Report from GG5, Dec. 20, 2005

Report from ILC GG 5:Cost and Engineering

(Updates since Snowmass)

Wilhelm Bialowons, Peter Garbincius and Tetsuo Shidara · GDE

December 20, 2005

1

Report from GG5, Dec. 20, 2005

• Summary of GG5 Cost & EngineeringEstablishing ILC standardsCost & schedule methodologyIndustrial issues

• Update since SnowmassFirst ideas of cost and schedule methodologySuggestion for project and engineering tools

• Summary

Outline

2

Report from GG5, Dec. 20, 2005

• The GDE Cost Engineers are trying to find a practical and pragmatic way, which will be accepted by the three regions, to speed up the process to obtain the cost estimate within the next year

• We are presenting a first idea which will be further developed up to beginning of next year

• Has to be confirmed by the GDE Design and Cost Board and the Executive Committee

Introduction

3

Report from GG5, Dec. 20, 2005

• Establishing ILC internal Standards is important• Near-term actions

– Choose an EDMS system– Choose cost and schedule software– Establish an engineering standards group– Choose common engineering tools (e.g. CAD

system)– Define the cost & schedule methodology for ILC– Develop parametric models to guide the design

• Study other large international projects and LEARN !

* Presented by Robert Kephart on August 19, 2005 at Snowmass

Summary of GG5*

4

Report from GG5, Dec. 20, 2005

EDMS Systems

5

A committee of an Electronic Data Management System for ILC was initiated and we are waiting for recommendations.

A glossary of ILC terms & definitions will be created using this EDMS and this could expand with time to become the WBS dictionary.

Selection of Project Management tools might be charged to this EDMS selection team.

Report from GG5, Dec. 20, 2005

• Need to agree on a standard method for the “Basis of estimate” for the ILC project.

– Use this method to identify the “core cost” of the project– Core cost = best guess of the cost of all materials, labor, and

resources the Project will need to be built on an agreed upon schedule (50/50 that cost will be this number)

– An all inclusive estimate. “Public” with nothing hidden or assumed– Industrial costs included, but encrypted in a way that the numbers

will not be useful for “rigging” subsequent bids– No “hidden” contingency or risk management funds

• Regions can then “interpret” these numbers in the way the regional funding agencies are used to seeing

– Example: increase task prices or add contingency to manage risk– Adjust labor costs as appropriate for the region, etc.

Cost & schedule methodology

6

Report from GG5, Dec. 20, 2005

• Agreeing on how to estimate the “core” costs is not enough– To estimate the cost & schedule, we must also

have a “model” for how the project will proceed– Example: Regional funding agencies might force

production of klystrons in 3 regions (3 orders of 200 klystrons will cost more than 1 order of

– Get regional funding agencies to endorse this model early in the game (adjust as required)

Cost & schedule methodology

7

Report from GG5, Dec. 20, 2005

General MethodologyCreate Technical

Requirements Document

Develop Technical Conceptual Design

Create the WBSEstablish C/S Coordinator for each Work Package

Establish rules for C/S & define assumptions

Set up tools and format for data input

Develop the RLS and Mgm’t Docs

Estimate Cost & Schedule and

create the BOE

ReviewNo

Yes

Fund Starts

C/S = Cost & ScheduleWBS = Work Breakdown StructureBOE = Basis of EstimateRLS = Resource Loaded Schedule

Interpret this CoreCost in each Region

Report from GG5, Dec. 20, 2005

• Reliable cost estimate for the Reference Design Report (RDR) by the end of 2006

• One common estimate of the ‘value’ and labor with (not too) different cost for the four sample sites

• Definition of the ‘value’ (adopting the ITER model) – Cost estimate on the basis of a (virtual) world wide call for tender

as competition (world market price if exist)– Best price for best quality – Two vendors for same package for risk minimization– Parametric cost estimate for scaling (i.e. cost improvement)– Different parametric cost estimate for design to cost for ‘small’

changes (for large changes redo of the project)

First ideas of cost and schedule methodology

9

Report from GG5, Dec. 20, 2005

• ‘Definition of the ‘value’ (continued)– No tax is included– No escalation (fixed date i.e. January 2, 2006) – No contingency but with risk analysis– One currency (fixed exchange rates)– External labor is included in the value– Internal (institute) labor will be estimated in man years– Site dependent cost due to real reasons is taken into account (i.e.

different geology and landscape, availability of electrical power and cooling water, different cycling rate of electrical power etc.)

– Site depending cost due to formal reasons are not taken into account (International treaty above national laws)

– No intellectual property rights

First ideas of cost and schedule methodology

10

Report from GG5, Dec. 20, 2005

• Cost estimate below level 1 won’t be public• One common design (including the footprint)

– Unavoidable differences due to physical reasons – Common set of rules, codes and laws which fits

to the regional sets if the cost impact is negligible– Use of ILC standards if necessary or– Adoption after site decision with additional cost– Additional regional options are allowed (i.e. use of

existing machines or substantial cost savings)

First ideas of cost and schedule methodology

11

Report from GG5, Dec. 20, 2005

• Standard project tools– We start with SLAC WBS tool, MS Excel for (parametric)

cost estimate and MS Project for schedule– For crosscheck, structure sheets and schedule would be

published without cost numbers– Adiabatic transfer to professional tools (Cobra with

Primavera are promising), but have to be further investigated

• Standard engineering tools– One high-end 3D-CAD for the design including the civil

engineering and common models excepting the foot print– Start with different tools (DESY makes a very first layout

for an ILC twin tunnel design with IDEAS)– Adiabatic transfer to common tools

Standard project and engineering tools

12

Report from GG5, Dec. 20, 2005

WorkBreakdownStructure WBS

13

Report from GG5, Dec. 20, 2005

• First ideas of cost and schedule methodology• WBS will developed on the basis of the TDR

and US cold option study• Parametric models will be developed• Strawman baseline will be used for first round• Next steps

– More detailed design, requirements, parts list etc.– Definition of work packages– Industrial studies for cost drivers

Summary

14