Electronic Document Management System: A tool for Product Lifecycle Management Marc Ross 31 March 2014 Introduction The goal of this meeting is to consider the application of EDMS to the development, production, and operation of LCLS-II equipment. We will: 1. Share experiences with the use of EDMS for project development, review, and production. 2. Discuss the systems in place that link DESY, DESY-XFEL partners, and XFEL industry in order to understand the technical (QC/QA), oversight (management), and safety (e.g. PED) functionality. 3. Evaluate possible application of parts of these systems to LCLS-II, including, possibly, application of the full-system in specific, specialized examples – such as cavity fabrication vendor oversight. This example is of direct, immediate interest as we consider cavity fabrication and processing. 4. Discuss paths forward, including EDMS development, licensing, use of alternate platforms and etc. 2 Agenda SLAC Building 52 Mad River Conference Room Title Speaker 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 Introduction LCLS-II Project construction planning CM Production Preparations at Jlab JLab SRF QA Tools BREAK Fermilab Cryomodule QA Introduction to PLM tools for project development and construction LUNCH Implementation of Siemens Team Center PLM at the European XFEL Consideration of hybrid PLM / Production QA schemes BREAK XFEL Series Cavity fabrication – Documentation issues Application of EDMS to XFEL Cryomodule asssembly OPEN DISCUSSION J. Blowers L. Hagge / B. List Monday 31 March time (PDT) 09:00 09:20 09:20 09:40 09:40 10:00 10:00 10:20 10:30 10:50 10:50 11:10 11:10 12:00 L. Hagge / B. List 12:00 13:30 13:30 14:30 L. Hagge / B. List 14:30 15:00 J. Iversen (go-to-meeting) Tuesday 1 April time (PDT) 08:00 08:30 M. Ross M. Ross/ L. Plummer E. Daly V. Bookwalter C. Madec (go-to-meeting); C. 08:30 Cloué 09:00 3 Attendees from E-XFEL and LCLS-II Partner Labs: E-XFEL Lars Hagge Benno List Jens Iversen Catherine Madec Christel Cloué LCLS-II Ed Daly Partner Labs Valerie Bookwalter John Mammosser Jamie Blowers Don Mitchell Tony Metz DESY DESY DESY (go-to-meeting) CEA / Saclay (go-to-meeting) CEA / Saclay (go-to-meeting) JLab JLab JLab Fermilab Fermilab (go-to-meeting) Fermilab (go-to-meeting 4 PLM (Wikipedia): 5 Process: • Conceive • • Specification • Concept design Design • • Detailed design • Validation and analysis (simulation) • Tool design Realize • • Plan manufacturing • Manufacture • Build/Assemble • Test / QC Service • • Sell and deliver Use • • Technical Requirements Management Vendor Oversight; Travellers Maintain and support Dispose 6 Bottom – up Design Bottom–up design (CAD-centric) occurs where the definition of 3D models of a product starts with the construction of individual components. These are then virtually brought together in sub-assemblies of more than one level until the full product is digitally defined. This is sometimes known as the review structure showing what the product will look like. The BOM contains all of the physical (solid) components. Bottom–up design tends to focus on the capabilities of available realworld physical technology, implementing those solutions which this technology is most suited to. When these bottom–up solutions have realworld value, bottom–up design can be much more efficient than top–down design. The risk of bottom–up design is that it very efficiently provides solutions to low-value problems. The focus of bottom–up design is "what can we most efficiently do with this technology?" rather than the focus of top– down which is "What is the most valuable thing to do?" 7 Top – down Design Top–down design is focused on high-level functional requirements, with relatively less focus on existing implementation technology. A top level spec is decomposed into lower and lower level structures and specifications, until the physical implementation layer is reached. The risk of a top–down design is that it will not take advantage of the most efficient applications of current physical technology, especially with respect to hardware implementation. Top– down design sometimes results in excessive layers of lower-level abstraction and inefficient performance when the Top–down model has followed an abstraction path which does not efficiently fit available physical-level technology. The positive value of top–down design is that it preserves a focus on the optimum solution requirements. 8 LCLS-II Methodology for Interface Control Technical Requirements Management L. Plummer & D. Marsh Top – down Design Example LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014 9 LCLS-II Project Controls Documents describe: L. Plummer & D. Marsh 1) elements of Project Management 2) overall machine requirements, basic parameters, design standards and guidelines, 3) main configuration of each system System Control Documents cover all specific design and interface requirements for each system Procurement/Fabrication Packages are drawings, specifications and plans that are passed on to the product realization processes. TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross 10 LCLS-II Document / Configuration Control (Sharepoint) 11 LCLS-II Document / Configuration Control - 2 12 Necessary LCLS-II Documentation Preliminary Project Execution Plan Acquisition Strategy Conceptual Design Report (w/external review) Preliminary Hazard Analysis Report Updated for cryogenics, ODH, MW beams and PL activities Integrated Safety Management Plan Quality Assurance Program Safeguards and Security National Environmental Policy Act Strategy Project Data Sheet (under review at DOE) Risk Management Plan (SLAC & LCLS II) Project Risk Registry Available on Website LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014 13 LCLS II Approach to Multi-Lab Project Management • Cost and Schedule Baseline – Single Source • P6/COBRA primary tools – Trained staff following common protocols • Funding transfers from SLAC to partner labs via MPO • Baseline changes, contingency managed centrally w/ approval thresholds • Documentation Management • LCLS II Website, EDMS (Team Center) • Procurements – Planned centrally • Specific deliverables managed and executed by responsible lab • ES&H – Work performed at partner labs mostly follow local rules • QA & Systems Engineering – Flow-down from requirements • Communications & Coordination – Clear R2A2s for labs and people LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014 14 LCLS-II: Accelerator Superconducting linac: 4 GeV Undulators in existing LCLS-I Tunnel New variable gap (north) New variable gap (south), replaces existing fixed-gap und. 4 GeV SC Linac In sectors 0-10 14 GeV LCLS linac still used for x-rays up to 25 keV North side source: 0.2-1.2 keV (≥ 100kHz) NEH FEH South side source: 1.0 - 25 keV (120 Hz, copper” linac ) 1.0 - 5 keV (≥100 kHz, SC Linac) Commissioning LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014 planned for late 2019 15 LCLS-II - Linac and Compressor Layout for 4 GeV L0 j=* V0 =94 MV Ipk = 12 A Lb = 2.0 mm L1 j =-21° HL V0 =223 MV Ipk = 12 A j =-165° Lb =2.0 mm V0 =55 MV CM01 CM2,3 GUN E = 95 MeV 0.75 MeV R56 = -14.5 mm sd = 0.05 % L3 j=0 V0 =1447 MV Ipk = 50 A Lb = 0.56 mm V0 =2409 MV Ipk = 1.0 kA Lb = 0.024 mm CM15 CM04 3.9GHz LH L2 j = -21° CM16 BC1 BC2 E = 250 MeV R56 = -55 mm sd = 1.4 % E = 1600 MeV R56 = -60 mm sd = 0.46 % 100-pC machine layout: Oct. 8, 2013; v21 ASTRA run; Bunch length Lb is FWHM Linac Sec. V (MV) j (deg) Acc. Grad. (MV/m) No. Cryo Mod’s No. Avail. Cav’s Spare Cav’s LTU E = 4.0 GeV R56 = 0 sd 0.016% 2-km * L0 cav. phases: ~(3.4, -15.2, 0, 0, 0, 15,15) P. Emma, L. Wang, C. Papadopoulos Includes 2.2-km RW-wake L0 94 * 13.2 1 8 1 L1 220 -21 14.3 2 16 1 HL -55 -165 14.5 3 12 1 L2 1447 -21 15.5 12 96 6 L3 2409 0 15.4 20 160 10 LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014 CM35 LCLS-II SRF Linac Closely based on the European XFEL / ILC / TESLA Design LCLS-II Linac consists of: Component Count Parameters Linac 4 cold segments 35 each 8 cavity Cryomodules (1.3 GHz) 3 each 4 cavity Cryomodules (3.9 GHz) 1.3 GHz Cryomodule 8 13 m long. Cavities + SC Magnet cavities/CM package + BPM 1.3 GHz 9-cell cavity 280 each 16 MV/m; Q_0 ~ 2.7e10 (avg); 2 deg. K; bulk niobium fine-grain sheet-metal Cavity Auxiliary per each cavity Coaxial Input Coupler; 2 each HOM extraction coupler; lever-type tuner Injector 1 each 1 each special cryomodule (TBD) TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross 17 LCLS-II SRF Linac • 4 GeV ‘up to 300 micro-Amp’ CW superconducting linac based on TESLA / ILC / E-XFEL 1.3 GHz technology Key topics: • Cavity process for high-Q0 production • CW cryomodule design and operations scheme for 110 W @ 2K / CM (or better) • Industrial capability for 1) dressed-processed-cavity, 2) coupler, and 3) vacuum-vessel/cold-mass production • Single RF-source single-cavity • Jlab Cryoplant CHL-2 (12 GeV Upgrade) adapted for SLAC TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross 18 Project Collaboration • • • • • 50% of cryomodules: 1.3 GHz Cryomodules: 3.9 GHz Cryomodule engineering/design Helium distribution Processing for high Q (FNAL-invented gas doping) • • • 50% of cryomodules: 1.3 GHz Cryoplant selection/design Processing for high Q (gas doping) • • Undulators e- gun & associated injector systems • • • Undulator Vacuum Chamber Also supports FNAL w/ SCRF cleaning facility Undulator R&D: vertical polarization • • • R&D planning, prototype support processing for high-Q (high Q gas doping) e- gun option 19 Cryomodule Collaboration Fermilab is leading the cryomodule design effort • Extensive experience with TESLA-style cryomodule design and assembly Jefferson Lab and Cornell are partners in design review, costing, and production • Jefferson Lab sharing half the 1.3 GHz production - Recent 12 GeV upgrade production experience Argonne Lab is also participating in cryostat design • Beginning with system flow analyses and pipe size verification 20 Cryomodule schedule and milestones - Fermilab LCLS-II Cryomodule Milestones Long Lead Procurements start: 10/15/14 Cryomodule production start: 10/15/15 Cryomodule production complete: 11/12/18 Last cryomodule delivered to SLAC: 12/15/18 21 XFEL Cavity procurement For the series production of s.c. cavities for the European XFEL, thorough quality assurance (QA) procedures are under preparation to ensure that all cavities satisfy their performance requirements. Each cavity needs to pass a number of quality gates at different levels of completion. At each quality gate, the so-far available manufacturing data and documentation is reviewed and approved by the XFEL cavity production team. To ensure reliable and repeatable procedures with timely responses, the QA efforts are supported by the DESY Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) System, the so-called DESY EDMS. The EDMS manages fabrication data, coordinates acceptance tests, manages sign-offs and provides fabrication progress monitoring. In particular, the EDMS tracks the entire history of all individual cavities, their parts and their semi-finished products. TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross 22 Product Breakdown Structure: 23 XFEL EDMS shall: 24 TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross 25 TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross 26 12.1 EDMS 27 12.1 EDMS (cont) 28 29 Modified Process Flow Scheme (2) TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross 30 Modified Process Flow Test 31 Modified Process Flow Test (2) TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross 32 TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross 33 TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross 34 TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross 35 TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross 36 LCLS-II QA/QC End Item Data Package Collection LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014 Records shall be established and maintained LCLS Device Database utilized to capture key end item data information Ensures documentation is centralized and readily available among various project and operational groups 37 LCLS-II Preproduction Cryomodule 1.3 GHz, modified for CW operation LCLS-II cryomodule 38 End 39