Project Overview Ron Strykowsky Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory NSTX Upgrade Project Office of...

Project OverviewProject Overview

Ron StrykowskyPrinceton Plasma Physics Laboratory

NSTX Upgrade ProjectOffice of Science Review

LSB B318February 4th, 2014

NSTX-UNSTX-U Supported by

Culham Sci CtrYork U

Chubu UFukui U

Hiroshima UHyogo UKyoto U

Kyushu UKyushu Tokai U

NIFSNiigata UU Tokyo

JAEAInst for Nucl Res, Kiev

Ioffe InstTRINITI

Chonbuk Natl UNFRI

KAISTPOSTECH

Seoul Natl UASIPP

CIEMATFOM Inst DIFFER

ENEA, FrascatiCEA, Cadarache

IPP, JülichIPP, Garching

ASCR, Czech Rep

Coll of Wm & MaryColumbia UCompXGeneral AtomicsFIUINLJohns Hopkins ULANLLLNLLodestarMITLehigh UNova PhotonicsOld DominionORNLPPPLPrinceton UPurdue USNLThink Tank, Inc.UC DavisUC IrvineUCLAUCSDU ColoradoU IllinoisU MarylandU RochesterU TennesseeU TulsaU WashingtonU WisconsinX Science LLC

NSTX-UNSTX-U NSTX Upgrade Project – Office of Science Review – February 4th 2014 2

Agenda

8:30 AM - 8:50 AM Executive session / Federal Project Director - Tony Indelicato

8:50 AM - 9:20 AM Project Overview — Ron Strykowsky

9:20 AM - 10:05 AM NSTX Centerstack Fabrication — Jim Chrzanowski

10:05 AM - 10:20 AM Break

10:20 AM - 11:20 AM Tour Centerstack Fabrication Area - Jim Chzanowski

11:20 AM - 2:15 PM Follow-up and report writing (includes lunch for committee)

2:15 PM - 2:45 PM Debrief

2:45 PM - 3:00 PM Closeout Presentation

3:00 PM Adjourn


Contents

• Progress;

– Continued good Technical progress to date

• Performance metrics, Cost, Schedule, Budget, Risks;

– On cost and schedule

• Charge Questions;

– Responsive and complete.


Good progress on NB, Construction and DCPS since the last review

Neutral Beam DI piping contract completed and tested.

Neutral Beam cabling contract completed.

Neutral Beam Armor being installed

VV feet installation complete.

PF 4/5 support installation complete (exc bay B & L)

Torquing of the upper outer TF support weldments to their final torque levels has been completed

The installation of the MPTS vacuum interfaces has been completed and they have passed leak check

Casing relocated to NSTX high bay for completion of stud installation.

Diagnostics incl racks and cabling re-installation underway

New milling machine purchased and installed at D-site to facilitate fit-ups and installation of hardware.

DCPS; Autotester software ready, MSDplus server funtional, realtime logging tested. On target for May 2014 completion and support of FCPC testing.


Good progress on the centerstack since the last review

Aqua pour process underway COMPLETE

OH Winding station and taping systems commissioned

OH winding to begin in UNDERWAY. 1st of 4 layers wound.

Final assembly and delivery to the NSTX Test Cell in JUNE 2014

PFC Tiles machined.

PFC Magnetic diagnostics being installed.

CS pedestal delivered and ready for installation.

Inner TF lead extension awarded.

PF1b coil delivered.

Bus bar design completed with fabrication underway


• Cost – CPI = 0.98 (n/c)

• Schedule– SPI = 0.94 (0.97 last review) (as measured against Sept 2014 early finish)

– Total float = 10 1/2 months to late finish CD-4 (n/c)

• Completion– Forecast = November, 2014 (n/c)

– CD-4 DOE Milestone (Late Finish) = September 2015

• BAC =$86.8 EAC= $89.3 TPC =94.3M

– Last Review; BAC =$85.0 EAC= $87.6

• Cost to date = $71.2 M 80% complete (through December)

– Last Review ; Cost to date = $63.4 M 72% complete (through August)

• Free balance contingency 33%-28%

– Last Review; Free balance contingency 30%-28% Free balance = $5.7M - $5.1M

• Outstanding Risk (rev 24 ) = $3.3M

– Last Review = $3.8M (rev 22)

Good Performance Maintained


CD-4 SEPT 30 2015

CD-4 SEPT 30 2015

Forecast November 2014

Forecast November 2014

CD-3 Dec 2011CD-3 Dec 2011

Schedule on track for early finish • Critical path continues to be the centerstack fabrication and installation• Keys to meeting schedule• Vendor vetting and oversight • Timely receipt inspection• Overtime• Multiple shifts• Scheduling workshops• Improve efficiency through anticipation• Collaborations with NML (report

available)

• 10 1/2 months float remain

• Critical path continues to be the centerstack fabrication and installation• Keys to meeting schedule• Vendor vetting and oversight • Timely receipt inspection• Overtime• Multiple shifts• Scheduling workshops• Improve efficiency through anticipation• Collaborations with NML (report

available)

• 10 1/2 months float remain

Deliver CS to Test Cell JUNE 2014Deliver CS to Test Cell JUNE 2014


NSTX Upgrade – Milestones on track

Level MilestoneDOE

Commitment Date

Forecast Actual

Level I Receive CD-2 Approval Jan-11 Dec-10Level II Project FDR Jun-11 Jun-11Level I Receive CD-3 Approval Jan-12 Dec-11Level II Receive First Delivery Machined Inner Tf Conductor Jun-12 Apr-12Level II Nstx Complete Operations Jul-12 Sep-11Level II Begin Upgrade Outage Aug-12 Sep-11Level II Award Neutral Beam (NB) Vessel Cap Jun-13 Feb-11Level II Begin Inner Tf Quadrant Fab (Apply Turn Insul #1 Apr-13 Jun-12Level II Complete Assy and Pot Of 4th Inner TF Quadrant Oct-13 Jun-13Level II Complete Fabricate & Test Inner TF/OH Coil Assy Jun-14 May-14Level II NB Cap Installed Oct-14 Jan-13

Deliver Center Stack to the NSTX TC Jun-14Level II Lift In New Centerstack Jan-15 Jul-14Level II Complete ISTP Aug-15 Nov-14Level II Resume Operations Sep-15 Nov-14Level I CD-4 Sep-15 Nov-14


Detail Schedule Analysis - Startup of OH winding

Commissioning of winding station took 14 weeks longer than planned. While it was not on the critical path it soon became critical and delayed the start of winding by approx 26 work days (approx 5.2 weeks)

Since the start of winding, tasks have progressed as planned. (22 days planned vs 21 days actual )


Utilized more 2 shift ops reducing schedule by10 work days

Detail Schedule Analysis – VPI & post VPI tasks


Utilized 2 shift ops reducing schedule by14 work days

Detail Schedule Analysis – Installation and CD-4


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Jun-

2010

Jul-2

010

Aug

-201

0Se

pt-2

010

Oct

-201

0N

ov-2

010

Dec

-201

0Ja

n-20

11Fe

b-20

11M

ar-2

011

Apr

-201

1M

ay-2

011

Jun-

2011

Jul-2

011

Aug

-201

1Se

pt-2

011

Oct

-201

1N

ov-2

011

Dec

-201

1Ja

n-20

12Fe

b-20

12M

ar-2

012

Apr

-201

2M

ay-2

012

Jun-

2012

Jul-2

012

Aug

-201

2Se

pt-2

012

Oct

-201

2N

ov-2

012

Dec

-201

2Ja

n-20

13Fe

b-20

13M

ar-2

013

Apr

-201

3M

ay-2

013

Jun-

2013

Jul-2

013

Aug

-201

3Se

pt-2

013

Oct

-201

3N

ov-2

013

Dec

-201

3Ja

n-20

14Fe

b-20

14M

ar-2

014

Apr

-201

4M

ay-2

014

Jun-

2014

Jul-2

014

Aug

-201

4Se

pt-2

014

Oct

-201

4N

ov-2

014

Technician labor

Labor on track

• Some leveling of field construction task required• On site electrical subcontractors to augment PPPL staff

• Some leveling of field construction task required• On site electrical subcontractors to augment PPPL staff


Risks

13

Retirement Date

OH/TF VPI $1,400k April 2014 (cost of rebuilding twice)

Inner TF bundle fab $325k Oct 2013

Serious injury stand-down $188k CD-4

Late vendor delivery on critical path $250k April 2014

I&C add’l capacity $300k June 2014

Diagnostic re-installation $294k April 2014

Hardware fit up issues $347 $477k Sept 2014

Mgmt direct allocations $216k April 2014

Critical skill lost $188k Sept 2014

Other $105k $155k June 2014

Total open $3,288k $3,793 k

Risk Events

• ~$505K net risk retired since last review• ~$505K net risk retired since last review


“What-if scenarios” bound the cost & schedule risk

14

Current BAC

Current EAC

1B2B

4

2C

3

2A

CD-4

3A

$86,000$86,500$87,000$87,500$88,000$88,500$89,000$89,500$90,000$90,500$91,000$91,500$92,000$92,500$93,000$93,500$94,000$94,500

10/1

/14

10/1

6/14

10/3

1/14

11/1

5/14

11/3

0/14

12/1

6/14

12/3

1/14

1/15

/15

1/30

/15

2/14

/15

3/2/

15

3/17

/15

4/1/

15

4/16

/15

5/1/

15

5/17

/15

6/1/

15

6/16

/15

7/1/

15

7/16

/15

8/1/

15

8/16

/15

8/31

/15

9/15

/15

9/30

/15

CD-4 Forecast

Schedule & Costing Scenarios

Monte carlo risk analysis @ 0%-100% probability. Criticalpath durations 90%-140%


Charge question #11. Critical Path Construction Efforts:

a) Does the Project team have a realistic, executable schedule for Center Stack (CS) remaining construction efforts?

b) Does the project have adequate resources and the appropriate skills mix to execute the remainder of the project per the plan?

• After initial startup issues with the OH winder, tasks have been progressing on schedule.

• Utilization of additional 2 shift operations have prevented schedule slip.

• Use of Saturdays still available to advance schedule and/or buffer against future delays.

• Overall the current staff levels on-board are adequate to execute the project schedule. Additional electrical labor will be augmented by our on-site BOA. Critical skills (i.e. welders, crane operators, machinists) work priorities managed via the Work Control Center (daily morning meetings.


Charge question #2

2. Baseline Cost and Schedule: a)Are the current project cost and schedule projections consistent with the approved baseline cost and schedule? b)Is the contingency remaining adequate for the risks that remain?

•The project is 10 1/2 months ahead of our CD-4 milestone.

•Reasonable contingency remains to complete the project. This conclusion is based monthly updates of our EAC’s as well as several schedule/cost “what-if” exercises.

•$505K net reduction in risks identified.

•Project schedule contingency is 10 1/2 months, cost contingency range is 33%-28% (ref 26.6% baselined at CD-2 )

•The project is 80% complete compared to 72% at the last review.


Charge question #33. Management: Evaluate the management structure as to its adequacy to deliver the scope within budget and schedule. a) Are risks being actively managed? b)Has the project responded satisfactorily to the recommendations from the previous project reviews?

•The key management personnel required to deliver the baseline are still in place within the project organization. This includes DOE Federal Project Director and senior laboratory leadership.

•The project has reacted effectively to resolve technical issues that have arisen.

•Communication amongst the project team, senior PPPL management and DOE has provided transparency into all aspects of the project.

•Project risk identified in our updated risk registry. Mitigation plans being implemented (e.g. coordination meetings, procedures, training, mockups, R&D, trials).

•Previous review recommendations reconciled - see next slide


Charge question #3 continued

3-b. Previous review recommendations:

1.Identify lower risk CS tasks that can be performed by additional personnel or off-shift to gain schedule contingency.

• Continually being evaluated i.e., Casing moved to D-site to facilitate field crews support.

2.Generate an interim milestone for DCPS for earlier commissioning of a reduced scope system able to support all system testing and initial machine operation.

• Simple over-current calculations developed.• Interim milestones being tracked toward a May 2014 completion date.

3.Include schedule contingency impacts in the ECP forms for the future ECPs.

• Implemented in the ECP log for impacts to the critical path.

4.The EAC calculation should include items and activities that are likely to occur.

• Concur and included


Charge question #3 continued

3-b. Previous review recommendations:

5. Ensure risk register is updated and maintained • Concur and updated twice since the last review. Changes are color

coded.

6. Evaluate a broader range of likely project outcomes to better understand and communicate with DOE the limits of cost and schedule contingencies to ensure project success by November 1, 2013.

• Completed and transmitted to DOE October 2013. Updated January 2014. (ref slide 14)

7. Work with the Site Office and program develop a focused “end game plan” to monitor and communicate critical project activities to better ensure project success by November 1, 2013.

• Detail critical path schedule updated, track, and posted weekly (ref slides 9-11)

• Weekly “rollover” meetings review all tasks for CD-4 and start-up.

8. Action Item; Site Office to schedule a status review in mid-January 2014.

• Completed February 4th, 2014


Summary

• Project personnel have maintained a safe working environment.

• The project continues to make good technical progress.

• The project is on schedule and cost with adequate contingency to finish.

• The project is sufficiently staffed to meet schedule.

• The project is on track for meeting CD-2 baseline within OFES budgetary guidance.

• Project personnel have maintained a safe working environment.

• The project continues to make good technical progress.

• The project is on schedule and cost with adequate contingency to finish.

• The project is sufficiently staffed to meet schedule.

• The project is on track for meeting CD-2 baseline within OFES budgetary guidance.

Project Overview Ron Strykowsky Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory NSTX Upgrade Project Office of...

Documents

Transcript of Project Overview Ron Strykowsky Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory NSTX Upgrade Project Office of...