Mini-review of MERLIN water fittings Background: 4.0.3 Beamline (EPU) M301: horizontal reflecting, tangential profile, fixed Glidcop mirror M302: horizontal reflecting, sagittal profile, Silicon, adjustable position M101: horizontal reflecting,

1
Mini-review of MERLIN water fittingsBackground
4.0.3 Beamline (EPU)M301 horizontal
reflecting, tangential profile, fixed Glidcop
mirrorM302 horizontal reflecting, sagittal
profile, Silicon, adjustable positionM101
horizontal reflecting, toroidal profile,
Si/Glidcop?, adjustable

• 04/12/06

2
Design features of cooling lines

• No pumping on air guard
• Remove water line w/o breaking vacuum
• Motion (where necessary) 5 mrad yaw/pitch/roll
• Specifications need 5 urad stability on pitch
  (.75 microns)
• (Possible) Axial forces on mirror only pitch is
  concern as force on centerline and normal to
  mirror face

3
Original design Teflon tube, coaxial ports
Pros axial force on mirror minimized/eliminated
Cons Leak developed, expensive features,
assemble both sides from inside vacuum vessel,
captured o-rings
4
New design under review
Pros Simple features in mirror, only 1 face
o-ring (easy to access), easier to assemble
Cons Axial force on mirror, unknown new design,
brazed fitting more complex
5
Addressing cons of new design
Water pressure variation /- .5 psi
(assumption, any data on magnitude or
frequency?) Dia. 9.5 mm gt Area .11
in2 Force on mirror .05 lbs (assume worst
case on one side only) Speed of sound (i.e.
pressure) in water 1500m/s Distance to other
side 1m Variation in pressure reaches other
side in 2/3 of millisec Resisting force Two
bellows, K28 lbs/in Two Lucas flexures, up to
52 lbf-in/rad (minimal restoring) Restoring
spring on drive assembly need 300mm 10 mrad
3 mm travel at pitch motor if motor supplies 20
lbs, K can be 170 lbs/in Tubing on waterline
(e.g. copper) (minimal restoring)
6
Motion of mirrorMirror pitches by
.05/(2x28170) .0002 gt 5.5 micronsMirror
center to fitting 150 mm so approx. 37 urad
pitchSpecifications need 5 urad stability on
pitch (.75 microns) Reduce pitch further bya)
cut area down where axial force applied on mirror
by using smaller tube to supply water b)
frequency of variation lt 1515 Hz would allow
pressure wave to reach other fitting and only
concern would be pressure rise within 2/3
millisecc) less magnitude variation in
pressureNeed test data to be certain but allow
for retrofit design
Addressing cons of new design
7
Addressing cons of new design
b) New design so unknown Two brazed
joints Talked with Insync design based on
their preferred fitting Imparting force on water
tube by connecting tubing Plastic tubing, dead
soft copper, ? Minimize water pressure
variation Data, compliant bladder/regulator to
smooth variations, ? Other?
8
Retrofit Design
9
Pats retrofit version metal shell, bellows
Pros Minimal/no axial force, easier internal
features, o-rings backed by metal, no captured
o-rings
Cons 4 o-rings, multiple components/joints