unit”

- Units made from natural OSB dimensions
- 8” x 48ft x 8ft
- 2 or 3 pieces of wood in 8 layers
- Two 30-strip modules which are 4ft x 48ft
- Encased in wood and captured with clips
- Step in z every 8ft

- End view of single unit

## Building up the detector

- Next one here

## Structural Properties of a Stack

- Bob Wands Bob Wands using an ANSYS FEA model tested extreme cases for some quick answers
- Horizontal with 2 or 3 supports along entire length

## Deflection and Stress in an Extreme Case

- Maximum deflection is 0.9”
- Maximum stress is 562 lbs

## Bob’s Conclusions

- There are no particular structural issues
- Stresses and loads low (Vic’s conclusion too)
- Bulking not an issue
- JKN Comment: FEA results say unsupported out vertical is at less then 30 degrees is fine
- He see no need for any bookends other that to start construction
- Expansions is global if bottom treated with low enough coefficient of friction
- Only question is do you want to do something to control bulk expansions for maintaining alignment for physics
- Thought container engineering more “interesting” problem...

## Installation Update

- Model unchanged except
- Stacks make in industrial building (e.g. MINOS surface building)
- Gets your floor space a lot cheaper & at grate
- Nathaniel stack production layout needs 5X surface building
- Earl scales it at $3M
- Revisited number of FTE
- Some double counting
- 34 -> 28 (plus support staff)

## Putting up the units

- Rigged using rotating vacuum fixture
- Just like every piece of MINOS steel
- Bob Wands verified that a stack’s weight is well within specifications for commercially available devices with cups specified with for porous surfaces
- Bob also says he’s convinced the stresses within are stack are safety below levels that could lead to structure failure in the material during a light

## Main changes of WRT Estimate

- APDs & modern PPD electronics ($ and channel count go down; 10m -> 14.5m)
- U loop reduces fiber costs; increases uniformity
- Step scintillator at near end (15% reduction in volume)
- Factory managers update shows machines and throughput OK; machine costs
- Earl updated building scaling; Staging facility
- Progression (Detector without buildings)
- $119M for M64 (L=10m) no changes from MINOS (Brajesh)
- $ 98M for APD (L=14m @ July talk)
- $ 93M more detailed costs; remove G&A; double counting (now)
- $163/m2 including electronics

## Solid Scintillator Cost Summary

## Liquid Version	

- Based on MINOS R&D summarized in P.Border et al NIMA 463:194,2001
- Documents a structural and mechanical design (to ME masters theses on these issues)
- Liquid added after erection, light, and leak tests
- Extensive studies of the effects of aging on optical and mechanical interactions of materials

## Liquid Scintillator Cost Summary

## Solid Scintillator Cost Summary

## Some personal extras

## Want more light?

- 0.8mm -> 1.0mm fibers
- Gives 36% more light for $5M

## RPC vs Solid Scintillator

- 20% in FOM -> 45% in reach (using document values for both)
- Pulse height info vs technique ???
- Costs are indiscernible for RPC vs Solid with current costing uncertainties (esp. with contingency)
- Very low risk for the solid design
- Scaling production factor of 5 vs factor of 100 for RPC
- Direct Fermilab experience in scintillator production & APDs
- MINOS used many institutions for production and same would be true for Off-Axis
- Comparable cost, better performance, & lower risk

## Solid vs Liquid

- Active components 33% cheaper (=$20M)
- Would guess that increased contingency would eat this difference at this time
- Would propose solid as baseline and liquid as a “value engineering” option
- Look at reoptimization of solid;  could decrease