GLAST Large Area Telescope: LAT Face to Face

advertisement
GLAST LAT Project
Gamma-ray Large
Area Space
Telescope
LAT Face to Face, July 17-18, 2003
GLAST Large Area Telescope:
LAT Face to Face
July 17-18, 2003
Lowell A. Klaisner
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Klaisner@slac.stanford.edu
650-926-2726
1
GLAST LAT Project
LAT Face to Face, July 17-18, 2003
Outline for this meeting
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Report on the JOG meeting and the rebaselining process
Get input on how we can be more effective in executing the project
Review the Strawman schedule
– Identify conflicts
– Identify plan to closure (by DOE review 7/31)
Initial discussions of how to meet the funding profile
Subsystem milestones for the next 3 months
Interdependencies
– TEM & TEMPS integration with CAL modules
– DAQ EGSE for subsystem testing
Subsystem reports
Business
– Combining monthly meetings
– Improving communications
Capture Action Items
2
GLAST LAT Project
LAT Face to Face, July 17-18, 2003
Overview
• Motivation for reviewing cost and schedule
– CNES in France deciding to not fund LAT work
– Completion of CDR/CD-3
• Design has reached a level of maturity
• Construction of flight hardware beginning
• Outcome
– LAT program needs an additional $17.2 M
– Fabrication Phase needs an additional $11.8 M
– Operating and commissioning needs an additional $5.5 M
• Primary open issue is the time phasing of the available funds
– Additional needs for the fabrication phase in FY04 = $7.6 M
– Additional funding for the fabrication phase in FY04
• NASA $3.0 million
• DOE $0.0 million
3
GLAST LAT Project
LAT Face to Face, July 17-18, 2003
Additional Costs to GLAST Mission
Additional Costs
Fabricate CDEs using US funds
Tracker EM overruns
ACD overruns
Electronics Manufacturing costs
Mechanical Design / Fab
Schedule Delay
Increase to Contingency
Total Added Costs
FY03
FY04
$2.1
$0.5
$2.1
$1.0
$0.9
$0.8
$2.0
$1.0
$0.7
$1.7
$1.7
$2.7
$8.5
$3.4
$2.7
$2.6
FY05
FY06
Total
$4.2
$1.5
$0.9
$0.8
$2.0
$5.4
$2.4
$17.2
All values in millions of dollars
4
GLAST LAT Project
LAT Face to Face, July 17-18, 2003
Costs that are not fabrication costs
FY03
FY04
FY05
FY06
Total
$1.0
$2.7
$3.7
Recognize LAT environmental test
as commissioning activity
Recognize IOC Operating Costs are
not part of fabrication
$0.2
$1.0
$0.6
Total non-fabrication costs
$0.2
$1.0
$1.6
$1.8
$2.7
$5.5
Note: These reductions represent an equivalent increase commission/operating costs
5
GLAST LAT Project
LAT Face to Face, July 17-18, 2003
Definition of CD-4
Definition of CD-4
Background: When the instrument is completed and functionally tested there is a preenvironmental test review. Then the instrument is shipped from SLAC to a test facility
for environmental testing. That is followed by a pre-shipment review, and the instrument
is sent to the observatory integrator for integration.
Proposal: Presently, CD-4 is defined by successful completion of the pre-shipment
review. Using the successful completion of the pre-environmental review is more
consistent with present practice on DOE projects. (The instrument will be complete and
will meet the functional requirements at that point.).
The effect is that the support of the instrument during the environmental test will be in
the commissioning phase, similar to the commissioning of other DOE high energy
physics detectors.
Therefore, the proposal is to define the successful completion of the pre-environmental
review as meeting the requirements for CD-4.
6
GLAST LAT Project
LAT Face to Face, July 17-18, 2003
Definition of the IOC
Definition of the Instrument Operation Center
Background: The standard practice with DOE high energy physics detectors is that the
operations center for the detector is developed by the scientific collaboration and not
included with the construction of the detector.
The difference with the LAT project is that the data is gathered remotely, on-orbit, and
passed through a Mission Operation Center to the IOC. This requires a level of
coordination of requirements and interfaces with the mission resources that is not
required with local accelerator based detectors.
Proposal: At present, the IOC is included in the construction project. It should be
implemented by the science collaboration to be consistent with current practice and to
take advantage of the resources in that group.
Nonetheless, in the case of the LAT, there is a coordination effort required within the
project. An IOC subsystem manager within the project is needed to provide this interface
between the IOC, the instrument management and the mission management.
The proposal is to include the IOC manager in the management structure of the
instrument and he/she is funded by the construction project. The remainder of the costs
will be funded by SLAC operating funds and collaboration resources
7
GLAST LAT Project
LAT Face to Face, July 17-18, 2003
Net Change to the Fabrication Phase
Total Added Costs
Total non-fabrication costs
Net change to the Fab Phase
FY03
$2.6
-$0.2
FY04
$8.5
-$1.0
FY05
$3.4
-$1.6
FY06
$2.7
-$2.7
Total
$17.2
-$5.5
$2.4
$7.6
$1.8
$0.0
$11.8
8
GLAST LAT Project
LAT Face to Face, July 17-18, 2003
Funding Guidance
Funding guidance for the LAT Project
NASA increased Fab funding
NASA increase to commission
DOE increased Fab funding
DOE increase to operating/commission
FY03
FY04
FY05
$1.8
$3.0
$0.1
$0.2
$0.0
$1.0
$2.0
$0.5
$4.9
$1.1
$2.1
$4.0
Total NASA Contribution
Total DOE Contribution
$1.8
$0.3
New Funding for the Fab Phase
Net change to the Fab Phase
Available Fab phase funding
Total Funding
Shortfall
FY06
Total
$1.4
$6.8
$1.9
$5.0
$3.6
$8.4
$2.7
$17.2
$3.0
$1.0
$2.5
$6.0
$1.4
$1.4
$8.6
$8.6
$2.4
$1.9
$7.6
$3.0
$1.8
$6.8
$0.0
$0.0
$11.8
$11.8
$0.5
$4.6
-$5.0
$0.0
$0.0
$1.4
9
GLAST LAT Project
LAT Face to Face, July 17-18, 2003
Total Fabrication Phase Cost and Funding
Previous
$35.4
$37.6
$2.2
FY03
$35.1
$33.5
-$1.6
FY04
$24.6
$31.0
$6.4
26.0%
FY05
$12.8
$19.6
$6.8
53.1%
Total
$107.9
$121.7
$13.8
New Fab Phase Cost
New Fab Phase Funding
New Fab Contingency
Contingency as % of this years cost
$35.4
$37.6
$2.2
$37.5
$35.9
-$1.6
$31.5
$38.6
$7.1
22.6%
$12.9
$21.4
$8.5
65.9%
$117.3
$133.5
$16.2
Baseline cost at risk*
Contingency as percent fo cost at risk
$54.3
25%
New cost at risk*
Contingency as percent fo cost at risk
$63.7
25%
Baseline Fab Phase Cost
Baseline Fab Phase Funding
Baseline Fab Contingency
Contingency as % of this years cost
*Cost at Risk = Estimated cost to compete minus EPO costs
Note: with the $4.6M shortfall in FY04 the available contingency is $2.5M or 8%
10
GLAST LAT Project
LAT Face to Face, July 17-18, 2003
Stanford University Loan
• Stanford University is willing to loan the project $700K to
bridge from FY 04 into FY 03
– The need for additional funds in FY 03 has decreased
• The mission office at Goddard has helped with ’03
• The proposed change to IOC funding reduces FY 03
fabrication phase costs by $200K
• This loan would only make the FY 04 cash flow problem
worse
• The project proposes to not exercise this loan in FY 03
– It may be possible to negotiate as similar loan for ~$1
million to bridge from FY 05 into FY 04
11
GLAST LAT Project
LAT Face to Face, July 17-18, 2003
Descope Options to Preserve Schedule
LAT and Mission designs are highly optimized. All identified descopes that
are effective are also painful. Most options address potential schedule slips.
 Previously moved beam test from before I&T to Comm. Phase
oTier 1
 Reprogram I&T prep and assembly of first towers
 Reprogram calibration modules for beam testing to be last modules
fabricated – add 2 weeks float
 Move environmental testing to Spectrum Astro
o Tier 2
 Build 16 modules, Fly 14 (Baseline -- Build 18 modules, Fly 16)
 Science impact: degradation of Aeff and FOV
o Tier 3
 Build 14 modules, Fly 12
 Science impact: Significant degradation of Aeff and FOV (below
level-1 requirements)
12
GLAST LAT Project
LAT Face to Face, July 17-18, 2003
Summary
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project is starting fabrication of flight hardware
– Completed the CD-3/CDR
The instrument design is mature
A review of cost and schedule indicates that the project needs $17.2M
increase in funding to have adequate cost contingency
Also the project needs an additional 3 months of schedule to have
adequate schedule contingency
Define CD-4 as the successful completion of the pre-test review
– The Fabrication Phase needs a $11.7M increase
– CD-4 date is unchanged
Some reorganization of the LAT to better address this next phase
Increased participation by the NASA, DOE and Laboratory
management to assure resources are available
The open issue is the time phasing of the funding
– Funding needs to be moved from FY05 to FY04 OR
– The work needs to be reprogrammed to move activities from FY04
to FY05 With a $1 M loan from SU, $3.6 M of work needs to move
DOE Rebaseline review on July 31, 2003
13
GLAST LAT Project
LAT Face to Face, July 17-18, 2003
Feedback
• Get input on how we can be more effective in executing the
project
14
GLAST LAT Project
LAT Face to Face, July 17-18, 2003
LAT Working Schedule
Available:
GRID 4/29 /04
Available:
TKR A/B 4/15 /04
CAL A/B 5/20/04
Complete
CAL 1-14
22 wk
Available:
TKR 13/14 10/28/04
CAL 13/14 10/21/04
Available:
ACD 9/21/04
Elex 9/10/04
X-LAT 8/2/04
8 wk FLOAT
10/28/04
5/20/04
7/1/04
Prep
GRID
3 wk
Install
Tower A
8 wk
Critical Path
Install
Towers B,1-12
13 wk
4 wk float
4/21/05
System
Test
16 wk
LAT ASSEMBLY
714/05
12 wk
FLOAT
Install
Towers 13/14
2 wk
7/21/05
Ship LAT
1 wk
Fabrication
CD-4
Install
Global items
6wk
11/11/04
12/23/04
11/3/05
Environmental
Testing
15 wk
4 wk
FLOAT
LAT RFI
12/1/05
Commission
15
GLAST LAT Project
LAT Face to Face, July 17-18, 2003
Remainder of the meeting
• Initial discussions of how to meet the funding profile
• Subsystem milestones for the next 3 months
• Interdependencies
– TEM & TEMPS integration with CAL modules
– DAQ EGSE for subsystem testing
• Subsystem reports
• Business
– Combining monthly meetings
– Improving communications
• Capture Action Items
16
Download