[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Comments on slides
Dear Dan,
Thank you very much for taking a close look at all my slides. I have
addressed many of your comments and have reposted.
I do not intend to show any slides on the cable attach inside the BCAL.
Chucks picture is a cartoon for now. I did plan on mentioning some sort
of attachment on the maintenance slide.
Also, I do not plan on getting into details on the magnetic field quench
during the talk. I will mention we are looking into it and have some
preliminary calculations.
The lower figure on slide 24 is a section cut from the area circled.
Thanks again.
Tim
Daniel S. Carman wrote:
> Tim,
>
> Things are looking better and better in your talk. I have gone
> over the slides and my comments are below. Let me know if you
> have any questions.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Daniel
>
> **********************************************************************
> pp.8 : Meaning of Phi=119.5cm in upper-left corner?
>
> pp.10 : Make figure slightly smaller to separate it from bullets. This
> is a problem on several slides in your talk. Note that 20 micron
> is wire diameter.
>
> pp.12 : Labels overlap figure. Make it slightly smaller to separate
> from bullets.
>
> pp.14 : For the text in the lower right, make it span 2 lines to avoid
> overlap with the slide number.
>
> pp.16 : eliminate punctuation on 4th bullet for consistency.
>
> Note: leaks are not the real problem (for a non-flammable gas mixture).
> The issue is contamination of the gas from water and oxygen. In
> general, if things can get from the inside to the outside, they
> can surely get from the outside to the inside!
>
> pp.19 : Missing ")" on 2nd bullet. Note that FDC assembled as single
> structure for installation. Note that 118 cm diameter is too
> small. This is the O.D. of the frame and does not account for
> the cabling.
>
> Note: You have not mentioned anything about the FDC cable support
> inside the solenoid (outside the BCAL). Is the current plan
> too premature/underdeveloped for at least a mention? Chuck
> has a picture that I included in the FDC TDR.
>
> pp.20 : On 3rd bullet, use "o-ring grooves".
>
> pp.21 : The wording "structural skin" is unneccesarily repeated repeated.
>
> pp.22 : Again, 20 microns and 80 microns are wire diameters. Use the
> term "sense wire" and not "signal wire". Also note that the
> tension choices for the W and CuBe wire are chosen to match the
> gravitational sag.
>
> pp.24 : Fig. labels overlap bullets. Also the lower figure does not
> make sense to me. It looks like we have square frames. It
> might be worth mentioning that tubes/skins will be light-weight.
> Skins will not allow for current path in case of a magnet
> quench.
>
> pp.26 : The point of this slide is not clear. This model is being made
> and calculations carried out to determine the hole locations and
> sizes to ensure a uniform gas mixture and (semi-) rapid gas
> volume exchange. It is crucial to have no pockets of stagnant
> gas. Also note that the holes in the cathodes rotate from
> cathode layer to cathode layer.
>
> pp.27 : Labels overlap bullets.
>
> pp.28 : Move slide contents further below the title.
>
> pp.29 : Note that wire frame boards are only partially stuffed prior to
> wire stringing. Additional components (including the connectors)
> are added after stringing.
>
> pp.32 : FDC installed from the upstream end should be stated explicitly.
>
> pp.33 : All bullet for why we extract from downstream end for servicing.
> The point is not to disturb the CDC, target, start counter,
> beamline, etc. (or their alignment). Also note that the first
> step in downstream extraction is to move the downstream carriage
> downstream and then to install the service platform.
>
> pp.34 : Spurious "[" on first bullet. Also I do not know what you are
> saying in the 2nd bullet.
>
> pp.36 : Meaning of 2nd bullet unclear. Also statement on minimizing
> material in the active area is unclear. The bars themselves
> are in the active area.
>
> pp.37 : On 3rd bullet, use 252 cm**2 (i.e. superscript) active area.
> On 4th bullet, use "6 cm" not "6cm".
> On 5th bullet, use "readout" not "read".
> On 6th bullet, is hole 12 cm**2?
>
> pp.38 : Fig. labels overlap words.
>
> pp.40 : Missing your footer here. Also you have not mentioned the
> movement of the downstream carriage.
>
> pp.41 : Slide is incomplete. State what has been done to address this
> issue in the FDC, CDC, and TOF. Mention Al endplate for CDC.
> Ref. Elton's GlueX note and give some relevant scale for the
> forces involved. In other words, beef this slide up a bit.
>
> pp.43 : Note that this is an example for one subsystem (the FDC) and
> that this hazard analysis has been done for all Hall D/GlueX
> subsystems and the Hall itself.
>
> pp.44 : On 3rd bullet, I would say "Some details still need to be ironed
> out".
> On 5th bullet, why not say "personnel and equipment safety".
> We are designed the detector and all construction/installation
> procedures certainly to protect the workers, but a big part of
> the design is also to protect the system (our investment) in
> case of failures or problems.
> **********************************************************************
> **********************************************************************
> * *
> * Dr. Daniel S. Carman e-mail : carman@jlab.org *
> * Staff Scientist office : (757)-269-5586 *
> * Jefferson Laboratory web: www.jlab.org/~carman *
> * *
> **********************************************************************
>
>
>
>
begin:vcard
fn:Timothy Whitlatch, PE
n:Whitlatch;Timothy
tel;work:757-269-5087
tel;fax:757-269-5279
version:2.1
end:vcard