BASIS OF DESIGN SUMMARY DOCUMENT
HANOHANO NEUTRINO DETECTOR
Prepared For
INTERNAL USE
MAKAI OCEAN ENGINEERING, INC.
ENGINEERING DIVISION
Makai Research Pier
Waimanalo, Hawaii 96795
Prepared By
MAKAI OCEAN ENGINEERING (CEROS CONTRACT 7611 – DESIGN TEAM)
PO Box 1206, Kailua, Hawaii 96734
September, 2005 – Revision 2.0 - <DRAFT>.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A Summary of Makai’s Report Format
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................ I
1.
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................1
1.1.
2.
INTENTION OF BOD DOCUMENT.......................................................................1
PURPOSE OF THE SYSTEM ...................................................................................2
2.1.
PHYSICS REQUIREMENTS ...................................................................................2
2.1.1.
Scintillator liquid ........................................................................................... 2
2.1.2.
Oil buffer........................................................................................................2
2.1.3.
Location of Neutrino Detector. ......................................................................2
2.1.4.
Communication requirements ........................................................................2
2.2.
DESIGN LIFE ...........................................................................................................2
3.
NEUTRINO DETECTOR CONCEPT ......................................................................3
3.1.
OVERALL DESCRIPTION BASELINE CONCEPT ..............................................3
3.1.1.
Scintillator tank .............................................................................................. 3
3.1.2.
Oil buffer – Sensor region .............................................................................3
3.1.3.
Oil buffer – veto region .................................................................................3
3.1.4.
External structure ........................................................................................... 3
3.2.
VISION – THE STORY OF HANO HANO ............................................................. 3
3.2.1.
The “story” of Hano Hano .............................................................................4
3.3.
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION CRITERIA ........................................................ 6
3.3.1.
Construction of support structure ..................................................................7
3.3.2.
Installation of detector components in support structure ............................... 7
3.3.3.
Testing and final confirmation of performance .............................................7
3.3.4.
Flooding and ballast systems .........................................................................7
3.3.5.
Fluid treatment system ...................................................................................9
3.3.6.
Tow-to-field ...................................................................................................9
3.3.7.
Installation to final position on seabed .......................................................... 9
3.3.8.
Long term seabed stability .............................................................................9
3.3.9.
Data communication & system status ............................................................ 9
3.3.10. Recovery for maintenance .............................................................................9
3.3.11. Final recovery & disposal ............................................................................10
3.3.12. Potential damage due to 3’rd party activity .................................................10
3.4.
INDIVIDUAL DETECTOR COMPONENTS........................................................ 11
3.4.1.
Scintillator fluid, option 1. ...........................................................................11
3.4.2.
Scintillator fluid, option2. ............................................................................11
3.4.3.
Plain oil buffer & material specs .................................................................11
3.4.4.
Outer detector oil / water .............................................................................12
3.4.5.
3.4.6.
3.4.7.
3.4.8.
3.4.9.
3.4.10.
3.4.11.
4.
Photo Detectors & internal sphere electronics .............................................12
Instrument housings (Glass spheres) ........................................................... 12
Acrylic boundary & material specs ............................................................. 14
Cabling – electrical ...................................................................................... 15
Cabling – optical .......................................................................................... 15
Control units & multiplexers(?) ...................................................................15
Total power requirements ............................................................................15
SHORE CABLE.........................................................................................................16
4.1.
PURPOSE ................................................................................................................16
4.1.1.
Communications requirements ....................................................................16
4.1.2.
Power requirements .....................................................................................16
4.2.
MATERIALS...........................................................................................................16
4.2.1.
Cable ............................................................................................................16
4.2.2.
Terminations ................................................................................................ 16
4.3.
PLANNING AND INSTALLATION .....................................................................16
4.3.1.
Bathymetry and cable selection ...................................................................16
4.3.2.
Near shore protection ...................................................................................16
4.3.3.
Termination at Neutrino detector .................................................................16
4.4.
SHORE STATION / ONSHORE COMMUNICATION LINK .............................. 16
5.
6.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS ......................................................................17
5.1.
BATHYMETRY......................................................................................................17
5.2.
OCEAN WAVES ....................................................................................................19
5.3.
OCEAN CURRENTS .............................................................................................. 19
5.4.
SEISMIC EVENTS .................................................................................................19
5.5.
MARINE LIFE ........................................................................................................19
SCHEDULE & MILESTONES................................................................................20
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
ii
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
1.
1.1.
INTRODUCTION
INTENTION OF BOD DOCUMENT
This document is intended to do the following:
 Define the design criteria, design issues, and construction issues associated with the
HanoHano Neutrino detector

Provide a common understanding of what is to be built. The budget for the preliminary
design is limited. It is therefore important that UH and Makai both have the same
understanding on what is to be built.

This document will be updated as the project proceeds and as new information is provided.
Later issues will be identified by the date in the footer. Makai will provide periodic updates
to this document. Portions of the document that are updated will be clearly marked.

In order to highlight critical items, Makai has marked action items as follows:
o Items in red: need to be defined by UH
o Items in blue: defined by Makai with agreement by UH
08/24/05 Updated document based on Task1-report from UH. Most important update: The overall
scintillator volume was increased from 1000 to 4000 m3.
06/27/05 Updated due dates, Scintillator and Acrylic material spec. Also made many other smaller
edits to the content.
05/16/05 This is the first edition of this document. The primary objective at this point is to provide
an agreed upon set of design parameters suitable for completing task 1 of the CEROS proposal.
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
1
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
2.
PURPOSE OF THE SYSTEM
The purpose of the deep ocean Anti-Neutrino detector is to measure natural earth background
radioactivity and determine whether the earth has a nuclear core reactor.
2.1.
PHYSICS REQUIREMENTS
The sizing of the detector should be such that a reasonable number of particle-events will occur
for the duration of the project (time in operation). This section is a condensed summary and
interpretation of the report from Task-1 of this project: “Detector Size and Sensitivity”. The term
“Task1 Report” will be used in this section when making references to this document.
2.1.1.
Scintillator liquid
Task1 Report suggested a fiducial volume of “4 kt”. For the purpose of sizing the detector, we
will assume a size of 4000 m3. The geometry of this volume can be in the form of a sphere
(Radius ~ 9.8m), or a cylinder (of proportional size: H ~= D).
2.1.2.
Oil buffer
Encapsulating the fiducial volume is a layer of oil. The thickness of this oil-buffer shall be: 2.5
m. This includes an inner 0.5m thick region where the Photo Multiplier Tube (PMT) instrument
housings (glass spheres) are mounted. A light-impenetrable membrane needs to be mounted
behind the glass spheres, such that no light from the outer region of this oil buffer will enter the
Scintillator liquid or the region in front of the PMT’s.
Veto sensors (PMT’s) will need to be placed in the outer region to serve as veto for penetrating
muons. This veto system will be used to effectively stop processing of events from the inner
PMT’s should it be necessary (prevent events of no interest from being processed.)
2.1.3.
Location of Neutrino Detector.
A location close to the Hawaiian Islands, in water depth of 4000m will satisfy the criteria
outlined in the Task1 Report. The detector can rest on the seabed without significant loss in
performance. A promising location would be west of Keahole Point, just north of Kailua Kona
on the Big Island. A water depth in excess of 4000 m is available at a distance offshore of 20 km.
This is close to the location of the original Dumand project, an area that is well documented.
2.1.4.
Communication requirements
The detector will require high-bandwidth communication with shore via a shore cable. The
anticipated data transmission rate is ___ bps.
2.2.
DESIGN LIFE
It is anticipated that the Neutrino detector and the associated communication cable will need to
be operational for at least 2.5 years, yielding a 10 kt-y exposure (Ref. Task 1 report). For design
purposes, we should assume a lifetime of 5 years.
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
2
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
3.
3.1.
NEUTRINO DETECTOR CONCEPT
OVERALL DESCRIPTION BASELINE CONCEPT
The following section is a description of the baseline-concept for the detector. Various alternate
concepts may be considered, but the baseline-concept outlined here is the most promising at this
point in time.
3.1.1.
Scintillator tank
The core of the baseline-concept consists of a spherical acrylic tank with scintillator fluid. This
region is where the particle collisions are taking place.
3.1.2.
Oil buffer – Sensor region
Outside the Scintillator tank is an oil-filled layer with a thickness of 2.5m (ref. Section___). The
2000 sensors that detect particle events inside the Scintillator tank are mounted here. Each sensor
consists of a Photo Multiplier Tube mounted inside glass-sphere instrument housings. External
light collectors (Winston cones) and magnetic shields are mounted to the glass spheres to
improve the overall performance of the sensor. The sensors are focused towards the center of the
Scintillator tank.
3.1.3.
Oil buffer – veto region
To prevent any light from entering the scintillator tank or the region just in front of the sensors, a
light-impenetrable membrane is mounted behind the sensor housings. The region outside this
membrane is used for vetoing purposes. Multiple veto-sensors are mounted in this region to
monitor for external events.
3.1.4.
External structure
A strong external steel hull encapsulates the oil buffer layer. The purpose of this structure is to
protect the inner volumes and provide a robust and rugged detector that can be handled at sea
without risk of leakage.
Since the detector may need to be towed to field and lowered to the seabed, it needs to have
hydrodynamic stability and also have a stable base suitable for resting on the seabed.
3.2.
VISION – THE STORY OF HANO HANO
This section presents the outcome of the Hano Hano Anti-Neutrino detector project in the form
of a future “news-story” about the project, after it’s successful completion. It is pure speculation
and “virtual”. However, the process of updating this “story” as the project develop may be a
good forum for building a common understanding of what we are trying to design. It also may
uncover new problems or requirements that we may never have anticipated.
This “story” should be updated as the project develops, such that we at all times can share a
common vision. Please feel free to elaborate and correct…
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
3
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
3.2.1.
The “story” of Hano Hano
Construction of the HanoHano started in January 200*. The cylindrical hull (steel structure) was
welded together at the Pearl Harbor shipyard. After the hull was complete, all steel surfaces were
sand-blasted, cleaned and epoxy coated. Installation of the seawater ballast system was then
completed and tested. To enhance stability of the hull, several compartments in the lower
perimeter were filled with grout.
A mainland yard was selected to manufacture the geodesic stainless steel sphere support
structure. This structure provided the supporting framework for all the PMT sensors. The
components arrived on time and were mounted on the designated support points on the outer
steel structure. The mounting points for the stainless steel structure were designed such that any
radial deformation would not result in excessive loads.
In parallel with the activity in the yard, the University had leased a warehouse where the 2000
sensors could be assembled and tested. Each PMT was taken through a performance test before
being mounted inside the pressure housings (glass spheres). The glass spheres were then sealed
off and pressure tested to ___m. These spheres were then mounted on triangular panels that
could later be mounted into the voids in the geodesic stainless steel sphere. These triangular
panels were manufactured with integrated light collectors and magnetic shields (grids).
As the sensors were being manufactured, the first shipment of acrylic panels for the inner acrylic
sphere arrived from the Mainland. The geometry of the geodesic stainless steel structure was
measured precisely with lasers before the first acrylic panel was glued to the adjustable elastic
mounting pads. All panels had been precision-machined from the factory, so the process of
building the sphere was one of precise positioning and careful bonding. All support points could
support displacements of up to ___ mm, and could be individually adjusted to achieve desired
stress levels. As the sphere took form, the flexible pads were re-adjusted to counteract the
increasing weight, and distribute the support-load evenly. All bonds were machined and
polished to achieve a smooth finish.
The neutrino detector was then launched from the dry-dock and the entire structure filled with
fresh water. The integrated buoyancy chambers around the outer perimeter of the hull ensured
sufficient flotation and stability. A sequence of differential pressure tests were carried out to
confirm the integrity of the detector. Scuba-divers were inspecting mounting pads for the acrylic
sphere and readjusting the pads to appropriate stress/deflection levels. The acrylic tank was
pressurized to __ psi and then subject to a negative pressure of __ psi. Volumetric changes were
measured, both for the outer hull and for the acrylic sphere. The tanks were then emptied and
cleaned to satisfy "clean-room" specifications.
The sensor panels were then carefully mounted onto the geodesic steel frame. At the same time,
the pressure-housings for the data aquisition system were installed and tested. Light sources were
installed inside the acrylic tank to provide a source for the sensor tests. A light-protecting
membrane was mounted outside each panel of sensors to prevent any light from entering the area
inside the sensors. The membrane has openings that allow the buffer oil to flood the inner
4
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
03/07/16
CEROS 7611
volume. Section by section, the sensor panels were mounted, connected and tested. This process
took more than __ weeks, and the detector was located along-side on Pier X. A temporary
opening in the hull had been made to facilitate easy access at dock level.
The scintillator fluid was manufactured on the East coast, and was on it's way in 4 specially
designed storage tanks. A storage / purification facility had been setup on Pier X for the lifetime
of the project (5 years). Mineral oil for the outer volume was also shipped in 4 specially designed
storage tanks. The content of these tanks were temporarily transferred to a transfer tank before
the storage tanks could be lifted from the barge to the precast slabs in the purification facility.
With all tanks in place, the final "charging" of the detector could take place. Scintillator fluid and
mineral oil were simultaneously filled into the detector. Continuous tests of the sensor
equipment was being done. Twice during this process, the filling was halted to debug problem
with the sensor panels. After the detector was filled to specified levels, 1982 sensors out of 2000
were found in working order. A week long performance test was then carried out with different
light sources in the scintillator tank. 5 sensor replacements had to be made by scuba-divers (in
the mineral oil). Scuba divers later replaced the faulty sensors with new one.
The detector was then "locked down" for transport, before the process of towing it to the
Dumand site, west of Kona, Hawaii could start. The tugboat "YY" pulled the detector at a speed
of ZZ kts, and the entire tow lasted for __ days. After arriving on site, the sea-state exceeded the
maximum outlined in the deployment procedures. The tugboats maintained position for 3 days
before conditions were acceptable.
A specially designed flotation collar was used as a safety device during initial lowering process.
The detector was completely flooded, allowing it to sink freely to a water depth of 100 m, at
which point the flotation collar stopped further descent by providing __ tones of buoyancy. The
target flooded weight of the detector was __ tones, and the synthetic lines attached between the
collar and the detector had sufficient elasticity to compensate for vertical surface motion. The
load-cells on the flotation collar gave feedback on the submerged weight and it was found to be
20% higher than anticipated.
Final performance tests were made to confirm that the detector had survived the pressurization to
10 atmospheres. Some loud “bangs” could be heard from the sensors mounted on the detector.
However, the real-time video feed from the inside of the detector confirmed that the internal
acrylic compartments were still intact. (The internal light system in the detector was powered up
during this stage.) A complete cycle of internal pressurization tests were repeated to confirm the
volumetric stiffness of the detector and the integrity of the compartments.
Having completed the final tests, the detector was lowered to the seabed. Onboard sonars would
alert the winch operator that the detector was close to the seabed. The touchdown was done in a
continuous operation and a lowering speed of ___ m/s. During the lowering, the shoreline cable
was also paid out under tension control, from a separate cable-laying vessel.
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
5
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
An acoustic release device was used to disconnect the lowering wire from the neutrino detector.
The cable-laying vessel then proceeded with lay-operation for the __ km long shore connection
cable to Keahole Point.
After a week of initial testing, the neutrino detector was declared “fully functional”, and in
operation monitoring particle collision events.
…elaborate on expected Geo-neutrino results, Geo-reactor… etc… what can go wrong…
3.3.
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION CRITERIA
This section attempts to provide specific details and design criteria for for use in the design
process. These criteria exists in order to arrive at a detector that may fulfill the requirements &
assumptions described in the “story of Hano Hano” in the previous chapter.
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
6
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
3.3.1.
3.3.2.
Construction of support structure
(1)
Welding & cleaning requirements? (any particular radiation issues?)
(2)
Corrosion protection and surface treatment?
Installation of detector components in support structure
(1)
Scintillator tank (acrylic)
(2)
Sensors
(a)
PMT installation in pressure housing
(b)
Closing & testing of pressure housing
(c)
Winstone cone and magnetic shield
(d)
Mounting mechanism
(3)
(a)
3.3.3.
3.3.4.
Wiring
…how to allow for later removal/replacement
(4)
Shade-screen - material selection
(5)
Veto sensors
Testing and final confirmation of performance
(1)
How to replace / repair individual sensor housings and/or panels.
(2)
Wiring for easy maintenance – how-to…
Flooding and ballast systems
(1)
Prior to submergence, the support structure must ideally be
sufficiently strong to support any level in any of the internal
compartments. This might result in expensive structural requirements… If
we can relax on this and require synchronized filling of compartments, the
loads are greatly reduced.
(2)
The design of internal compartment should be such that a complete
venting of all trapped air is possible, or the support structure will have to
support huge external loads as the detector is lowered to it’s operating
depth. (…use soft membranes for safety?)
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
7
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
(3)
Both the fluids and the structure will compress due to extremely
high external pressures. A mechanism for relieving pressure difference
between compartments is essential. It could be in form of deformable
membranes or by other means. Difference between bulk compressibility
of the different materials must be taken in account when designing
attachments etc.
(4)
Change in density due to cooling during the descent should be taken
in account. Scintillator gets cooler and more dense, resulting in additional
shrinkage (adds to effect of pressure)
(5)
Change in density due to accidental mixing due to rupture of shell
between Scintillator fluid and Buffer region fluid. Need to verify density
of mix between fluids to ensure that overall buoyancy is not affected.
Since the true density of a mix (rhoMixTrue) of two fluids is not always
the same as the density calculated from a simple mix-ratio formula
(rhoMixCalc), we might get in trouble if the membrane between
scintillator and the outer veto-compartment breaks:
rhoMixCalc = (VolSci * rhoSci + VolWtr*rhoWtr) / (VolSci+VolWtr)
rhoMixTrue = The actual density of mix between scintillator and pure
water, should the membrane leak.
Potential buoyancy loss due to density increase (dRho):
dRho = rhoMixTrue - rhoMixCalc
Also, since the "consumed volume" of the new mix might be smaller
than the detector itself, the outer shell also needs to shrink.
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
8
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
(6)
3.3.5.
Fluid treatment system
(1)
(a)
3.3.6.
Purification of Scintillator and oil…
…
Tow-to-field
(1)
Hydrostatic stability, … what is flooded, how to control ballast
levels?
3.3.7.
3.3.8.
3.3.9.
(2)
Integrity of support structure.
(3)
Expected tow-forces & sea-worthiness.
Installation to final position on seabed
(1)
Huge mass to lower 4000m
(2)
How to control & confirm?
(3)
Shore cable to be laid immediately after lowering detector?
(4)
Instrumentation & feedback?
Long term seabed stability
(1)
Criteria for bottom placement (Roll & pitch)
(2)
Erosion / deep water currents?
Data communication & system status
(1)
Additional instrumentation of detector (Pressure and temperature
sensors etc.)
(2)
3.3.10.
Network protocol (push/pull?)
Recovery for maintenance
(1)
How to recover?
release?)
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
(…line w/manual release hook?, acoustic
9
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
3.3.11.
Final recovery & disposal
3.3.12.
Potential damage due to 3’rd party activity
(1)
Submarines
(2)
Fishing activity?
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
10
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
3.4.
INDIVIDUAL DETECTOR COMPONENTS
3.4.1.
Scintillator fluid, option 1.
(1)
Type: HPhenylxylylethane (PXE), an organic liquid Scintillator.
[Ref. Borexino Collaboration, August 2004]
3.4.2.
(2)
Chemical description: C16-H18
(3)
Material properties
(a)
Typical density: 988 kg/m3
(b)
Range in density: 980 – 1000 kg/m3
(c)
Viscosity (40 celsius) 5.2 cSt
(d)
…additional properties available in [Ref. above]
Scintillator fluid, option2.
(1)
Type: Dodecane mix (80% Dodecane, 20% Trimethylbenzene) [Ref
KamLand]
(2)
(a)
Dodecane: C12H26
(b)
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene (pseudocumene)
(c)
+1.5 g/l 2,5-diphenyloxazole (PPO)
(d)
…Please confirm the above…
(3)
3.4.3.
Chemical description:
Material properties
(a)
Typical density: 778 kg/m3 (Kamland – ref.UH) (…or: 820 kg/m3)
(b)
Range in density: 749 – 876 kg/m3. (for various mix ratios)
(c)
Dodecane density: 749 kg/m3
(d)
Pseudocumene density: 876 kg/m3
(e)
Viscosity (…Celsius) _____ cSt
Plain oil buffer & material specs
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
11
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
3.4.4.
(1)
Type: Mineral oil
(2)
Chemical description: _____
(3)
Material properties
(a)
Density: _____ kg/m3
(b)
…need detailed specs here & bulk compressibility properties etc.
Outer detector oil / water
(1)
(a)
Material properties (we may use oil instead of water…)
Density: 1000 kg/m3
(b)
3.4.5.
Photo Detectors & internal sphere electronics
(1)
PMT Type: Photonis XP1804. 27.0 cm hemispherical 11-stage tube.
(2)
Quantities: 2000 PMT’s + 200 units in outer region
(3)
Physical properties
(a)
Dry weight PMT: 1.744 kg.
(b) Estimated dry weight of other electronics inside the spheres: 1.744
kg (Same as PMT weight, or as low as half of this according to Gary
Varner)
3.4.6.
(4)
Power requirements
(5)
Dimensions
Instrument housings (Glass spheres)
(1)
Quantities: 2000 + 200 units for outer region
(2)
Manufacturer A: Benthos
(a)
Type: “Deep Sea Glass Spheres”
(b)
Glass quality: Borosilicate (low expansion)
(c)
Physical properties
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
12
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
Refractive index …
Dispersion …
(d) Standard model
13” OD (330mm)
12” ID (305mm)
9.07 kg dry weight
10.4 kg buoyancy
Depth rating: 11034m
(e)
Cost: $305 per unit. ($___ for large quantities)
(f)
Hard hat option: $104 per unit ($____ for large quantities)
(3)
Manufacturer B: Nautilus / Schott
(a)
Type: Deep Sea Glass Spheres
(b)
Glass quality: Vitrovex (3.3 borosilicate glass)
(c)
Physical properties:
Refractive index (nd): 1.472
Dispersion (nf-nc): 72.6e-4
(d) Standard models
13” OD (330mm)
306 mm ID
8.5 kg dry weight
107 Newton buoyancy
Depth rating: 9000m
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
13
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
3.4.7.
(e)
Cost: $____ per unit. ($___ per unit when ordering 2000)
(f)
Hard hat option: ____
Acrylic boundary & material specs
(1)
Type: Polycast
(2)
Manufacturer: Spartech Polycast
(3)
Physical properties
(a)
Dry weight: 1190 kg/m3
(b)
Thermal expansion: 0.000042 in/in/deg.F
(c)
Water absorption: 0.26% after 26 days
(d)
Refractive index: 1.49
(4)
Tensile strength
(a)
Yield: 11250 psi
(b)
Elongation at rupture: 6.4%
(c)
E modulus: 450000 psi
(5)
Flexural strength
(a)
Rupture: 15250 psi
(b)
E modulus: 475000 psi
(6)
Compressive strength
(a)
Yield: 18000 psi
(b)
E modulus: 440000 psi
(7)
Sheer strength: 9000 psi
(a)
(8)
Thickness: _____mm minimum, ___mm maximum.
(9)
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
14
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
3.4.8.
3.4.9.
3.4.10.
3.4.11.
Cabling – electrical
(1)
Cable type: Coax - _____.
(2)
Estimated Quantity: ____ m
(3)
Manufacturer: _________
(4)
Physical properties
(a)
Dry weight: ____kg/m
(b)
Submerged weight: ____ (in liquid: ____ at pressure___)
Cabling – optical
(1)
Cable type: ___________
(2)
Estimated Quantity: ____ m
(3)
Manufacturer: _____________---
(4)
Physical properties
(a)
Dry weigh: _____kg/m
(b)
Submerged weight: _____(in liquid: ____ at pressure ___)
Control units & multiplexers(?)
(1)
Dimensions: ______
(2)
Dry weight: ______
(3)
Pressure housing required: yes/no?
(4)
Submerged weight: _____ (in liquid: ____ at pressure _____)
(5)
Power consumption
Total power requirements
(1)
_______
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
15
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
4.
4.1.
4.2.
4.3.
SHORE CABLE
PURPOSE
4.1.1.
Communications requirements
4.1.2.
Power requirements
MATERIALS
4.2.1.
Cable
4.2.2.
Terminations
PLANNING AND INSTALLATION
4.3.1.
Bathymetry and cable selection
For the purpose of this project, the shore-cable can be assumed laid on the seabed between
the detector location and Keahole point.
4.3.2.
Near shore protection
For estimating purposes, the cable shall be assumed armored down to a water-depth of
500m.
4.3.3.
Termination at Neutrino detector
…think about how we connect to detector and how to deal with deployment & recovery
issues.
4.4.
SHORE STATION / ONSHORE COMMUNICATION LINK
…what is the vision here?
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
16
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
5.
5.1.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
HARBORS
5.1.1.
Depth of harbors
Comment: None of the harbors in State of Hawaii has sufficient depth for complete submergence
of a 20m+ structure. Pearl harbor is the deepest with it’s ~15m draft. To completely flood the
neutrino detector, the structure needs added buoyancy. For the purpose of design, we assume a
design draft of 10m, keeping in mind that the detector should be maintainable on the Big Island
too.
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
17
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
5.1.2.
(1)
Honolulu: 40’ (12.2m)
(2)
Pearl harbor: 49’ (14.95m)
(3)
Barbers point: 38’ (11.6m)
(4)
Hilo: 35’ (10.7m)
(5)
Kawaihae: 35’ (10.7m)
Harbor entrance (widths)
(1)
Honolulu: 500’ (Not a problem)
(2)
Pearl harbor: 1200’ (Not a problem)
(3)
Barbers point: 450’ (Not a problem)
(4)
Hilo: 800’ (Not a problem)
(5)
Kawaihae: 525’
(6)
5.2.
CANALS – LONG TRANSITS
5.2.1.
Panama Canal
(1)
The panama canal draft limit is: 12m, but PCC now restricts to 11m
draft maximum to reduce water usage.
(2)
The beam limit is: 106’, but if under 100’, the passage takes less
time, since the vessels can then pass eachother.
(3)
Panamax vessels are the largest specially constructed to cross the
canal, and have a beam in excess of 100’
(4)
Average cost of a transit is $47000 (avg. of all vessels)
(5)
Vessels under 50’ pays $500
(6)
Takes about a day to transit.(48 miles)
(7)
5.3.
BATHYMETRY
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
18
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
For the purpose of this project, no bathymetric survey will be required. For design purposes, the
detector will be placed on the seabed in a water-depth of 4000m. The expected bottom
conditions can be assumed ideal: Firm, stable, bottom sediments with moderate slopes of ___
degrees. The area can be assumed 20 km west of Keahole point.
5.4.
OCEAN WAVES
The anticipated deep-water particle motion due to surface-wave action can be assumed
negligible. However, the waves during launch, tow-to-field and final lowering will however
affect the safety of the detector. The following conditions can be assumed:



5.5.
Assembly location: Sea-State ____
Tow-To-Field route: Sea-state ____ or less severe.
Lowering of detector: Sea-state ____ ( __ m waves of period __sec. Etc….)
OCEAN CURRENTS
Design currents should be based on “typical” deep-water Pacific currents in the region of
Hawaii. For the purpose of deployment analysis, the following current profile can be assumed:
Depth Current magnitude
0 m ___ kts.
100 m ___ kts.
> 200m
___ kts.
5.6.
SEISMIC EVENTS
The bottom-resting detector shall be designed to survive seismic events typical to Hawaii.
Horizontal sea-bed accelerations of ____m/s2 should be accounted for when designing the
detector and all internal sub-systems. Vertical accelerations can be assumed __% of horizontal
values.
5.7.
MARINE LIFE
Under normal operation, the detector should be designed to have no adverse effect on the marine
life. The Neutrino Detector contains a combination of pure water, mineral oil and scintillator
fluids. The fluid containment system should be designed with double protection against spills. If
applicable, all USCG regulations needs to be followed. The exterior detector surface will be
surface-treated similar to any marine vessel to prevent corrosion and limit marine growth.
Standard treatment procedures, using approved materials needs to be used.
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
19
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
6.
6.1.
COST
MATERIAL COST
6.1.1.
Steel
The average cost of steel (2003) was $250-350 per ton, but has since January of 2004 rised to
$650-$750 per ton.
Stainless steel prices have tripled.
A standard LNG tanker (insulated) (130000m3) cost $150 – 250 million ($1923 per m3 tank
volume) (Ref. 185.pdf from eneken.ieej.or.jp/en/data/pdf/185.pdf)
A standard LPG tanker (not insulated) cost $60 million / 130000m3 ($461/m3) CONFIRM
SIZE!!
US Navy 95-99 vessels cost 780 million in average (46 ships)
6.2.
SIZE VS DURATION OPTIMIZATION
The tradeoff between building small and operating over a longer duration vs. building big and
achieve a shorter period of operation might need to be made to make the final sizing decision.
The following is a draft set of assumptions:
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
20
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
6.2.1.
6.2.2.
6.2.3.
6.2.4.
6.2.5.
6.2.6.
6.2.7.
Detector Fixed cost, independent on size
(1)
PMT / Instrument housing
(2)
Electronics etc.
Detector Variable cost, dependent on Surface area of sphere(s)
(1)
Cabling
(2)
Surface treatment
(3)
…
Detector Variable cost, depending on Volume of sphere(s)
(1)
Scintillator (inner sphere)
(2)
Mineral oil (void between inner and outer superstructure)
(3)
Ballast systems / pumps
(4)
…
Detector Variable cost, depending on Volume AND area
(1)
Acrylic tank (Additional thickness required to support larger size)
(2)
Support frame (Additional strength needed to support larger size)
(3)
Steel superstructure framing needs to be stronger when we go bigger
(4)
…
Land systems (support & maintenance – Independent of size
(1)
Office, computers, networking, etc. Independent of size
(2)
Stor
Land systems – dependent on size
(1)
Storage tanks for mineral oil / Scintillator fluids
(2)
Pumps & other support dependent on capacity req.
Labor cost
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
21
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
6.2.8.
(1)
Salaries of staff
(2)
Salaries of Researchers
Land lease
(1)
Might need larger area to support 4kt system
(2)
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
22
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611
7.












SCHEDULE & MILESTONES
UH report #1 is due Mid-August. (Payment #1).
CEROS Milestone report is due mid August. (Task 1 complete).
UH report #2 is due mid-September. (Payment #2).
CEROS Milestone report is due mid-October. (Task 2,4,8,9 complete)
UH report #3 is due mid-November. (Payment #3)
UH report #4 is due mid-January. (Payment #4)
CEROS Milestone report is due mid-February. (Task 3,5,6,7 complete)
UH report #5 is due mid-March. (Payment #5)
CEROS Milestone report is due mid-April. (Task 10,11,12,13 complete)
CEROS Milestone report is due mid-May. (Task 14 and 15 complete)
UH report #6 due (Payment #6)
CEROS Final report is due mid-June. (Confirm this…)
Makai Ocean Engineering, Inc.
03/07/16
23
HanoHano Neutrino Detector, BOD-Rev.1
CEROS 7611