Core Barrier Study.

Research record

The detail behind
the study.

Source-linked work for this revision. Reported checks describe the stated model or test; physical qualification and applicability to the current retrofit remain separate.

Subfield Core compartment barrier study

73-part mechanical candidate retaining the current exterior. A removable lower front frame seats the power cover. Fixed rear and side barriers meet the tray and divider; a tray rib and rounded divider ends permit rotation behind the frame. Four removable bezel posts replace fixed arms that obstructed tray withdrawal.

Evidence: - 943 nominal fit/export checks pass, including 73 separate valid STEP solids. - 1,720 conservative service-motion/tool checks pass: front-frame extraction, divider rotation/extraction, post removal with an assumed D16 socket envelope, then tray/support withdrawal. - The ideal CAD void calculation separates a sample in the closed power compartment from samples in the upper compartment and ahead of the lower cover. Removing the lower cover reconnects them as a negative control. - Actual CAD render/native Blender reopen verifies 54 visible meshes. The weather cover and faceplates are intentionally omitted for inspection.

Nominal service sequence: isolate the assembly; remove weather cover and faceplates with their loose hardware; remove four countersunk frame screws and withdraw the frame; remove divider screws, rotate the divider 20 degrees and withdraw it; unscrew/remove four frame posts; remove tray screws and withdraw the tray/support carrier. Unlike R5, this divider rotates before any outward pull. Thread rotation/torque, real tools, hands, electronics and wiring remain unqualified.

Post axes: X +/-144, Y -150/-273. Post body Z13..130 with AF10 drive at Z120..130; nominal M4 lower stud Z9..13 and upper blind bore Z122.4..130. The housing receivers are blind. Generic countersunk screws seat 0.1 mm below the frame surface. Tray corners are R16; the divider has semicircular R1.5 plan ends. These are development dimensions, not fabrication tolerances.

The connectivity result assumes ideal zero-gap CAD contacts; it proves no electrical rating, sealing, touch protection, creepage or dielectric performance. The many small void components include nominal fastener cavities and are not separate functional compartments. Materials, process, tolerance stack, anti-loosening, thread/preload/stiffness, actual wiring penetrations, supplier parts, thermal behavior and physical qualification remain open. Rear-carrier attachment is still absent. This study is outside the R4/R5 regression scope and is not fabrication-ready.

Scripts are workspace-relative development source. They depend on the accompanying workspace CAD modules; integration and a portable reproducible release package remain to be completed.