Big Science Projects - CERN · Big Science Projects - What is it that makes some a success and...

Big Science Projects What is it that makes some a success and others fail?

IPAC 2014

Dresden, 18 June 2014

James H. Yeck ESS CEO & Director General

www.europeanspallationsource.se

Personal experience with large science projects

• Compact Ignition Tokamak at Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (~0.5B) – Cancelled

• Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at Brookhaven National Lab (~0.75B) – Successful…

• US Large Hadron Collider at CERN: US “In-Kind” Project (~0.75B) – Successful

• IceCube Neutrino Observatory at the South Pole Antarctica (~0.3B) - Successful

• National Synchrotron Light Source II at Brookhaven National Lab (~1B) – Commissioning

• European Spallation Source at a new site in Lund Sweden (~2B) – To be determined

• Plus some experience with DUSEL/LBNE, LIGO, FRIB, and others

Experience from other projects: A few ingredients to success

NSLS II

Facility must be a priority of the science community!

Funding agency commitments and strong host role

Collaboration leadership enables success of others

Establish realistic goals – “Experience over hope”

Credibility through openness with transparency

Collective ownership of problems & solutions

Populate the organization with experience

Compact Ignition Tokamak at PPPL (~20% contingency)

• Lack of priority within the US plasma science community

• Declining US fusion funding required redirection of existing funding – winners

and losers

• Slow decision-making on technology choices – better enemy of good enough

• Host priority conflict between existing operating facility and new project

• Expectation that a better facility/experiment (BPX) @ 1B would be supported

• CIT cancelled, team redirected to BPX, BPX also cancelled

Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider @ BNL (~15%)

• Priority established within US nuclear physics community - long range plan

• Priority of the US funding agency, within annual funding limits

• Highest priority of host lab with generous external resources and support

• Hired key individuals and engaged NP community leadership

• Initial cost and schedule goals unrealistic, but morphed into achievable goals

• Limited scrutiny allowing work on problems in the shadow of the focus on SSC

• Completed when ground rules were changing – to deliver on initial promises!

US LHC (ATLAS, CMS, Machine) @ Labs & Universities (20% & 40%)

• Unquestioned priority within the US high energy physics community – post SSC

• Explicit internationally agreed upon annual funding profile

• Priority of host laboratory and universities – people and management support

• Highly experienced and motivated collaborations and leadership

• Maximized US deliverables within a fixed total budget

• Realistic goals including high initial contingency resulting in more deliverables

• Collective ownership in challenges and success

IceCube @ South Pole (~22% contingency)

• Academy studies confirmed priority based on new funding (NSF MREFC)

• US National Science Foundation Major Research Equipment and Facility

Construction (MREFC) funding – stable annual profile based on requirements

• Priority for NSF South Pole Station (support) and University of Wisconsin-

Madison (project and collaboration host) – resources and management

• Unique challenges due to seasonal installation - austral summer ~ 3 months

• Realistic goals - contingency resulted in more 20% more deliverables

• Collective ownership in challenges and success

8

15.0

39.5

85.7

140.1

199.4

235.3

260.8

273.6 279.2 279.5

231.6

$0M

$50M

$100M

$150M

$200M

$250M

$300M

FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12

FISCAL YEAR

DEPLOY INITIAL STRINGS & TANKS

INITIAL OPERATIONS & DATA ANALYSIS CAPABILITY

FULL SCALE DOM PRODUCTION

FULL OPERATIONS

& DATA ANALYSIS CAPABILITY

DETERMINE FULL DEPLOYMENT RATE

COMPLETE EHWD INTEGRATION & TEST

Initial In-Ice Strings & IceTop Tanks Installed Jan-2005

Initial Operational Capability Mar-2007

Project Completion & Closeout Aug-2012

Total Project Cost $279.5

Value of Foreign Contributions $37.4

NSF Funding $242.1

Remaining Contingency $0.1

Strings Installed 86

31-Aug-12Performance and Cost through:

IceCube Project Baseline (M$)

___Total Funds (US & NonUS)

___Original Budget (BCWS)

___Current Budget (BCWS) 100.00 %

___Earned Value (BCWP) 100.00 %

___Actual Cost (ACWP) 99.60 %

IceCube Performance (Funding, Plan, Actual)

9

29.5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Apr

-04

Jul-0

4

Oct

-04

Jan-0

5

Apr

-05

Jul-0

5

Oct

-05

Jan-0

6

Apr

-06

Jul-0

6

Oct

-06

Jan-0

7

Apr

-07

Jul-0

7

Oct

-07

Jan-0

8

Apr

-08

Jul-0

8

Oct

-08

Jan-0

9

Apr

-09

Jul-0

9

Oct

-09

Jan-1

0

Apr

-10

Jul-1

0

IceCube Contingency % of Remaining Work

Project Year 3

33.3%

29.5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Apr

-04

Jul-0

4

Oct

-04

Jan-0

5

Apr

-05

Jul-0

5

Oct

-05

Jan-0

6

Apr

-06

Jul-0

6

Oct

-06

Jan-0

7

Apr

-07

Jul-0

7

Oct

-07

Jan-0

8

Apr

-08

Jul-0

8

Oct

-08

Jan-0

9

Apr

-09

Jul-0

9

Oct

-09

Jan-1

0

Apr

-10

Jul-1

0


Project Year 4

Annual Planning of Estimate To Complete

33.3%

26.2%29.5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Apr

-04

Jul-0

4

Oct

-04

Jan-0

5

Apr

-05

Jul-0

5

Oct

-05

Jan-0

6

Apr

-06

Jul-0

6

Oct

-06

Jan-0

7

Apr

-07

Jul-0

7

Oct

-07

Jan-0

8

Apr

-08

Jul-0

8

Oct

-08

Jan-0

9

Apr

-09

Jul-0

9

Oct

-09

Jan-1

0

Apr

-10

Jul-1

0



Add 10 IceTop Stations & Installation Season

Project Year 5

23.6%

29.5%26.2%

33.3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Apr

-04

Jul-0

4

Oct

-04

Jan-0

5

Apr

-05

Jul-0

5

Oct

-05

Jan-0

6

Apr

-06

Jul-0

6

Oct

-06

Jan-0

7

Apr

-07

Jul-0

7

Oct

-07

Jan-0

8

Apr

-08

Jul-0

8

Oct

-08

Jan-0

9

Apr

-09

Jul-0

9

Oct

-09

Jan-1

0

Apr

-10

Jul-1

0




Instrumentation for 5 Additional Strings

Project Year 6

26.4%

33.3%

26.2%29.5%

23.6%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Apr

-04

Jul-0

4

Oct

-04

Jan-0

5

Apr

-05

Jul-0

5

Oct

-05

Jan-0

6

Apr

-06

Jul-0

6

Oct

-06

Jan-0

7

Apr

-07

Jul-0

7

Oct

-07

Jan-0

8

Apr

-08

Jul-0

8

Oct

-08

Jan-0

9

Apr

-09

Jul-0

9

Oct

-09

Jan-1

0

Apr

-10

Jul-1

0





Project Year 7

26.4%

33.3%

26.2%29.5%

33.6%

23.6%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Apr

-04

Jul-0

4

Oct

-04

Jan-0

5

Apr

-05

Jul-0

5

Oct

-05

Jan-0

6

Apr

-06

Jul-0

6

Oct

-06

Jan-0

7

Apr

-07

Jul-0

7

Oct

-07

Jan-0

8

Apr

-08

Jul-0

8

Oct

-08

Jan-0

9

Apr

-09

Jul-0

9

Oct

-09

Jan-1

0

Apr

-10

Jul-1

0





Project Year 8

PY7 & RPSC FY08 Closeout

RPSC FY11 6 Str. & PY9 Pre-Ops.

Contingency Experience Contingency % of Remaining Work

Dimensions of ESS A Next Generation Materials Research Infrastructure

SCIENCE The most powerful spallation source with the highest flux and realtime data acquisition • Life science • Soft condensed matter • Chemistry of materials • Energy research • Magnetism and superconductivity • Engineering materials and

geosciences • Archaeology and

heritage conservation • Fundamental and particle physics

SOCIETY Research directly related to societal values Opportunity to benefit from the innovation capacity of industry. Driver for job creation

PROJECT/FACILITY A partnership of 17 European nations committed to the goal of collectively building and operating the world’s leading facility for research using neutrons by the second quarter of the 21st century.

GEO SCIENCE

LIGHTNING

TAILOR MADE

MATERIAL

MEDICINE

SOLAR ENERGY

BIO FUEL

TRANSPORTS

COSMETICS

FUNCTIONAL FOOD

MOBILE PHONES

PACE- MAKERS

IMPLANTS

NEW MATERIALS

ESS - Bridging the Neutron Gap

• ESS long pulse is more powerful and 30 - 100 times brighter than existing facilities • Compliments existing short pulse neutron scattering facilities

Berkeley 37-inch cyclotron

350 mCi Ra-Be source

Chadwick

1930 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

105

1010

1015

1020

1

ISIS

Pulsed Sources

ZINP-P

ZINP-P/

KENS WNR IPNS

ILL

X-10

CP-2

Steady State Sources

HFBR

HFIR NRU MTR

NRX

CP-1

1940 1950 1960

Effe

ctiv

e th

erm

al n

eutr

on

flu

x n

/cm

2-s

(Updated from Neutron Scattering, K. Skold and D. L. Price, eds., Academic Press, 1986)

FRM-II

SINQ

SNS

Reactors

Spallation

J-PARC (1MW)

J-PARC LANSCE

OPAL

PIK

ESS long pulse potential

time (ms)

Inte

nsity (

n/c

m2/s

/ste

r/Å

)

10

5

x1013

ISIS TS1

ISIS TS2

SNS JPARC

ILL

(JPARC 1MW)

ESS

0 1 2 3

Recent improvement in ESS performance

wavelength [Å]

pea

k b

righ

tnes

s [n

/cm

2/s

/sr/

Å]

TDR Moderator

3cm Tall Moderator

Cold Thermal

Sweden and Denmark:

47,5% Construction

15% Operations

100% Cash

Partner Countries:

52,5% Construction

85% Operations

IKC/Cash ~ 70% / 30%

European science project

Road to realizing the world’s leading facility for research using neutrons

2014 Construction work starts on the site

2009 Decision: ESS will be built in Lund

2025 ESS construction complete

2003 First European design effort of ESS completed

2012 ESS Design Update phase complete

2019 First neutrons on instruments

2023 ESS starts user program

ESS transition from ESS AB to an ERIC

• ESS member countries will submit application this summer to establish a European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC) for ESS. ERIC will be in place in early 2015.

ESS transition from ESS AB to an ERIC

• ESS member countries will submit application this summer to establish a European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC) for ESS. ERIC will be in place in early 2015.

European Spallation Source Council

Preparing the project

• Deliver on the Technical Design Report performance and Steering Committee commitments

- 5 MW accelerator capability

- Construction cost of 1,843 B€

- Operations cost target of 140 M€

- 22 “public” instruments

• Start w/ unconstrained resources (technically limited schedule) and develop credible project execution plans

• Comprehensive review of project baseline and execution plans

• Secure funding and resources and align schedules with the available resources

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

ESS Program

Conventional

Facilities

Accelerator

Target

Neutron

Scattering

Systems

Integrated

Control Systems

Building

Commissioning

Concluding

Design

Design

Construction

Commissioning Design &

Prototyping Procurement

Installation

Commissioning

Design

Procurement

Installation

Commissioning

Installing

Construction

Ground Break

First installations (of Machine Systems)

First Neutrons

Machine 2.0 GeV

Accelerator, Target, Aux, Office, Lab & Instr Bldngs*

570 MeV

Instrument Selection - Decision

Design

Commissioning

Construction

Design

Development

Commissioning CS Network Operational

3 Instruments ready for Comm.

Initial Operation

Installed for 2.0 GeV

16 Instr

End Of Construction Start Of Construction

Concept

Devlopment

Licensing Preliminary Design Acccelerator Bldngs

Detailed Design Accelerator Bldngs

Earth Works

G01 Linac Tunnel G02 Klystron Bldng

Cryo Kompressor Bldng

Medium Beta Fabrication Spoke Series Procurement

High Beta Fabrication

Installation Phase 1


Innstr 16 – Cold Comm.

Innstr 16 – Constr & Inst.

Top-Level ESS Project Schedule

1st Call for User Proposals

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

ESS Program

Conventional

Facilities

Accelerator

Target

Neutron

Scattering

Systems

Integrated

Control Systems

Building

Commissioning

Concluding

Design

Design

Construction

Commissioning Design &

Prototyping Procurement

Installation

Commissioning

Design

Procurement

Installation

Commissioning

Installing

Construction

Ground Break

First installations (of Machine Systems)

First Neutrons

Machine 2.0 GeV

Accelerator, Target, Aux, Office, Lab & Instr Bldngs*

570 MeV

Instrument Selection - Decision

Design

Commissioning

Construction

Design

Development

Commissioning CS Network Operational

3 Instruments ready for Comm.

Initial Operation

Installed for 2.0 GeV

16 Instr

End Of Construction Start Of Construction

Concept

Devlopment

Licensing Preliminary Design Acccelerator Bldngs

Detailed Design Accelerator Bldngs

Earth Works

G01 Linac Tunnel G02 Klystron Bldng

Cryo Kompressor Bldng

Medium Beta Fabrication Spoke Series Procurement

High Beta Fabrication



Innstr 16 – Cold Comm.

Innstr 16 – Constr & Inst.

Top-Level ESS Project Schedule

1st Call for User Proposals

Swedish Environmental Court Verdict on June 12 Permission to Start Construction!

ESS, Max IV and Science Village near Lund

Max IV

Science Village

Lund

ESS

E22 Highway

Target station and experimental halls

Accelerator

24

€ 42

€ 109

€ 228

€ 382

€ 29

€ 47

€ 123

€ 127

€ 0

€ 100

€ 200

€ 300

€ 400

€ 500

€ 600

IKC Cash

Construction cost: € 1,84 Billion

In-kind: € 750 Million

Accelerator NSS Target ICS

65%

59%

65%

75%

€ 509 M

€ 350 M

€ 155 M

€ 71 M

ESS In-kind Goals

Ingredients to Success

• Facility is a priority of the science community!

• Funding agency commitment and clarity of roles and responsibilities

• Strong host role as an equal partner with the funding agencies

• Populate the organization with high quality people – recruit experience

• Project & Collaboration Leadership

- Makes timely decisions, seeking consensus whenever possible

- Serves as an umbrella for the team so they can focus on their jobs

- Manages expectations and communicate plans and results

• Understand the project – determine characteristics that are common to other

large projects and those that are unique

• Establish realistic project goals (experience over hope)

• Maintain credibility with stakeholders through openness and transparency

• Seek collective ownership of problems and solutions

Thank you for your attention!

Big Science Projects - CERN · Big Science Projects - What is it that makes some a success and...

Documents

Transcript of Big Science Projects - CERN · Big Science Projects - What is it that makes some a success and...