Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Kruislaan 409
1098 SJ Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Abstract
The structural verification of the 'LHCb VELO detector support' lifting device is the
subject of this document. Purpose of these calculations is to investigate stress and
stability of this lifting device. This lifting device has to comply with the D1 CERN
Code. Numerical analysis was performed with the IDEASTM finite element analysis
software
April 2004
Table of Contents
1. Introduction................................................................................................................3
6. Conclusion ...............................................................................................................13
APPENDICES
A ………….. All Technical Drawings
B ………….. More FEA results
For installation of the two detector supports a lifting device has been designed.
Figure 1.2 shows the lifting device (in yellow) with the two detector supports in front
of the vacuum vessel. The scope of this document is to investigate stress and stability
of this lifting device. This lifting device has to comply with the D1 CERN Code.
Fig 1.2: Lifting device for installation of the two detector supports.
The two main plates of this lifting device (shown in fig. 2.1) , so called 'lifting
plates', are bolted together with 4 intermediate plates. Between these two lifting plates
are two cross plates hanging in capacious slots. On the cross plates are the detector
supports mounted. To get a reasonable weight (43 Kg) for handling of this lifting
device, all plates are cut with a triangular or circular pattern.
The load of the lifting device is determined by the weight of the two detector
supports. The weight for each detector support is 1100 N. This weight and the center
of gravity is calculated in the 3D modeling software. There are 8 holes to put in a
lifting bar for adjusting the center of gravity.
A safety factor used in the simulation is 2.4.
With a weight (G) of each detector of 1100 N, the load at each lifting point is:
510
F1 = × 1100[ N ] × 2.4 = 1224 N
1100
590
F2 = × 1100[ N ] × 2.4 = 1416 N
1100
To simulate the 'worse case scenario', the first support point (see fig 3.1) of the
'lifting plate' is used (largest distance to the cross plates) and the forces are in vertical
direction placed on the surface on which the 'cross plates' are. The model is build up
with 2D Thin Shell parabolic quadrilateral. A buckling analysis is presented as the
stresses in some 'relative thin' sections are compressive.
Due to the symmetry of the cross plate, half of the 'cross plate' has been
simulated. Two angle directions of the force are analyzed: 0 (vertical) and 30 degrees.
This 30 degrees (shown in fig 3.2) is a worse case lifting scenario. Under normal
conditions this force will always be vertical. The model is build up with 3D Solid
parabolic tetrahedron elements.
Fig 4.5: 0 degrees; Von Mises stress results. Max. 90.2 MPa.
Fig 5.1 detail cross plate with the 2 bolts and sliding axle.
F ×a 1416 × 30
Bending: σb = M b = = = 250 N / mm 2
Wb π × d 3
π × 12 3
32 32
Shear: τ F
= =
F
=
1416
= 12.5 N / mm 2
A π ×d 2
π ×12 2
4 4
5.2 Bolt M6
Tension: σt = F = F
=
708
= 41N / mm2
A π ×d2 π × 4.7 2
4 4
Deformations on both parts are not critical and can only be a point of discussion for
installation reason.
For what concerns stability of the lifting plate, the linear buckling analyses shows a
comfortable safety margin (buckling mode 1, buckling load factor = 8.9).