Comments for Evaluation of flex joint vs floating clamp 
			July 10, 2001
		by Chris Jensen, BD/EE Support



1. Overall Remarks

I thought the presentations were good. The level of detail of the
drawings in the handout could have been better. It would have been
easier to understand some of the concerns/comments. It seems the
floating clamp design, while having some nice features, might be more
difficult to design.

Always consider breaking up the functionality of a very complicated
component into more manageable components that might then be
reintegrated, in a more efficient manner, into a final system.


2. Itemized suggestions, questions and concerns

(1) Certainly the suggestions regarding the "floating clamp" for the
flexible joint were relevant. It was never clear to me the purpose of
the insulating boss that sits into the aluminum bus. I think it is a
much better idea to have the ceramic bars clamp the bus directly; there
is less chance of breaking them from the bus jumping around

(2) I think some more substantial analysis of the magnetic forces in the
flexible joint should be done. The equation offered for magnetic force
is only valid for two lines of current, not for two planes with depth to
them. In the process of slitting each bus, you get more flexibility, but
the force on each slit piece may go up substantially and of course the
pieces are less rigid so I would worry about fatigue problems.

(3) It would certainly be prudent to make some kind of mechanical
mockup, some fractional piece of the assembly, so that some simple
experiments could be made; actual flexibility vs displacement and
transferred force, welding tests, simple manufacturing tests.

(4) While perhaps beyond the scope of this review, some further thought
should be given to the location of the clamp joint, both in the number
of clamps (1 x 8 conductors, 2 x 4 conductors, 4 x 2 conductors) and in
the location of the clamp ( in the very high rad area vs. above the
shielding blocks). It would seem this is a difficult design (even if not
floating) and a step back to review the actual requirements vs. the
desired requirements might simplify the effort.