1 / 26

ILC Engineering Design Phase - Status & Plans

ILC Engineering Design Phase - Status & Plans. Mike Harrison GDE/BNL. Reference Design Report. The draft report and associated cost estimate was presented to ICFA in Beijing. 11km SC linacs operating at 31.5 MV/m for 500 GeV Centralized injector

aadi
Télécharger la présentation

ILC Engineering Design Phase - Status & Plans

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ILC Engineering Design Phase - Status & Plans Mike Harrison GDE/BNL Global Design Effort

  2. Reference Design Report The draft report and associated cost estimate was presented to ICFA in Beijing • 11km SC linacs operating at 31.5 MV/m for 500 GeV • Centralized injector • Circular damping rings for electrons and positrons • Undulator-based positron source • Single IR with 14 mrad crossing angle • Dual tunnel configuration for safety and availability Global Design Effort

  3. Reference Design Cost Estimate • The Value costs have been reviewed 3 times: • 3 day “internal review” in Dec 06 • ILCSC MAC review in Jan 07 • International Cost review in Orsay, Paris May 07 • Σ Value = 6.62 B ILC Units • The technical design has been reviewed by the MAC • Also at the DOE ART review to a certain extent • The RDR & cost estimate + associated technical reviews has been formally presented to FALC 3 days ago (Rome) and will be presented to ICFA in August (Korea - Lepton Photon conference). This will end this phase of the project. Summary RDR “Value” Costs Total Value Cost (FY07) 4.80 B ILC Units Shared + 1.82 B Units Site Specific + 14.1 K person-years (“explicit” labor = 24.0 M person-hrs @ 1,700 hrs/yr) 1 ILC Unit = $ 1 (2007) Global Design Effort

  4. ILC Engineering Design Phase • We are at an evident change point in the ILC Project. • Two years after the formal formation of the GDE, • the recent completion of the draft Reference Design Report (RDR) marks a major milestone in this global effort. • The GDE is now in the process of restructuring itself and making plans for the engineering design phase, leading to the completion of the ILC Engineering Design Report (EDR) in 2010. Global Design Effort

  5. Engineering Design phase will include: • Basic R&D to demonstrate that all components can be engineered • R&D into alternative solutions to mitigate remaining risk. • An overall design to allow machine construction to start within 3 years, • selection between high tech options must be made to allow industrialization efforts. • A comprehensive value-engineering exercise must be conducted. • A complete value cost estimate for the machine must be provided, including a funding profile consistent with the project schedule. • A project execution plan must be produced, including a realistic schedule. • Designs for facilities shared between different “area systems”, and for site-specific infrastructure. The designs must include the level of detail needed for regions to estimate the cost to host • All necessary information must be provided to regions to evaluate project technical and financial risks in support of a bid to host.

  6. High Priority – Controlling COST • fundamental  containment of the current RDR Value estimate (no cost creep). • potential cost-reduction via engineering • clearly identified in the RDR (do we really need two tunnels ?). • Together with the risk-mitigating/cost reducing prioritised R&D program n.b. the Reference design costs were reduced by ~25% from the original numbers Global Design Effort

  7. Industrialization • Second focus: increasing direct involvement of industries • Preparation for mass production • is a critical issue for key technologies, • understanding how individual countries can contribute in-kind • This must be achieved on a truly worldwide basis, • Intend to follow free-market • including seeking out and developing potential (new) industrial bases For example  India Global Design Effort

  8. RDR provides guidance • The RDR provides a design and a value estimate that is parametric in nature, • allows us to identify the cost drivers and the technical risks; • critical in prioritizing both engineering and R&D, • primary cost drivers: • SCRF linac technology • CFS, • ~70% of the ILC value estimate. • These two will be a major focus during the EDR Global Design Effort

  9. Prioritization for the EDR • Based on: • Technical risk mitigation • Cost risk mitigation • Cost reduction • Preparation • Not in the above order: • Quantitative evaluation possible based on RDR Value estimate and plan • Mechanism? • Define proposed Work Packages, • Build Work Breakdown Structure • Secure institutional/funding agency consensus Reference design risk assessment Global Design Effort

  10. Getting Started on the EDR: • Re-organize ourselves toward the EDR • Project management-based structure, • Definition, scope and resources • Examine RDR & plan EDR a starting point • Multi-day technical meetings planned • Internally controlled process • Continue the design work and technical R&D Global Design Effort

  11. EDR Objectives – Main Linac Technology: • Complete the critical R&D as identified by the R & D Board task forces. • Coordinate/monitor industrialization efforts • Identify a plan for consolidating design work • Identify ways in which the maximum benefit can be obtained from the European XFEL project • Formally launched June 5, 2007 Global Design Effort

  12. EDR Objectives: Conventional Facilities & Siting (CFS) • CF/S has been identified as an RDR cost driver; • expected to yield cost reduction through “value” engineering. • Complicated via site/regional dependencies: • Need to delineate global/generic engineering and site/region-specific engineering; • Both categories to be clearly identified in WBS. • Primary EDR Goals: • iteration of CF/S requirements with accelerator designers/engineers (‘value engineering’); • Detailed evaluation of alternative solutions (e.g. shallow site); • Prepare critical information for specific site selection / development; • Lack of an agreed-upon single site is a significant problem Global Design Effort

  13. EDR Objectives: Accelerator Systems • Define performance-driven specifications for the accelerator components and infrastructure • Iterate cost/performance trade-offs • CF/S will be a focus; • Demonstrate that the accelerator design fulfills the required performance goals in a cost-effective way; • by demonstration via critical R&D; • by simulation; • Maintain a risk register, and develop alterative fall-back solutions. Global Design Effort

  14. Restructuring the GDE • Project Management for the EDR Phase • Devised along functional lines • (instead of institutional or regional…) • Many WP’s will have strong institutional center • Relationship between Project and Institutes through a series of ‘Memoranda’ • Defines a Work Package for a given Institution • we must be extremely careful to develop and maintain inter-regional consensus/balance Global Design Effort

  15. ILC Project Management • Global focus • Role of the project managers in relation to the regional directors: • Project Managers are responsible for • Leading the worldwide technical development effort • Setting technical direction and executing the project toward realization of the ILC • Regional Directors are responsible for • Promoting, seeking funding and authorization of the international cooperative program. Global Design Effort

  16. ILC Project Managementasa proposal for the organization toward EDR V-070710 ILC Council (ILCSC) Funding Agencies and Institutions Global Design Effort Director’s Office Director: B. Barish assisted by Project Managers: M. Ross*, N. Walker, A. Yamamoto Board - Accelerator Advisory - RD sub-panel - Design & Industr. SubP. Executive Committee Director, Reg. Directors, Accelerator Experts, PMs Regional Leadership (by Regional Directors) - Funding and Authorization Technical Leadership (by Project Managers) - Engineering Design and R&D Asiay M. Nozaki US M. Harrison Europe B. Foster Tech. Sys. A. Yamamoto Global Sys. M. Ross Accel. Sysy N. Walker P. M. Officey N. Walker Many Tasks Instit. …. Institution Institution Institution Instit. …. Global Design Effort

  17. EDR Project Management Global Design Effort

  18. Managing a non-centrally funded project: • green indicates a commitment: • institute will deliver • MoUs facilitate connection: • Project Management (authority and responsibility) and institutions (funding and resources). • The ‘C’  coordinating role in a WP • Each WP has only one coordinator. technical Global Design Effort

  19. Beam Delivery System Level 3 Global Design Effort

  20. Beam Delivery System Work Packages TENTATIVE ! Global Design Effort

  21. Beam Delivery System (sub) Work Packages Structure of sub work-packages Global Design Effort

  22. Memoranda of Understanding • Until we have central funding, the GDE must continue to seek its resources indirectly via the institutes forming the collaboration. • Responsibilities for delivering a WP must be formally agreed upon between the GDE Project Management and the corresponding institute via MoU. • The institutes are then responsible for obtaining the necessary resources for the task from their funding sources (agencies). • The process by which the WPs are defined, and the allocation of institutes to carry out those WPs through MoUs, must be an open and transparent process allowing all interested parties to make a proposal to carry out the work and to understand and accept the criteria used in decision making. Global Design Effort

  23. Resources • SCRF ‘Centers of Excellence’ in each region • KEK, FNAL/ANL/JLAB, DESY • Infrastructure and key staff ready for EDR • Supports R & D and development of industry • ILC Design and Engineering expertise in each region • CERN has unique expertise in large scale civil engineering, mass production of cryogenic components and cryogenic systems Global Design Effort

  24. 2007/08 – EDR Meeting Schedule FALC ILCSC 05/07 10/07 03/08 06/08 DESY ILC2007 PM Team announcement FNAL GDE meeting Tohoku GDE meeting EDR ‘Kick Off’ Meetings EU GDE meeting (Dubna ?) EDR R & D Meetings Global Design Effort

  25. 2007/08 EDR Milestones • May – Project Managers announced: • Akira Yamamoto (KEK) • Marc Ross (Fermilab) chair • Nick Walker (DESY) • Aug. – Korea ILCSC PM submission • Aug. to Oct. – EDR Kick Off Meetings • Oct – DRAFT Work Packages / WBS • Fermilab ILC GDE meeting • Jan. to Feb. 08 – EDR R & D Meetings • March 2008 – Tohoku ILC Meeting • EDR organization in place (WBS, MoU drafts) Global Design Effort

  26. Conclusions • GDE transition from reference design phase to the engineering design phase is underway • The goal is to produce a design by 2010 which can be used for project approval, site selection and updated cost estimates. Consistent with construction start ~ 3 years later • Engineering Design phase will benefit from: • Strong, steady support from funding agencies • Institutional commitment to further develop collaborations • A commitment to unify and strengthen governance Global Design Effort

More Related