GDE Report and Discussion of Costs - ligo.caltech.eduBCBAct/talks06/11-06... · 6/6/2011 ·...

11-Nov-06 ILCSC - Valencia

Global Design Effort 1

GDE Report and

Discussion of Costs

Barry BarishCaltech / GDE

6-Nov-06



Outline• Progress Since Last Mtg and Plans to RDR

– Vancouver first costing – July 06– Design Cost Optimization for RDR (Valencia)– The RDR Outline and Plans for Writing– GDE Coordination of Global R&D Program

• Proposal for 2nd Linear Collider Accelerator School

• GDE Response to MAC Report – N. Walker

• Planning for the Post RDR Period - B. Foster

• Common Fund – B. Barish



Baseline to a RDR

Jan July Dec 2006

Freeze ConfigurationOrganize for RDR

Bangalore

Review Design/Cost Methodology

Review InitialDesign / Cost Review Final

Design / CostRDR Document

Design and Costing PreliminaryRDR

Released

Frascati Vancouver Valencia



RDR Cost Estimating

• 500 GeV BCD machine + “essentials” for 1 TeV

• Follow ITER “Value” & CERN “CORE” model for International Projects– Provides basic agreed to costs [common “value”

+ in-house labor (man-hr)]

• RDR will provide information for translation into any country’s cost estimating metric, e.g. Basis of Estimate => contingency estimate, in-house labor, G&A, escalation, R&D, pre-construction, commissioning, etc.

• Assumes a 7 year construction phase



• Based on a call for world-wide tender: lowest reasonable price for required quality

• Classes of items in cost estimate:– Site-Specific (separate estimates for each site) – Conventional – global capability (single world est.)

High Tech – cavities, cryomodules, regional estimates

• Cost Engineers will determine how to combine and present multiple estimates

• WBS ; WBS Dictionary; Costing Guidelines are mature enough - cost estimating is underway

ILC Cost Estimate



WBS Level of Detail - Cryogenics

percentage of total materials cost for USLCTOS 500 GeV Cold optionthese percentages for USLCTOS are somewhat sensitive,they are listed just to give idea of level of detail that has been attained

WB_6feb_PG_8feb (Follows USLCTOS) This is what is on the web, the items 1.8.3.1.1.i1.8.3 Cryogenic Plant and Distribution were omitted. The green numbers on left are

4.08 1.8.3.1 Cryogenic Plants percentage 4.08% of total USLCTOS 500 cold M&S3.27 1.8.3.1.1 Cryo Refrigeration Unit (includes cryo distribution, but not civil utilities)

This layer was not included - consider adding this layer to increase sensitivity1.12 1.8.3.1.1.1 Cryo Cold Boxes0.68 1.8.3.1.1.2 Cryo Warm Compressor System0.12 1.8.3.1.1.3 Cryo Cold Compressor System0.11 1.8.3.1.1.4 Cryo Purification System0.13 1.8.3.1.1.5 Cryo Refrigeration System Controls0.10 1.8.3.1.1.6 Cryo Liquid Helium Storage0.17 1.8.3.1.1.7 Cryo Vertical Transfer Line0.16 1.8.3.1.1.8 Cryo Distribution Boxes 1,2,80.11 1.8.3.1.1.9 Cryo Distribution Boxes 3,6,70.16 1.8.3.1.1.10 Cryo Warm He Gas Header0.09 1.8.3.1.1.11 Cryo Vacuum Barriers0.19 1.8.3.1.1.12 Cryo System Installation Contracts0.04 1.8.3.1.1.13 Cryo Miscellaneous0.05 1.8.3.1.1.14 Cryo Feed Boxes0.04 1.8.3.1.1.15 Cryo End Boxes

0.25 1.8.3.1.2 Cryo Cooling Towers0.04 1.8.3.1.3 Cryo Warm Helium Storage0.04 1.8.3.1.4 Cryo Helium Gas (initial charge) - should this be operating, not construction?0.00 1.8.3.1.5 Cryo Vacuum Barrier0.01 1.8.3.1.6 Cryo Feed Boxes0.01 1.8.3.1.7 Cryo End Boxes0.17 1.8.3.1.8 Cryo Load Controls0.30 1.8.3.1.9 Cryo Cold Bypass (1 kilometer) - what was this? fairly pricey!

1.8.3.2 Cryogenic Distribution - actually included above 1.8.3.1.1.i - so can discard this element

%

LHC refrig. single units



Technical SystemsVacuum systemsMagnet systemsCryomoduleCavity PackageRF Power

InstrumentationDumps and CollimatorsAccelerator Physics

Global SystemsCommissioning, Operations & ReliabilityControl SystemCryogenics

Area Systems e- e+ damping RTML main BDSsource source rings linac

Cost Roll-ups



System July 18, 2006 - Cost Estimates received for Regionaldescription common e- e+ DR RTML ML BDS Exp Am Asia Eure- Source √e+ Source √DR √RTML √Main LinacBDS √Com, Op, ReliabControl System √ √ √ √ √ √ √Cryogenics √ √ √ * √ √ √ *Convent. Facilities √ √ √ √ √ √ √ * √ √ √ √Installation √ √ √ √ √ √ √Instrumentation √ √ √ √ √ √ √Cavities √ √ √Cryomodules √ √ √ √ √ √ √RF √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √Magnets & PS √ * √ *Dumps & Collim √ √ √ √ √Vacuum √ √ √ √ √ √Accel Phys

√ = complete, √ * = almost complete, missing something minor

Vancouver Cost Data



ILC Estimate by Area Systems -17july06

Main Linac DRs Beam Deliv RTML e+ Source Exp. Halls e- Source General

Costs by Area System



ILC Estimate by Technical & Global Systems - 22july06

Conventional Facilities

Dumps & Collimators

CM & Cavities

Instrumentation

RF

Vacuum

Installation

Magnets

Cryogenics

Controls

Costs by Technical & Global System



Vancouver Valencia

CostReduction

Design Scope

Component Costs

Physics ScopeNo big ticket items!

Just lots of ≤1% effects



Design Changes Under Consideration

RDR MB CCB

2×14mr IRs supported

central injectors supported

Removal of service tunnel rejectedconventional e+ source rejectedRF unit modifications (24 → 26 cav/klys) supported submittedreduced RF in DR (6 → 9mm σz) supported in prepDR race-track lattice (CFS) supported in prepreduced static cryo overhead supported in prepremoval linac RF overhead supported in prepsingle-stage bunch compressor rejectede- source: common pre-accelerator supported in prep



Vancouver Costs for BDS

• Cost drivers– CF&S– Magnet

system– Vacuum

system– Installation– Dumps &

Collimators

Total Cost

Additional costs for IR20 and IR2



2/20 mrad 14/14 mrad• Motivation

– Reduce costs• 2 mrad beam line expensive, risky, especially extraction line• Common collider hall

– Advantages• Improved radiation conditions in the extraction lines• Better performance of downstream diagnostics• Easier design and operation of extraction optics and magnets• Reduced back scattering from extraction line elements

– Disadvantages• Impact on physics (appears minor at present). • Simpler incoming beam optics

• R&D on small crossing angles will continue as alternative



Muon walls

Baseline configuration:18m and 9m walls in each beamline

Scheme of a muon wall installed in a tunnel widening which provide passage around the wall

• Purpose:– Personnel Protection: Limit

dose rates in one IR from other IR

– Physics: Reduce the muon background in the detectors



Reduced Muon Walls

• Considerations – The estimation of 0.1% beam halo population is conservative and

not supported by any simulations– The min muon wall for personnel protection is 5m– Detector can tolerate higher muon flux. – Cost of long muon spoilers is substantial, dominated by material

cost– Alternatives – muon spoilers need study

• The caverns will be built for full length walls, allowing upgrade if higher muons flux would be measured

• MDI panel accepted this change.



On-surface Detector Assembly• Vancouver WBS considered the underground halls

sized at 32m (W) x 72m (L) each to allow underground assembly of the largest considered detector.

• Conventional Facilities Schedule gives detector hall is ready for detector assembly 5 yrs from project start– If so, cannot fit our goal of “7years until first beam” and

“8years until physics run”

• Surface assembly allows to save 2-2.5 years and allows to fit into this goal– The collider hall size may be smaller (~40-50%) in this

case – A building on surface is needed, but savings may be still

substantial

• Optimization needs to be done



CMS assembly approach• Assembled on the surface in parallel with underground work• Allows pre-commissioning before lowering• Lowering using dedicated heavy lifting equipment• Potential for big time saving• Reduce size of underground hall required

On-surface assembly



MDI Related Design Changes• Some cost / performance design changes would affect

physics performance or reach. We are trying to pick items without major impact or are reversible changes– Energy reach: maintain 500 GeV (but redefine performance

at that energy)– Peak Luminosity; (reduce for initial running; but,

upgradeable)– Two detectors preserved, but one beam line + push-pull

• These are being fully discussed and coordinated with the Physics Community– MDI Panel; WWS; Physics Parameter Group



Cost details of new 14/14 baseline

Total cost

1.000

0.368 0.316 0.316

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Total Common add for IR A add for IR B

a.u.

Updates from CF&SMagnets to be included

Should we go to a single IR and push

pull system and save 30% of BCD costs?



Push-Pull Evaluation

• Initiated by GDE & WWS at the end of September• Detailed list of questions to be studied developed:

• Large group of accelerator and detector colleagues, from ILC and other projects, is participating in design and discussion of these question

• The task force of detector experts was formed to contribute to detailed evaluation of the whole set of technical issues

http://www-project.slac.stanford.edu/ilc/acceldev/beamdelivery/rdr/docs/push-pull/

http://www-project.slac.stanford.edu/ilc/acceldev/beamdelivery/rdr/docs/push-pull/



Reduced # BunchesImpact of ILC operation with a reduced number of bunches

IntroductionAs a possible cost reduction option, a proposal to operate with half the number of bunches (approximately 1330 bunches) over the same train length (one ms) is being considered. Because of a factor of two reduction in the size of the RF system, this modification will result in a net savings of 2-3% of the total project cost. Although the peak luminosity of the machine will be reduced by a factor of two, a relatively straightforward upgrade of the RF system can fully restore the machine’s luminosity performance to that of the current baseline.



Luminosity Model – ½ RF ScenarioFull rf systemyear peak L avail % peak lum/yr int lum

1 2.00E+33 10% 80% 3.57E+39 3.57E+392 6.00E+33 30% 80% 3.22E+40 3.57E+403 1.30E+34 70% 80% 1.63E+41 1.98E+414 2.00E+34 80% 80% 2.86E+41 4.84E+41

Half rf systemyear peak L avail % peak lum/yr int lum

1 2.00E+33 10% 80% 3.57E+39 3.57E+392 6.00E+33 30% 80% 3.22E+40 3.57E+403 1.00E+34 70% 80% 1.25E+41 1.61E+414 1.10E+34 80% 80% 1.57E+41 3.18E+415 1.20E+34 80% 80% 1.72E+41 4.90E+41



Change to Central Damping Rings



Cost Reductions Found (unvetted)

0.35% e- source: elim 1 NC beam, lasers to surface0.14% e+ source: < # correctors, BPM, 2nd target sta.0.20% RF: fast ACD charging PS for modulators1.21% Controls: Front End electronics, cable plant, ATCA,

network infrastructure, LLRF changes 1.80% Installation (in contract labor) new basis of est:

scale time & motion to task, bottom-up est.0.91% PS engineering optimization0.29% Cold Vacuum: remove fast acting valves and4.91% total 15/16 of Turbo Molecular Pumps



On Tuesday, Tetsuo showed:

Our efforts at Valencia identified another 4.91%!

05

10152025

initial

BDS 14/ 1

4 + m

uon

1 e+ r

ingML R

FDR 9m

m +e+

sourc

eRTML

CF&S Shaf

ts+

Centra

rized

DRBDS 1I

RCoo

ling+M

iscEne

rgy?

Lumino

sity?

%

Accumulated Cost Savings Each Cost Savings



Plans until Beijing (Feb. '07)November December January February

Valencia

Further cost consolidationCCR preparation & submissionCost & Design Freeze 30/11

Prepare for Full Cost Review

SLAC Cost Review 14-16/12

MAC 10-12/01/07

Final cost corrections and documentation

Agency cost briefings

Beijing: RDR draft publishedRDR final editing

RDR prepare 1st drafts

2006 2007



ILC Documents• Several reports for different audiences

• Brochure – non-technical audiences, ready now• “Quantum Universe” level booklet ~30 pages

• Executive Summary ~ 30 pages • Physics motivation, accelerator and detectors

• RDR Report ~ 300 pages• high level description of the accelerator

• DCR Report ~ 250 pages• physics and detectors

•



RDR Report

• RDR is a high level description of the accelerator, CFS, sites and costs

• A snapshot of what we propose to build– not a history of R&D, design evolution, and alternatives

• Editors: – Nan Phinney (SLAC), Nobu Toge (KEK), Nick Walker

(DESY)

• Original schedule was complete draft now, but has been pushed back because of cost iterations



The ‘S’ R&D Task Forces

S0High-Gradient Cavities

S1High-Gradient Cryomodule

S2Test Linac

S3Damping Ring

S4Beam Delivery

S5…Sn

To address priority R&D items, RDB has convened several ‘task forces’.

S0-S3 will report on Friday AM GDE plenary



The ‘S’ R&D Task Forces

• Addresses current ‘poor’ yield for EP cavities

• Primary goal: establish parameters for routinely producing 35 MV/m EP’d cavities– required ≥ 80% yield

S0High-Gradient Cavities

S1High-Gradient Cryomodule

S2Test Linac

S3Damping Ring

S4Beam Delivery

S5…SnH. Hayano, T. Higo, L. Lilje, J. Mammosser, H. Padamsee, M. Ross, K. Saito



What Happens after Beijing?

• Public Release of Draft RDR and Preliminary Costing at Beijing– Cost Reviews, etc– Finalize RDR by Summer 2007?

• Enter into Engineering Design Phase– Planning underway internally– Design will evolve through value engineering

and R&D program– General Goal is to have Construction Proposal

ready by 2010



Proposal of the 2nd International LC Accelerator School in 2007

• First LC School held May 19-27, 2006, in Sokendai, Japan -- A big success!

• Our proposal:– to hold a second topical LC school similar to

the first school– solicit advisory help from USPAS and CAS– tentative location and time is Erice,

September-October, 2007



Summary• Status of Costing

– First costing available at Vancouver (July)– Cost to performance optimization

• Component level cost reduction (requirements) • Machine design changes• Changes effecting physics performance

• Status & Plans for design modifications– Several proposals accepted and some rejected– Changes having physics impact (Valencia)– Complete RDR by Beijing Meetings

• Global planning for critical R&D beginning– Formation of ‘S’ task forces



Final Comments

• Discussion Items (RDR)– The MAC Review in January? Preview of RDR

and Costs or list of items?– Informing ILCSC (Feb 4?) – Informing FALC ?– Strategy for Release – ICFA Feb

• How are we going to approach getting candidate sites? Who solicits?

GDE Report and Discussion of Costs - ligo.caltech.eduBCBAct/talks06/11-06... · 6/6/2011 ·...

Documents

Transcript of GDE Report and Discussion of Costs - ligo.caltech.eduBCBAct/talks06/11-06... · 6/6/2011 ·...