# Presentation: 470821

## Detector Stacking and Un-stackingCell Guides

- John Cooper
- 2nd NuMI Off-Axis Experiment Detector Workshop   at Argonne National Laboratory
- April 27, 2003

## Remember what 20-foot containers look like

- Corner fittings stick out beyond
- the corrugated skins, so you
- can’t pull them out of the
- stack easily

- Use the corner fittings
- to lift the containers with
- a crane

## Since the SLAC workshop

- We have examined the corner posts of standard ISO 20-foot shipping containers and believe they can conservatively be stacked to 10 high when fully loaded – return to this later
- We have tried a couple of container modifications to allow access to all the detectors in the stack, but the mods do not seem cost effective
- How do we get at a detector deep in the stack?

- Off-Axis notes will be posted nest week

## Some History

- These containers were invented in the mid 1950s by Malcom McLean, a North Carolina trucking owner who grew tired of wasting his trucking company’s time with trucks standing idle in line as ships were unloaded bit by bit by dockworkers.
- McLean developed sealed truck trailers and the concept of loading and unloading the trailer interiors only at the points of origin and destination.
**The first ship modified to accept these “containers” on deck,  sailed with 58 of them from New York to Houston in April, 1956. This was the start of McLean’s company, the Sea-Land Corporation.  **
- The Matson Line (Hawaii) put the first _fully_ containerized ship into service in 1960.
- The International Standards Organization (ISO) first established container standards in 1961.  The ISO standard is not prescriptive and instead simply stipulates tests that the containers must pass.

## Just use them as they were designed to be used

**So this system of transportation has been around a very long time, allowing **_**fifty years**_** of engineering innovation and solution.  **
**Modern container ships have exactly our problem – when the ship arrives in port, the object is to unload the containers quickly to get them on to their final destination and to get the container ships back out to sea fully loaded heading for the next port.  **
**To accomplish this,  container ships are equipped with steel skeletons called “cell guides” and there is an ISO standard for these guides**
**A special lifting fixture is used with remote actuators which engage the corner blocks on the top of the container.  **
**A recent survey indicates that port crane operators can execute full crane cycles to remove and position containers at rates of between 30 and 60 boxes per hour. **

## Hatchless Cellular Vesselsare what we need to copy

- Hold about 1500 boxes.
- We need 2000

- They stack them
-     10 high

- Like Feeder airlines to hubs
- or fast hub-to-hub traffic

## Cell guides from aluminum angleours can be flimsy because we don’t have to withstand pitch and roll at sea

- beam

- Four 6” x 6” x 3/8”
- Al angles

- 4” x 1⁄2” Al straps
- but only every 16 ft
- vertically

- 1” gap
- along beam

## Add containersand cables / gas lines along cell guides to tops of containers 

- beam

- Gain extra
- space in the
- “down” part
- of the
- corrugated
- steel top

- ISO spec
- lets two
- people
- walk on
- top of
- containers

## Top view of cell guides

- beam

- Small gap compared to the 6000 mm wide containers

## Incoming beam view

- The corner
- blocks guarantee
- an 18 mm gap
- between stacked
- Containers.
- Use this for
- power, signal,
- gas access

## Cell guides in the building

- This takes 12.7 miles
- of 3/8” x 6” x 6” Al angle,
- but we have a quote at
- $ 1.23 / lb. = 517 K$
- Weld subassemblies on
- the ground and then erect.
- A crew of 30 could build
- the whole set in 20 weeks.
- Total cost 1.4 M$
- 	add 25% Al contingency
- 	add 40% labor cont.
- (steel would be cheaper,
- 1.1 M$ if low Z not desired)

- Below grade
- Brace to
- Pit walls

- Cross
- Brace
- Above
- grade

## Full of containers

## To service, just unstack

- Man hoist lowers a guy into the hole to disconnect the cables and gas,
- lay the cables carefully up in the cell guide cable trays out of harm’s way.
- RTG runs the good containers down to the staging area.
- Swap in a known “good” container to fix the problem.
- Will get engineers to calculate, but I’m guessing 2 shifts to get at and replace a bottom container.
- Similar to CDF access Thursday to fix one drift chamber wire.

## Catwalk cost

**110 40-foot containers**
**Turned 90 degrees to the **
**20-foot containers.**
- (have same vertical periodicity)
- Remove one door and 1⁄2 of
- the opposite endwall for
- a 4 ft wide walkway.
- Use the other 4 ft for racks.
- Cut holes towards the detector
- array to bring out cables, gas
- Tie all 110 together with
- twistlocks on the corner fittings
**Cost estimated at 792 K$,**
**including 50% contingency**

## Rubber Tire Gantry (RTG) cost

- Mi-Jack quote for
- a 30 m span, 1 above 4 RTG
- Includes the fancy automatic lifting fixture
**1.8 M$, add 20% contingency = 2.2 M$**
- Runs on propane
- Might do better on a used one
- Building crane quote + beef up building columns
**1.4 M$, including 25% contingency **
- Sounds cheaper, but the RTG may pay back because it can be used to muck out the excavation

## Lifting fixtures: Off the shelf, all designed for speed

- Corner
-  blocks

- guide

- Twist-lock

**Also casters, box to box clamps,...**

- Only the corner
- Blocks touch when stacked

## Summary

_**Cell Guides**_ used just like on container ships
**1.41 M$ + 0.57 M$ contingency** (25% Al, 50% labor)
_**Catwalks**_ built from 110 40-foot Containers
**0.53 M$ + 0.26 M$ contingency** (50%)
_**RTG**_ - Rubber Tire Gantry Crane
**1.80 M$ + 0.4 M$ contingency** (20%)
- Total “**Installation &** **Servicing Package**” 			**at 3.74 M$ +1.23 M$ contingency**

## More detail on stack height

- “standard” gross wt is 24,000 kg,   2,200 kg tare
- 33 m3, so 0.66 gm/cc.      **Corner posts tested to 86,400 kg**

| # containers stacked on one | Safety factor 
ISO on corner post loading
86,400
21,800+2,200 | Safety factor 

97,370
21,800+2,200 | Safety factor

97,370
20,000+2,200
 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 8 | 1.8 at sea |  |  |
| 9 | 1.6 |  |  |
| 10 | 1.44 | 1.62 |  |
| 11 | 1.31 |  | 1.58 |

- Safety Factor:  2.0 AISC Steel Construction Code (untested parts)
-                          1.25  Aircraft Industry, rigorous testing and QA
- 		Bob Wands likes 1.5, since tested to 1.8
- 		Could be higher if _we test_ to actual failure (>1.8)

- 26 m high

- 28.6 m

- 31.2 m