Monday, November 25, 2024, 09:56, Adam Newsome, South Hot-Cell, Standard Operation, TM3, , TM3 move - silo to SHC
|
TM3 was moved from silo to SHC with no target. Move successful. |
Tuesday, November 26, 2024, 13:03, Frank Song, South Hot-Cell, Standard Operation, TM3, UCx#47, electrical check/leak check
|
An electrical check and leak check had been done after new target UCx47 was installed on TM3 in SHC. see attachment pls. |
Tuesday, November 26, 2024, 14:52, Aaron Tam, South Hot-Cell, Standard Operation, TM3, UCx#47 , UC#47 LP-SIS w/ gas Install 6x
|
November 26, 2024 - Aaron Tam
Handover from TPO and inspection
- Completed
- Some modification to the center Inner-Outer conductor had to be made (hole enlarged as tab was slightly short)
Target Insertion:
Target Mounting:
- Upon fully seating UC#47 on service tray locating pins, the gas line VCR gasket came off
- Operator doesn't have line-of-sight to this area, so there has to be healthy clearance (Foreshadowing)
- Gas line VCR gasket reinstalled using manipulators
- 2nd seating of UC#47 on service tray locating pins, the gas line VCR gasket came off again
- Some alignment interference with the gas line coupling is the cause of the gasket falling off during placement (photo attached)
- Gas line on service tray was loosened, raised to highest position and fastened (Photo attached)
- Failed to re-install VCR gasket (Plastic separated from gasket material)
- Target removed from Hot cell to reinstall gaskets and make modifications to the gas-line coupling
- Gas line coil plastically deformed to give less of a spring action so the coupling can stay down under friction until it is time to couple
- Target carefully inserted into hot cell without disturbing spring/friction of gas-line coupling.
- This had to be repeated several times. Once for the waterline gaskets coming off, and a few other times to insert the target/tray without disturbing sprung coupling
- Target mounted without issue after the above steps successfully
Gas and Water Services:
- VCR connections coupled
- Leak test passed
- leak test faster today because module had been left in silo for a long time to dry out.
- Gas line no-longer needed, so was not checked
Electrical Services:
- Conductor bolts installed
- All bolts (including mounting bolts) checked for fit with mirror
- Coil conductor bolts torqued to at least 130inch-lbs
- Electrical test completed
Containment box panel reinstalled
Cleared area around module for craning out.
|
Thursday, November 28, 2024, 16:13, Aaron Tam, South Hot-Cell, Standard Operation, , TiC#9 Parasitics, TiC#9 Parasitics Leak Check and removal from hotcell    
|
November 27th, 2024 - Aaron Tam with Farran & David
Parasitic Assembly Leak Check (Aaron, Farran, David)
-Note that the furthest upstream (right of the target) parasitic top cap screws had been loosened and retightened in error when attempting to remove it off TiC#9
-This puts this data point into question
-Leak check starting from upstream to down stream
-First parasitic had no leak
-Second parasitic had some leak
-Third parasitic was not pumping down at all
-First parasitic checked on test hose again with same success
Parasitic Dis-assembly (Aaron)
-First parasitic had good tension in all 3 screws
-second parasitic had 2 screws with a perceptible breaking-loose of the screws, but one was imperceptible
-Third parasitic had lower (than first parasitic), but okay tension in all 3 screws
In an attempt to move the PEEK seal into a safe spot with tweezers, this one was accidentally sprung across the hotcell in the direction of the tool port
A lengthy attempt to find it was conducted, but no PEEK seal was recovered
This may effect our ability to do work during hot cell entries coming up.
PEEK Seal extraction (Aaron, Farran)
-A labeled bag was inserted into the hotcell via the tool port and onto an existing tray in the Hotcell
-PEEK seal placed inside bag, placed back on tray, and moved back to the tool port for extraction
-With tool port open, the draft was able to push the bag across the lift table. Changing the cross section exposed to the draft works to keep the bag from moving
-Farran used picker to extract the bag into the tool port where he wiped and placed into separate bag.
-This process was repeated for the second PEEK seal
-Bags were wiped and swiped, put in another bag, swiped and brought over to Hot cell Service area Lab
|
Tuesday, December 03, 2024, 10:51, Adam Newsome, South Hot-Cell, Standard Operation, TM2, , TM2 move - ITE to SHC
|
TM2 was moved from ITE to SHC with Ta#68 target. During the move, a railing was lightly bumped by the corner of the module - no obvious damage or issues have been observed. Otherwise, the move was smooth. |
Tuesday, December 03, 2024, 12:28, Adam Newsome, South Hot-Cell, Standard Operation, TM2, , TM3 move - TCS to ITE
|
TM3 was moved with UCx#47 from TCS to ITE. The move was smooth. |
Tuesday, December 03, 2024, 15:53, Aaron Tam, South Hot-Cell, Standard Operation, TM2, Ta#68, Ta#68 Removal 22x
|
Note: Ta#68 had a difficult install. See E-log ID# 2698 for more info
First look:
- Containment box cover looks the same as previous (See:ID: 2697)
- Target shows large amount of soot-like deposits (See photos for locations)
- Deposits seem to have been left on parts of the service tray as well ie.: Multipin connector
Removal:
- Removal was smooth
- Water-line bracket fixing bolts seemed loose even before I put a tool to them
Eyes of sides:
- Better photos of where deposits are
- Everything else seems normal
|
Wednesday, December 04, 2024, 10:40, Adam Newsome, South Hot-Cell, Standard Operation, TM2, , TM2 move - SHC to silo
|
TM2 was remotely moved from the South Hot Cell to SW Silo. Reading at SHC = 89.8 mSv/h. The move was smooth. |
Wednesday, December 04, 2024, 14:30, Aaron Tam, South Hot-Cell, Standard Operation, , Ta#68, Ta#68 PIE 32x
|
Abstract:
This target has seen some irregular beam patterns
Possibility that the beam hit the walls of the target tube or even the cooling fins
This PIE we want to investigate how the irregular beam physically affected the target
Related ELOGS:
ID: 2728
ID: 2698
PIE was performed by Aaron Tam, Directed by Aurelia Laxdal, Observed by Lucas Backes, Special help from Chad Fisher
External views:
- Windows are clear of any irregularities
- More pictures of this can be found in RH-ISAC E-log 2728
Internal Views:
- Heatshield internal
- Some discolouration from heat and soot deposits.
- This seems to be fairly clean to normal amounts - not concerning
- Target tube
- tube is bent with the middle higher than the sides
- Target tube was not removed 9/64ths allen wrench could not be located for this operation
- Target tube Exit
- Heatshield windows were punctured to reveal the target tube entraces/exits
- Entrance is waterline side (ITE)
- Extraction electrode parts were removed from the back off the target
- These parts look normal
- some of the extraction electrode would not pull out due to tight fitting parts and the investigation stopped here.
Conclusion: Target physical condition is normal as far as we could investigate |
Thursday, December 05, 2024, 11:43, Aaron Tam, South Hot-Cell, Standard Operation, , Ta#68, Pail loading - Ta#68 & Others into Pail#300    
|
December 5, 2024 - Aaron Tam w/ help from Chad, Peter and Adam at the Crane
Hot Cell Prep:
- Tools organized, working space cleared, spot for clean tool to sit placed, Air tool is open and spinning clockwise for tightening
Loading:
- Ta#68 was loaded into pail# 300
- PEEK seal parasitic assemblies loaded (PEEK seals were removed in ID: 2724)
- Farran had some old samples that also went in (More details to come when Farran sends the info)
Lid/latching:
Bail attachment:
- Some difficulty in attaching the Lifting Bail, but went on smoothly with the help of Chad
Notes:
- One of the PEEK seal parasitic Target assembly lids was missed in the loading. This will have to be loaded next time.
- All parasitic type targets remain in the yellow container shown in photos below.
|
Wednesday, January 08, 2025, 07:37, chad fisher, South Hot-Cell, Standard Operation, TM4, UCx#46, UCx#46 removal 
|
UCx#46 removed from TM4 and placed into a pail back-filled with argon. Nothing visually unusual; no issues. |
Tuesday, January 14, 2025, 10:00, David Wang, South Hot-Cell, Standard Operation, TM3, UCx#47, after operation electrical check, Tm3 UCx 47
|
TM3 UCx#47 after operation electrical check is done at SHC. The result is normal. See attachment. |
Monday, January 27, 2025, 08:27, om David Wang, South Hot-Cell, Maintenance, , parasite target, Transfer parasite target from SHC to NHC.
|
A parasite target has been transferred from SHC to NHC. It is a job to reduce SHC field for coming SHC entry job. The transfer is successful. |
Wednesday, January 29, 2025, 11:10, chad fisher, South Hot-Cell, Standard Operation, , , Pre-entry field Check
|
Fields in the hot cell were checked using a pole monitor. Field approximately in the area someone would stand to repair manip. is 3.8 mSv/h
Hot item found! Bag with extraction electrode and high current fasteners from an online target. |
Monday, February 10, 2025, 11:48, David Wang, South Hot-Cell, Standard Operation, TM2, No target, TM2 has been moved from W_S silo to SHC.
|
Remotely removed TM2 from S-W silo to SHC . Peter and I did the move. It is successful. |
Tuesday, February 11, 2025, 10:36, chad fisher, South Hot-Cell, Repair, TM2, , Conductor Block Insulator Replacement  
|
Ceramic conductor blocks ITD0053 and ITD0054 were replaced on TM2. Initially, only ITD0053 was to be replaced but after removing it it was noticed that ITD0054 (the larger conductor block behind it) was also broken, fractured through the helicoil that retained ITD0053 (see attached picture).
Both the old 53 and 54 fell into multiple pieces upon removal (see attached photo).
Fasteners holding 53 and 54 to the mounting plate and each other had loose washer on them. I have never seen this done before and, after checking drawing ITA3560 (extraction column Assembly) and confirming they have not been called out, I removed them before reinstalling.
|
Friday, February 14, 2025, 10:48, David Wang, South Hot-Cell, Standard Operation, TM2, No target, TM2 has been moved from SHC to TCS.
|
TM2 has been moved from SHC to TCS successfully. Travis and I did the move. |
Thursday, February 20, 2025, 11:29, chad fisher, South Hot-Cell, Standard Operation, , , Field Check
|
After removing the previously found extraction electrode and other suspect components the field at the manipulator tongs (in front of the window) in still 3mSv\h.
I have been through every bin etc in the hc and even emptied the dust seperator canister of the vacuum. I will use the camera to look under the table and inside the vacuum cleaner itself...these are really the only possibilities left. |
Wednesday, February 26, 2025, 09:59, David Wang, South Hot-Cell, Standard Operation, , , SHC Field measurement from TH
|
After waste transfer, I did a SHC field measurement from TH through top flange opening. The general field around manipulator maintenance working area is 550 to 650 usv/hr(0.4 to 0.5 meters above table). some area on work table where target fragile material stayed before have 1.0 to 1.3 m/sv (closing to contact measurement). The spreading of target material dusts deposited on table, and affected the whole cell field in my view. |
Friday, January 11, 2019, 13:59, Isaac Earle, Safe Module Parking, Development, , , SMP motor selection decision
|
SMP drivetrain design work is currently underway. Alejandro has selected a suitable 1200:1 reducer which will give a vessel rotation speed of 0.21rpm with a 1725rpm motor (deemed sufficiently close to the SHC rotation speed of 0.17rpm). The reducer however is only rated for 0.33hp, and Allon's analysis recommended we use a motor of at least 0.4hp
From his calculations the expected power required to turn the loaded vessel is 0.2hp (see Document-161943, p3). The higher figure of 0.4hp in his final recommendations comes from the power rating of a 40 tooth sprocket (the driver sprocket) with a No. 50 roller chain operating at 10rpm (the lowest speed shown on the table) - meaning this driver sprocket arrangement can handle up to 0.4hp. We discussed this on the phone on January 4th and agreed that a 1/3hp motor could be used which will match the reducer Alejandro selected, and will supply sufficient power given that calculations indicate only 0.2hp is required.
Once the vessel is installed in the shield box a test will be performed to determine the actual torque (and power) required to turn the vessel. If the value differs significantly from the calculated value the design will be revisited. |
|