alignment tests review of clic two beam module lab program 06/11/2013 on behalf of clic...

ALIGNMENT TESTS

Review of CLIC Two Beam Module lab program

06/11/2013

On behalf of CLIC pre-alignment team

2

Summary

4 main tasks/objectives of the alignment tests on TBTM:

Validation of measurement methods for the alignment tests

Validation of the pre-alignment strategy on short range

Inter-comparison between alignment systems on short range

Study of the alignment of supports and components when the conditions change:

Additional constraints like waveguides, connection to vacuum pipes, vacuum

Thermal tests

Conclusion : resources needed and next tasks

Initially foreseen on an independent mock-up

3

Validation of measurements methods for the alignment tests

Objectives:

To have a range of tools:• Allowing precise and accurate measurements• Allowing cross check of measurements• Taking into consideration the small space available around the module

Several instruments qualified using CMM measurements as reference (Leitz Infinity: 0.3 μm + 1 ppm)

Romer arm AT401 Micro-triangulation

Performances(over 2 m)

~ 10 µm ~ 5 µm ~ 5 µm

Drawbacks Limited range Displacement of the prism, contact with the object

Needs permanent stations

4


Inter-comparison between micro-triangulation and AT401:

Two MB girders equipped with both types of fiducials and measured on CMM

Alignment of girders measured by the two instruments and compared

5


Other methods to be considered for the alignment tests:

Photogrammetry• This could be very interesting for thermal tests as it is very

quick: a series of pictures is needed on site, then analysis can be performed far from the module.

• Not ready for such an accuracy, targets need to be adapted (R&D needed)

Other methods to be considered for integration purposes:

3D scans• To solve the problems of integration that were met (3D models

did not correspond to what was installed a lot of time lost)

Postponed due to lack

of time

Postponed due to lack

of time

6

Fiducialisation of components

Fiducialisation of their common support

Alignment on a common support

Whole assembly ready to be aligned


Strategy of pre-alignment:

7

Budget of alignment errors

Requirements:

Budget of error:

The zero of each component will be included in a cylinder with a radius of a few microns:

14 µm (RF structures & MB quad BPM)

17 µm (MB quad)

20 µm (DB quad)

Steps AS MB quad

Achieved

Zero of components to fiducials 5 µm 10 µm ????

Fiducials to sensor interface on support 5 µm 5 µm Yes

Sensor interface on support 5 µm 5 µm Yes

Sensor measurement w.r.t straight reference

5 µm 5 µm Yes

Stability knowledge of the straight reference

10 µm 10 µm Yes, on short range

Total error budget 14 µm 17 µm

The combination of the 3 first steps is the object of PACMAN


8

Determination of the position

Reference network: layout and configuration of sensors

Comparison of the alignment of the mean axis of the Ves by AT401 and alignment sensors

X (µm) Z (µm)

MC1-E -5 12

MC1-S 10 -5

MC2-E -1 -4

MC2-S -11 -7

Difference between coordinates of mean axis extremities calculated by 2 different methods


9

Re-adjustment

Two solutions studied in parallel:

Algorithms of re-positioning: relative ok, absolute to be tested

Linear actuators

Cam movers

Ok when no constraints

Not ready


10

Case of the supports:

Girder:• Mean axis of the V-shaped supports:

Boostec: radius of the cylinder containing the center of the V-shaped support : 6μm and 4μm

Micro-Contrôle: radius of the cylinder containing the center of the V-shaped support: 7.5 μm and 5.5 μm

Girder + cradle: • Measurements out of the range of the CMM: accuracy ~ 15 µm, some

faults detected.• Total length above 2 m• Different types of fiducials implied different types of measuring devices

sometimes outside the range of measurement.

Articulation point:• Not so bad at the beginning• Degradation along time (shocks, loads, constraints)


11

Case of the components:

2 steps:• Determination of the position within a few microns• Alignment on the support

PETS:• Assembly ok• No problem on alignment (on V-shaped supports)

DB quad:• System of adjustment not ok, no stability of the position (offset of 200 μm

w.r.t. theoretical position) => new system under design

AS:• Assembly not ok


12

Inter-comparison between alignment systems

oWPS versus cWPS:

Summary of sensor performances

oWPS (μm) cWPS (μm)

Noise 2 8

Repeatability < 1.5 < 2

Reproducibility < 2 < 3

Interchangeability 6 - 8 3 - 4

Resolution < 0.5 < 0.5

Accuracy of measurement of oWPS is ~ 20 µm and needs to be improved Accuracy of measurement of cWPS is ~ 5 µm thanks to new benches and new

procedures of calibration.

Noise of cWPS is a serious drawback for active alignment and needs to be understood.

13


cWPS versus NIKHEF alignment systems:

2 main systems installed by NIKHEF (+1 in longitudinal)

RasDif RasNik

Development of sensors

Qualification (@ NIKHEF)

Integration in 3D models

Installation & analysis of data

• Length between girders not the same

• Use of oWPS interface• Choice of the components• Software, preparation of

database

• Influence of T°• Necessity of thermal

shielding

• Exchange of 3D models

• Longitudinal position of cradles not good

• Interferences with other systems

• One cradle with problem

14


Need to develop an inclinometer that is absolute:

To avoid 2 wires per beam, 4 wires per module, as in lab and CLEX

Difficulty: absolute measurement combined with kinematic interface

Development of a special measurement bench and special tool, to be tested on TBTM

Next step: development of a rad hard version (manufacturers are not interested to do this in-house development)

15

Alignment of components & supports when conditions change

Test of DOF of girders along 3 steps of installation:

Step 0: components installed Step 1: connection of the bellows of the vacuum tank with PETS and AS Step 2: connection of the waveguides between AS and PETS Step 3: connection of the vacuum network between TANK and AS.

16


Thermal tests: introduction

First tests performed between 20°C and 40°C to check that the performed measurements are correct:

• Network all around the room on the concrete beams of the ceiling and walls

• Fiducials of the girders considered as reference of measurement (low thermal expansion of the girder): best fits were performed with measurements performed at 20°C by CMM, to check the coefficient of thermal expansion.)

• Redundancy of measurements and study of the residuals

Special care for all the measurements:• Nobody else inside• Station < 45’• Use of a heavy tripod• Warm-up of instruments

Cross-check with other methods (photogrammetry, micro-triangulation under study)

Nb of days: 26 Stations: 165 Measurements: > 18 000

17


Thermal tests: some particular cases

Repeatable measurements

Warm-up of DB components has no impact on MB components

The initial misalignment of components that is important in some cases makes the displacements more difficult to be understood

18


Vacuum tests

Displacement of girders

Roll:• DB: ~ 1mrad (T0-1), ~ 0.1 mrad (T0-2)• MB: 0.327 mrad (T0-1), 0 (T0-2)

Displacement of cradles

19


Vacuum tests

Displacement of cradles versus girders

Non repeatability

Consequences:• Fiducialisation lost: no possibility to perform again absolute

measurements re-measure on CMM needed• ZTS vvu Kosice has copied this solution for CLEX same problem for CLEX

no possibility to align the components in an absolute way• Articulation point lost

20


Vacuum tests

Independence of girders

Impact on components:

• Less than 10 μm for PETS and DBQ1• Longitudinal displacements of 678 μm for DBQ2• Displacements of 115 μm in radial for AS1

21

Next tasks

Validation of measurements methods: Measurements of 1 module take ~ 1 day: to improve the speed if needed up to

30’, R&D needed [0.2 FTE] Development of photogrammetry and micro-triangulation (if possible to have

permanent stations) [0.2 FTE] Implementation of 3D scans [0.2 FTE]

Validation of the pre-alignment strategy: Validation of absolute repositioning algorithm (if module re-fiducialised) DB quad support:

• Validation of the prototype• Design of the support• Qualification on DB type 1

Inter-comparison between alignment systems: Cross-check measurements of RasNik, RasDif and cWPS Re-installation of oWPS once recalibrated and comparison between cWPS and

oWPS Impact of temperature on sensors.

22

Next tasks

Alignment and fiducialisation of components

Type 0-1:• Transport tests (and re-alignment of all components and girders if needed)• Any additional tests• Refiducialisation of the module

Type 0-2:• Control of assembly and fiducialisation of components AS and PETS• Control of their alignment on girders• Alignment of the 2 modules type 0, tests of actuators, tests of articulation

point, etc.• Tests with constraints, T°, vacuum

Type 1:• Control of assembly of PETS, AS• Fiducialisation of DB quad, PETS, AS• Design, order, assembly of the cradle linking MC girder to Boostec girder (MB)• Assembly of articulation + cradles on Epucret girder• Alignment cradle versus girder on MB and DB side• Fiducialisation of girders + cradles• Fiducialisation of supports + stabilization system + MB quad

23

Next tasks


Type 1:• Assembly of cam movers• Installation and validation of cam movers (+ control/command system)• Installation and validation of alignment sensors (on cradles and MB quad) (+

acquisition system + software + database)• Aligment of all the supports• Tests of actuators and cam movers• Tests of absolute repositioning• Tests with constraints?

Transfer Type 0- Type 1:• Study of the new configuration (longitudinal problem to be solved)• Design of new parts, procurement, assembly,…• Fiducialisation of new cradles• Dismounting, marking on the floor, drilling, reinstallation of the new solution• Alignment of the new configuration

24

Next tasks


Type 4:• Assembly, fiducialisation of DB girder• Manufacturing (redesign?) of articulation point• Fiducialisation of components: DB quad• Design of supporting system (and sensor interfaces), procurement,

fiducialisation• Control of assembly of MB quad, MB quad + stabilization system, MB quad +

stabilization system + supporting system• Preparation of the algorithms of repositioning• Installation and validation of cam movers (+ control/command system)• Installation and validation of alignment sensors (on cradles and MB quad) (+

acquisition system + software + database)• Alignment of type 4• Tests of actuators and cam movers• Tests of relative, absolute repositioning• Tests with constraints?

25

Resources linked to the TBTM in lab

Study of cam movers1 FTE (PhD student) 0.4 FTE in 2014 ?

Mechatronics0.7 FTE (PJAS student) 0.3 FTE in 2012

0.3 FTE in 20130.3 FTE in 2014

Fiducialisation, alignment1 FTE (fellow) 0.8 FTE in 2013

0.8 FTE in 2014Sensors, actuators

1 FTE (fellow –PJAS?) 0.6 FTE in 20120.6 FTE in 20130.4 FTE in 2014

Mechanics, prototypes0.5 FTE (FSU) 0.3 FTE in 2013

0.3 FTE in 2014

SupervisionM. Sosin: 0.3H. Mainaud Durand: 0.6

Help from ABP/SU (oWPS, photogrammetry, scans, second operator)

CLIC TBTM in lab

26

Summary of the situation

Alignment tests on TBTM

Development and qualification of sensors

Development and qualification of

actuators

Integration of alignment systems

Fiducialisation with the metrology lab

Mechanical designs

Design of articulation points & cradles

Study of new methods of measurements

Development of acquisition system,

databases, analysis scripts

Implementation of a measurement lab

Alignment tests on CLEX

27

List of publications

• IPAC 2011: Theoretical and practical feasibility demonstration of a micrometric remotely

controlled pre-alignment system for the CLIC linear collider, H. Mainaud Durand et al.

Validation of micrometric remotely controlled pre-alignment system for the CLIC test setup with 5 DOF, H. Mainaud Durand et al.

• MEDSI 2012: Issues & feasibility demonstration of positioning closed loop control for the

CLIC supporting system using a test mock-up with 5 DOF, M. Sosin et al. CLIC MB quadrupole active pre-alignment based on cam movers, J.

Kemppinen et al.• FIG 2012:

Augmentation of total stations by CDD sensors for automated contactless high precision metrology, S. Guillaume

• IWAA 2012: Validation of the CLIC alignment strategy, H. Mainaud Durand et al. oWPS versus cWPS, H. Mainaud Durand et al.

• IPAC 2012: Strategy and validation of fiducialisation for the pre-alignment of CLIC

components, S. Griffet et al.

28

List of reports

• 1096126: Evaluation du laser tracker AT401 par 1 CMM• 1096127: Simulation d’un réseau applicable à un module CLIC• 1096130: Fiducialisation & pre-alignment• 1096133: Pre-alignment solutions applied to girders• 1097661: Fiducialisation & dimensional control• 1098660: Poutres Boostec: tolérances à contrôler sur site• 1100438: Poutres Epucret: tolérances à contrôler sur site• 1103378: Contrôle des poutres Boostec sur site• 1106507: Evaluation des performances du prototype de micro-triangulation• 1108528: Evaluation des performances du bras de mesures Romer Multi Gage• 1108692: Contrôle des poutres Micro-Contrôle sur site• 1131579: Emplacement des fiducielles et interfaces capteur sur les poutres de la

maquette TM0• 1137443: Measurements of MB supporting systems, fiducialisation• 1141392: Qualification of linear actuators from ZTS vvu Kosice• 1142857: Contrôle de la position des poutres Micro-contrôle au bâtiment 169• 1146050: Evaluation du laser tracker AT401 par des mesures du banc de micro-

triangulation• 1155733: Inter-comparison of measurements performed on the micro-triangulation

bench• 1163017: Mesures laser tracker sur les poutres TM0 de la maquette CLIC• 1166274: Coordonnées des fiducielles des composants de la maquette CLIC• 1171946: Alignement des DBQ sur la maquette TM0• 1175924: Contrôle des PETS à l’aide du bras Romer Multi Gage, confrontation aux

mesures CMM• 1218458: Inter-comparaison par des mesures sur la maquette CLIC TM0: micro-

triangulation et laser tracker AT401

29

List of reports

• 1209967: Influence de l’installation des DB quad et PETS sur l’alignement des poutres• 1218458: Procédure de fiducialisation des 4 premières structures accélératrices et

calendrier associé• 1227067: Fiducialisation des 4 premières structures accélératrices: résultats et analyse• 1233948: Fiducialisation du 2ème stack TM0: résultats et analyse• 1242279: 1er et 2ème stack TM0:alignement avant EBW, contrôle sur poutres après• 1246581: Rattachement des plaques aux extrémités de la maquette CLIC• 1247059: Test T-Scan CS• 1257114: Mesures de la maquette avant RFN• 1273476: Rapport de test à réception du bras Romer Multi Gage 12/12/12• 1308072: Dimensional control and fiducialisation of DB girder (Epucret) for the TM1 of

the lab• 1308123: Influence of different factors on the mock-up (connection between the different

components and thermal test)• 1308128: Control of the position of the components during the assembly steps• 1308603: Tests des nouveaux supports photogrammétriques• 1309127: Tests des nouveaux supports 1.5’’ amagnétiques aux aimants amovibles• 1322106: ZTS linear actuators test report• 1325401: Historique des décalages des points d’articulation sur la maquette test module• 1325402: Variations des lectures des capteurs lors du changement de température de la

maquette du test module• 1325403: Impact du vide sur l’alignement de la maquette CLIC Test Module• 1325404: Test de contrainte lié aux connexions entre le MB et le DB de la maquette CLIC

test module

alignment tests review of clic two beam module lab program 06/11/2013 on behalf of clic...

Documents