1 / 17

CLIC RF structure development meeting Structure cost study (introduction)

CLIC RF structure development meeting Structure cost study (introduction). G. Riddone, 18.08.2010 . Content. Introduction and method Learning curves Manufacturing flow Parameters affecting the cost Some comparative numbers Cost study in industries. Introduction. Accelerating structures

malaya
Télécharger la présentation

CLIC RF structure development meeting Structure cost study (introduction)

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. CLIC RF structure development meetingStructure cost study (introduction) G. Riddone, 18.08.2010

  2. Content Introduction and method Learning curves Manufacturing flow Parameters affecting the cost Some comparative numbers Cost study in industries

  3. Introduction Accelerating structures • Two cases are considered: • Accelerating superstructures in quadrants • Accelerating superstructures in disks • For both cases: • Sealed structures • Diffusion bonding at ~1000 ˚C under hydrogen • 3 production lines PETS • Octants and mini tank concept • 3 production lines

  4. Method Definition of the manufacturing flow Identification of the main steps Prototype cost based on current design Usually cost of the first third/fourfh unit Calculation of cumulative cost Application of learning curves Calculation of average unit cost

  5. Learning curve - Theory • T.P. Wright, Factors affecting the cost of airplanes, Journ. Aero. Sci. (1936) • Unit cost c(n) of nth unit produced with a = « learning percentage », i.e. remaining cost fraction when production isdoubled • Cumulative cost of first nth units with C(n)/n = average unit cost of first nth units produced • n = number per production line ≠ total number in project We have to define c(1) and a

  6. Learning percentage Typical learning percentage values (NASA Learning Curve Calculator)

  7. Learning percentage

  8. Assumptions: 1 as = 30 disks Bonding of superstructures (2 as) Accelerating structures DISKS (142812) 1. Raw material a:1 2. Machining 4284360 disks (including HOM, manifolds), QC and cleaning Sequence a: 0.93 3. Assembly and brazing 285624 couplers 8 couplers /cycle [35703 cycles] a: 0.85 Alignment and bonding 71406 disk stacks 4 ss/cycle [17852 cycles] a: 0.85 5. Final bonding and assembly (HOM, manifolds), incl. RF check - 71406ss a: 0.85 4 ss/cycle [17852 cycles] a: 0.9 6. Baking 71406ss 4 ss/cycle [17852 cycles]

  9. Assumptions: 1 as = 4 quadrants Bonding of superstructures (2 as) Accelerating structures QUADRANTS (142812) 1. Raw material a:1 Sequence 2. Machining 285624 quadrants (including HOM, manifolds), QC and cleaning a: 0.93 4. Alignment and bonding 71406 structures 4 ss/cycle [17852 cycles] a: 0.85 5. Final bonding and assembly (HOM, manifolds), incl. RF check - 71406ss a: 0.85 4 ss/cycle [17852 cycles] a: 0.9 6. Baking 71406ss 4 ss/cycle [17852 cycles]

  10. Assumptions: 1 PETS: 8 bars, 1 coupler Mini-tank concept PETS (71406) 1. Raw material a:1 2. Machining 571248 bars (including HOM), QC and cleaning Sequence a: 0.92 3. Machining 71406minitanks, QC and cleaning a: 0.92 4. Machining 71406 couplers, QC and cleaning a: 0.92 5. Brazing 71406 couplers a: 0.85 8 couplers/cycle [8926 cycles] 6. Final bonding and assembly (HOM, minitanks), incl. RF check - 71406 a: 0.85 a: 0.9 7. Baking 71406 8 ss/cycle [8926 cycles]

  11. Some parameters affecting the total cost Choice of learning factor (+++) Saturation value: value above which learning stops, no average cost reduction (negligible) Number of production lines (+)

  12. Learning factor CLIC

  13. Saturation Examples [a= 0.9]: Sat 0.8  learning process stops after 80 % of the production Cumulative cost increase 0.31 % Sat 0.5  learning process stops after 50 % of the production Cumulative cost increase 2.7 % For CLIC RF structure quantities

  14. Influence of production lines Examples [a = 0.9]: Cost increase of 18% from 1to 3 production lines (no saturation)

  15. RF structure cost

  16. Two beam module cost The highest contribution! BREAKDOWN RF system: 65 % Alignment system: 10 % Supporting system: 6 % Magnet system: 5 % Beam instrumentation: 5% Magnet powering system: 3% Vacuum system: 2.5 % Other systems: 3.5 %

  17. Industrialization and mass production study • Launched industrialization and mass production studies in 3 industries/institutes: • VDL • KERN • VTT/HIP • CLIC structures, with HOM damping material, vacuum material,…. • Cost study will include both capital and running cost (CERN cost study only running cost) • Study currently under way. • Analysis of the preliminary results confirm tendency of CERN cost study

More Related