Engineering Overview
advertisement
Engineering Overview CD-2 Lehman Review Nadine Kurita - LUSI Chief Engineer August 19, 2008 Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 1 p. 1 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Outline Safety Organization Engineering Processes Standards Reviews Specifications/Requirements/ICDs Configuration Management Value Management Engineering Status Requirement Document Status Basis of Estimate Cost Methodology Major Milestones Summary Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 2 p. 2 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Safety Lead Engineer & Engineering Staff Responsible for integrating safety into their designs Access to ES&H staff, peer reviews and SLAC Safety Committees Line Management Responsible for safety Responsible for authorizing work to proceed Utilize verification processes: LUSI safety review checklist Design review process includes safety at each stage of design Safety reviews are included in the P3 schedule Work Authorization Form – LCLS Procedure Instrument designs are consistent with SLAC ES&H Policy – Safety Overview Committee Review SLAC authorization to energize machine includes sign-off by SLAC Safety Committees and SLAC Safety Officers Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 3 p. 3 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Organization Nadine Kurita LUSI Chief Engineer J. Langton – XPP Lead Engineer P. Montanez – CXI Lead Engineer E. Bong – XCS Lead Engineer E. Ortiz – DCO Lead Engineer ---------------------------------------------D. Arnett – Design Supervisor/Designer B. Bigornia – Designer A. Busse – Mechanical Engineer M. Campell – Mechanical Engineer J. Castagna – Mechanical Engineer M. Carracos* – Design Engineer J. Defever – Design Engineer J. Delor – Design Engineer M. Holmes* – Mechanical Engineer R. Jackson – Design Engineer M. Kosovsky* – Mechanical Engineer T. Osier – Designer *currently supporting AMO Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 4 p. 4 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Organization (2) Staffing Progress Added 12 engineers/designers since the CD1 Review All Lead Engineer/CAM positions filled Manpower Requirements per Current Schedule Q4FY2008 12.1 FTE Mechanical Engineers 6.6 FTE Mechanical Designers 1.9 FTE Controls Engineers Currently searching for 3-4 additional engineers AMO engineers available in September Maximum load for mechanical engineering is in Q3FY2009 11 FTE Mechanical Engineers 9.3 FTE Mechanical Designers Maximum load for controls engineering Q2FY2010 5.1 FTE Controls Engineers 1.7 FTE Controls Programmers Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 5 p. 5 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu LUSI Engineering Resource Loading Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 6 p. 6 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Organization (4) Lead Engineer Reports to Chief Engineer Responsible for all technical aspects of the project Responsible for reporting cost and schedule Control Account Manager (CAM) Responsible for supervising daily activities of subordinate engineers, design engineers and designers Responsible for keeping management informed on critical issues, delays, etc. Works with upper management to make critical decisions Design Supervisor Responsible for design standards Checking, approving and releasing drawings Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 7 p. 7 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Processes – Standards Formalize Design Standards Incorporated SLAC Mechanical Design Department standards through SP-391-000-36, LUSI Design Standard Supplement Developed standard engineering notes Developed Solid Edge Tool (3D parametric software) Formalize Manufacturing Practices LUSI Procedures and Travellers Produced for critical equipment Configuration controlled History archived via LCLS/LUSI sharepoint Non-Compliance Reports (NCRs), Inspection Reports History archived via LCLS/LUSI sharepoint Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 8 p. 8 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Processes - Reviews Design review goals and criteria are documented Design reviews are milestones in our schedule Essential to ensure the designs meet their prescribed functionality Demonstrate value engineering Engineering review template completed Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 9 p. 9 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Processes - Reviews (2) Preliminary Instrument Design Review (PIDR) Instrument System Specific (CXI, XPP, XCS) Goal Approve the objectives and physics requirements of the instrument Approval of the conceptual design approach Presents the following Science including breadth of applications possible with the instrument Objectives and the requirements of the system Instrument System Physics Requirements Document complete and ready for sign off Performance requirements of the components “Proof of Concept” Models Proposed approach to meet the requirements System design Mechanical Electrical Major system interfaces, organizational and technical Major design alternatives considered (Value Management) Safety considerations Assessment of risk areas Planned test program if appropriate After closure of action items this approves the baseline design, continuation of engineering specifications and preliminary component designs Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 10 p. 10 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Processes – Reviews (4) Preliminary Design Reviews Component specific Final design details are not required Goal Approval of the component specifications & preliminary design Approval to complete final design Approval to fabricate test articles and place long duration procurements Presents the following: Science/technical objectives, requirements, general specification Engineering Specification Document complete and ready for sign off Preliminary design & engineering analyses Design interfaces Control/software requirements Quality control, reliability Safety considerations – “define hazards” Cost & schedule After closure of action items preliminary design approved and long duration items will be purchased. Move to final design. Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 11 p. 11 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Processes - Reviews (3) Final Instrument Design Review (FIDR) Instrument System Specific (CXI, XPP, XCS) Prerequisite All major Component Preliminary Design Reviews must be completed. Goal Approve final instrument design / configuration & verify that they meet requirements Presents the following System requirements for the instrument Instrument PRD, ESD and procurement specifications are complete and ready for sign-off Layout Update - Identify changes from PIDR layout Component design status and description Design and analyses to meet the requirements Major design alternatives considered (value management) Major system interfaces, organizational and technical Identify operational modes Maintenance requirements Planned test program if appropriate Installation & alignment plans Cost & schedule Safety – status and description of hazard and mitigation After closure of action items this approves the final design and configuration of the instrument. Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 12 p. 12 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Processes – Reviews (5) Final Design Reviews Component specific Goal Approval of the final design, cost and schedule Approval to complete detail drawings Approval to start procurement & fabrication Presents the following: Science/technical objectives, requirements & specifications Review closure of actions from the Preliminary Design Review Final design and analyses Test results and design margins “Analyze and develop controls” for all safety hazards Approved safety reviews as required Identified problem areas/open issues Cost & schedule After closure of action items this approves the final design and detail drawings are completed. Approval to purchase items and begin fabrication. Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 13 p. 13 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Processes – Reviews (6) Manufacturing Readiness Review Component specific Schedule milestone Goal Provides status on drawings, procurement, manufacturing and safety documents. Presents the following: Status of assembly and detail drawings Approval process per Mechanical Department standards Procedures, travellers, inspection and testing plans Status of procurement and manufacturing Installation plans & documents Work Authorization, Statement of Work Operational requirements/procedures checkout, testing, maintenance “Develop and implement” hazard controls Safety documents Review closure of action items from the FDR Cost and schedule update After closure of action items this approves the start of assembly, testing and installation. Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 14 p. 14 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Processes – Reviews (7) Safety Reviews Safety Overview Committee Review (SOC), K. Moffeit Completed December 2006 and identified the following required committee reviews: Earthquake Reviews Radiation Safety Reviews Laser Safety Reviews Electrical Safety Reviews Hoisting and Rigging Safety Committee Fire Marshall Hazardous Experimental Equipment Committee SOC approval ensures that the hazard analysis is adequate, controls planned to mitigate or eliminate hazards are adequate, and that the activity will conform to SLAC ES&H policy Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 15 p. 15 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Process – Requirements Physics Requirements Documents (PRD) Defines functionality of the component Provides detailed physics/science requirements Basis for engineering design Required for the Preliminary Instrument Design Review Approved by Science Team Leaders and/or LUSI Project Manager Engineering Specification Document (ESD) General & engineering specifications to meet the PRD Covers additional requirements not in the PRD Space constraints, environment, etc. Required for the Preliminary Design Review Approved by Chief Engineer, Scientist, Project Manager ESD template created Interface Control Documents (ICD) Describes the boundaries of one system with respect to another Physical interface between the two Responsibilities Required for the Preliminary Design Review Approved by all involved system managers Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 16 p. 16 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu INSTRUMENT PHYSICS REQUIREMENT DOCUMENT (PRD) System Engineering Flow Diagram PRELIMINARY INSTRUMENT DESIGN REVIEW (PIDR) SAFETY PRELIMINARY DESIGN COMPONENT PRD COMPONENT ENGINEERING SPECIFICATION DOC (ESD) INTERFACE CONTROL DOCUMENTS (ICD) COMPONENT PRELIMINARY DESIGN SAFETY SIMULATIONS LONG DURATION PROCUREMENTS COMPONENT PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW (PDR) FINAL INSTRUMENT DESIGN REVIEW (FIDR) COMPONENT FINAL DESIGN SAFETY APPROVALS COMPONENT FINAL DESIGN REVIEW (FDR) PROCUREMENTS LUSI DOE Review, Aug. 19, 2008 Engineering, Cost & Schedule, p. 17 DETAIL DRAWINGS COMPONENT STATUS REVIEW ASSEMBLY & TESTING MANUFACTURING DOCUMENTS Travelers Procedures Inspection Forms Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Process – Requirements (3) Statement of Work/Technical Purchase Specifications Mandates the technical, quality and procurement specifications for a purchased item Engineering Notes Documents engineering analysis and other information critical to the design of the component These documents are all configuration controlled via LCLS/LUSI Sharepoint or SODA (SLAC Online Database Access) Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 18 p. 18 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Processes – Drawing Tree/Structure Roadmap for building components and installing in the hutch Assemblies & installations thought through – streamlines modeling and drawing preparations Organizes the assemblies & models Integration between design teams NEH GP-391-010-00 Mr. Beam mr39175000 NEH Building mr39175010 NEH Utilities (non-hutch) H1 GP-391-100-00 LASER BAY INSTALL LO-391-010-01 NEH H3 GP-391-300-00 H2 GP-391-200-00 See Sheet “H2” Mr. Beam mr39175000 NEH Building mr39175010 Upbeam Vacuum Systems ID-391-300-03 Pump Laser Equipment ID-391-300-12 H3 XPP Local Beam mr39175013 Optics & Diagnostics Raft ID-391-300-01 XPP IDs Diffractometer ID-391-300-10 HOMS Beam Vacuum Systems (Through-Pipe) ID-391-300-05 Diagnostics Raft ID-391-300-02 Detector Mover ID-391-300-11 Downbeam Vac Systems ID-391-300-04 H3 Utilities H3 XPP Local Beam mr39175013 H3 XPP Local Beam mr39175013 H3 XPP Stay Clears mo39175014 KEY: Pump H3 XPP Stay Clears mo39175014 Kappa SC-391-32006 Alignment Fixture Common Circles SC-391-32003 Accessories SC-391-32008 H3 XPP Local Beam mr39175013 Support Structure H3 XPP Local Beam mr39175013 H3 XPP Stay Clears mo39175014 Diagnostics Support ID-391-350-01 SEISMIC RESTRAINT ID-391-350-09 Robot H3 XPP Local Beam mr39175013 Tee Optics Tables Bellows Girder SA-391320-09 Feet Floor Anchors, Hiltis Huber 5102.50 X-Y Translation R.A. Valve Laser Optics Tilt SC-391-32005 Pump Stand REF__ Kappa Huber 115.103 Beamline Translation SC-391-32004 Huber Custom 650mm Translation Huber 5103.C40 Lift Stage Huber 430 Circle Huber 430-5203.80 Adaptor Huber 5203.80 Tip/Tilt H3 XPP Local Beam mr39175013 Devices SA-391300-08 Strong back SA-391-35018 Cross H3 XPP Stay Clears mo39175014 Installation ID Assembly AD or SA Diffractometer Base Install ID-391-320-07 H3 XPP Local Beam mr39175013 H3 XPP Stay Clears mo39175014 H3 XPP Stay Clears mo39175014 H3 XPP Stay Clears mo39175014 Pedestal SA-391350-06 Huber 5103.D40 Lift Stage PF- Shim PF-391-35023 Parts or Purchased ASM STOP ASM X-Y SA-391350-26 Sunnex Leveling Jack Spherical Washer STOP ASM X SA-391350-37 X ADAPTER PLATE PF-391-35025 STOP PLATE PF-391-35027 STOP, THREADED PF-391-35035 SURFACE PLATE ASM SA-391-35002 LEG PF-391802-19 MAIN BEAM SIDE PLATES PF391-802-22 OUTER UPRIGHT CROSS PLATES PF391-802-21 INNER UPRIGHT Combined Diagnostics Complete AD- Window Bellows Gate Valve Drift Tube Support Rails THK SHS30C Granite Block PF-391-35007 IntensityPosition Monitor Pop-In Profile Monitor Support Assy Spool SA-391825-11 X-Y ADAPTER PLATE PF-391-35024 Pump Cross NUT, 3/8-24 Reference Models Pump Stand Spool Rails THK SHS30C FLOOR ANCHORS HDWE HDWE Tee MISC HDWE MISC HDWE Spool SWIVEL PAD Gauge PIVOT PIN SWING BOLT PF-391-35028 STUD 3/8-16 R.A. Valve PADDLE, RELEASE PF-391-35036 Spool BALL PLUNGER CARRLANE CL40SBP1 Drift Tube Support KNOB Bellows Gate valve H3 XPP Local Beam mr39175013 H3 XPP Stay Clears mo39175014 UPBEAM Optics & Diagnostics ID-391-300-XX Optics & Diagnostics Support ID-391-350-00 Pedestal SA-391350-06 STOP ASM X-Y SA-391350-26 Sunnex Leveling Jack Shim PF-391-35023 Spherical Washer STOP ASM X SA-391350-37 X ADAPTER PLATE PF-391-35025 STOP PLATE PF-391-35027 STOP, THREADED PF-391-35035 SEISMIC RESTRAINT ID-391-350-03 SURFACE PLATE ASM SA-391-35004 Rails THK SHS30C Granite Block PF-391-35005 FLOOR ANCHORS SIDE PLATES PF391-802-20 CROSS PLATES PF391-802-21 HDWE ACTUATOR THK KR46 CROSS BEAM 1 MAIN BEAM Strong back SA-391-35016 H3 Local Beam mr39175013 IntensityPosition Monitor Complete AD- Slits Complete AD- OUTER UPRIGHT Support Assy Gate valve INNER UPRIGHT XFLS Complete AD- Attenuator Complete AD- H3 Local Beam mr39175013 MAIN BEAM Pulse Picker Complete AD- Pop-In Intensity Monitor Complete ADBellows Support Assy CROSS BEAM 2 NUT, 3/8-24 X-Y ADAPTER PLATE PF-391-35024 LEGS PF391-80219 MOVER ASM SA-391-350-10 DOWNBEAM Optics & Diagnostics ID-391-300-XX Strong back SA-391-35016 Int-Pos Mon Device Slit Device Support Assy XFLS Device Support Assy Attenuator Device OUTER UPRIGHT INNER UPRIGHT Support Assy Pop-In Int Mon Device HRM Complete AD- Bellows Slits Complete AD- Combined Diagnostics Complete AD- Gate Valve Laser Port Bellows Pop-In Profile Monitor Chamber IntensityPosition Monitor Pump Support Assy R.A. Valve Gauge Rails THK SHS30C MISC HDWE SPRINGS SWIVEL PAD Long Bellows MISC HDWE MISC HDWE HDWE CUPS PIVOT PIN STUD 3/8-16 SWING BOLT PF-391-35028 HDWE PADDLE, RELEASE PF-391-35036 LUSI DOE Review, Aug. 19, 2008 Engineering, Cost & Schedule, p. 19 KNOB BALL PLUNGER CARRLANE CL40SBP1 MISC Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Document Control Utilize existing SLAC MD Document Control System and Sharepoint database 3D-models will use SLAC MD Project Database Management (PDM) for configuration control and archiving Drawings and specifications Check, approval and release process as defined in DS-391-000-36, “LUSI Design Standards Supplement” Project documents are released and subject to revision control Management PEP, Acquisition Strategy, Hazard Analysis, QIP, Value Management, … Technical PRDs, ESDs, ICDs, ... Fabrication & Installation Procedures, travellers, ... Design reviews will be archived Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 20 p. 20 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Document Control (2) Engineering Change Orders (ECO) Working with MD on a sitewide ECO process ECO procedure is under review Keeps detailed revision history Increase efficiency of implementing and documenting design and manufacturing changes Allows for quick approval for implementing changes Helps to maintain these changes in the supporting design/fabrication documents Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 21 p. 21 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Value Management Consistent with DOE Value Management, DOE order 413.3A and OMB Circular A-131 LUSI Value Management Plan completed, PM-391000-02 R0 Executed LUSI Value Management Plan Conducted with internal and external reviewers 4 alternative solutions identified Savings of $355K executed LUSI Value Management principles are applied to all LUSI engineering tasks Design alternatives Part of the engineering review process Applying common designs Value Management principles assisted in finalizing the LUSI scope Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 22 p. 22 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Status - XPP X-ray Pump Probe Extensive engineering and design progress for CD-2 Engineering Staff J Langton - Lead Engineer Jim Defever – Mechanical Engineer Jim Delor – Mechanical Engineer Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 23 p. 23 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu XPP Instrument Location Near Experimental Hall X-ray Transport Tunnel AMO (LCLS) XPP Endstation XCS CXI Far Experimental Hall Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 24 p. 24 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Status – XPP (3) CD-2 Activities Completed – Preliminary Instrument Design Review Approved by team leaders in 2007 - System PRD Completed – System ESD released Completed - Drawing Tree/File Structure Completed - High level models & their drafts Completed - Hutch definitive layout Completed - Laser table layout & pump laser to FEL interface Completed - Detector mover ESD released Completed - Detector mover “proof of concept” Testing just completed in August Completed - Diffractometer ESD released Documented the interfaces and deliverables with vendor Completed - Diffractometer definitive layout Completed – About 85% complete on design effort of all the supports and laser tables Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 25 p. 25 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Status – CXI Coherent X-ray Imaging Significant engineering and design progress since CD-1 Engineering Staff Paul Montanez - Lead Engineer Jean-Charles Castagna – Mechanical Engineer Armin Busse – Mechanical Engineer Rick Jackson – Design Engineer Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 26 p. 26 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu CXI Instrument Location Near Experimental Hall X-ray Transport Tunnel AMO (LCLS) XPP XCS CXI Endstation Source to Sample distance : ~ 440 m Far Experimental Hall Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 27 p. 27 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Status – CXI (3) CD-2 Activities Completed – Preliminary Instrument Design Review Approved by team leaders in 2007 - System PRD Completed – Draft System ESD Completed –Drawing Tree/File Structure Completed – XRT/FEH5 beamline layout Complete drafts for the following ESDs Sample Chamber & Injector Completed – Sample Chamber Completed – Detector Stage –in review Completed – Precision Instrument Stand –in review Completed – Reference laser –in review Completed – 1 m KB mirror system Completed – Hutch 5, Common Room & Control Cabin ESD Completed – ICD LUSI to LCLS Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 28 p. 28 Fixed Target Configuration Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Status – CXI (4) Hutch Layout Drawings Completed – Stay Clears Completed – Utilities Completed – Hutch Layout Preliminary component designs ~75% complete – Sample Chamber for the 1 m KB system ~75% complete– Detector stage Preliminary design nearly developed Detector packaging details needed Completed – Precision instrument stand conceptual design ~90% complete - Reference Laser preliminary design 1 m KB system Budgetary Inquiry Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 29 p. 29 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Status - XCS X-ray Correlation Spectroscopy (XCS) Major engineering and design progress since CD-1 Engineering Staff Eric Bong – Lead Engineer Jim Delor – Mechanical Engineer Jean-Charles Castagna – Mechanical Engineer Armin Busse – Mechanical Engineer Ted Osier – Designer Don Arnett – Designer Ben Bigornia – Designer Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 30 p. 30 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu XCS Instrument Location Near Experimental Hall AMO (LCLS) X-ray Transport Tunnel (200m long) XPP XCS Hutch Source to Sample distance : ~ 420 m CXI Hutch Far Experimental Hall Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 31 p. 31 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Status – XCS (3) CD-2 Activities Completed – Preliminary Instrument Design Review Approved by team leaders in 2008 - System PRD Completed – Drawing tree/file structure Completed – Higher level models/draft Completed – Definitive hutch and XRT layout Completed – Detector mover layout Completed – Diffractometer definitive layout Completed – Detector mover proof of concept Completed – Draft detector mover ESD/SOW Completed – Draft diffractometer ESD Completed – Conceptual design for tables and supports Completed – Hutch Design Completed – Hutch 4 & Control Cabin ESD Completed– Interface Control Document (ICD) LUSI to LCLS Hutch Layout Drawings Completed – Stay Clears Completed – Utilities Completed – Hutch Layout Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 32 p. 32 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Status - DCO Profile-Intensity Monitor Attenuator X-ray Focusing Lens Diagnostics & Common Optics Engineering Staff Eliazar Ortiz – Lead Engineer Marc Campell – Mechanical Engineer Nadine Kurita – Mechanical Engineer Rick Jackson – Design Engineer Don Arnett – Designer Ben Bigornia – Designer Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 33 p. 33 Dual Blade Slits Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Engineering Status – DCO (2) CD2 Activities Complete Draft ESDs Completed – Pop-In Profile Monitor Completed – Pop-In Intensity Monitor Completed – Intensity-Position Monitor Completed – Wavefront Monitor Completed – Slits Completed – Pulse Picker Completed – Attenuators Completed – Be Lens System Completed – Harmonic Rejection Mirror Monochromator Working – Complete draft ICD to instruments. Pulse Greater than 50% complete on preliminary designs for thePicker CD4a deliverables Completed – Pop-In Profile Monitor , 75% complete Completed – Pop-In Intensity Monitor , 75% complete Completed – Intensity-Position Monitor , 50% complete Completed – Pulse Picker, 50% complete Completed – Slits, 50% complete Conceptual designs for all remaining devices. Completed – Wavefront Monitor Completed – Attenuators Completed – Be Lens System Completed – Harmonic Rejection Mirror Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 34 p. 34 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Project PRD & ESD Status 35 PRDs, 91% complete 55 ESDs, 49% complete SUMMARY PRD Total ESD XPP Summary 35 55 10% in work 3 4 60% draft review (draft complete out for review) 0 10 80% in work-finalize (revising & preparing final edit) 0 4 90% approvals (out for final review and signatures) 6 100% released not started cancelled or obsolete XCS Summary PRD CXI Summary ESD Total 5 3 Total in work 0 0 draft review 0 in work-finalize 10 26 ESD 12 14 in work 2 0 0 draft review 0 9 0 0 in work-finalize 0 0 approvals 2 0 approvals 0 0 8 released 3 3 released 10 3 2 3 not started 0 0 not started 0 2 12 12 cancelled or obsolete 5 0 cancelled or obsolete 6 4 91% 49% 96% 100% 85% 60% PRD ESD Controls & DAQ PRD Dia & Common Optics ESD Total 5 6 Total 2 8 Total in work 0 1 in work 0 1 draft review 0 1 draft review 0 in work-finalize 0 0 in work-finalize approvals 4 0 released 1 not started cancelled or obsolete Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 35 p. 35 PRD PRD ESD 11 9 in work 1 2 0 draft review 0 0 0 0 in work-finalize 0 4 Approvals 0 2 approvals 0 3 2 Released 2 5 released 10 0 0 1 not started 0 0 not started 0 0 0 0 cancelled or obsolete 0 0 cancelled or obsolete 1 7 92% 45% 100% 86% 92% 68% Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Basis of Estimate Contains the following Detailed description of the component Based on latest PRD 3D model if applicable and available Detailed cost estimate Part number, drawing number, vendor, notes, weight, qty, cost, etc. Supporting quotations, drawings, catalogs, etc. Configuration controlled with the CD-2 baseline Cross referenced to P3 activity ID’s Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 36 p. 36 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Cost Methodology Cost Methodology Engineering labor estimates based on prior experience of similar designs Materials & Labor estimates were driven by the latest design and Physics Requirements Recently obtained vendor budgetary quotes Vendor Catalogs Engineering bottoms up estimate Engineering judgment Installation cost and schedule activities were discussed with LCLS installation manager(s) Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 37 p. 37 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Major Milestones/Reviews Completed Reviews Dec ’06 - Safety Oversight Review Dec ’07 - XPP Preliminary Instrument Review Dec ’07 - CXI Preliminary Instrument Review May ’08 - Design Review – Pop-In Profile Monitor Jul ’08 - XCS Preliminary Instrument Review Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 38 p. 38 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Major Milestones/Reviews (2) Upcoming Reviews (6 month look ahead) XPP Q4FY08 - PDRs & FDRs Support Tables & Optical Table Q4FY08 - PDRs & FDRs Optical Tables Q1FY09 - PDR Diffractometer & Detector Mover Q2FY09 - FDR Diffractometer & Detector Mover CXI Q42008 – PDR Detector Stage Q1FY09 - PDR & FDR Reference Laser Q1FY09 - PDR 1.0 m Sample Chamber DCO Q4FY08 - PDR Pop-In Profile & Intensity Monitor Q4FY08 - PDR Pulse Picker Q1FY09 - PDR Intensity-Position Monitor Q1FY09 - PDR & FDR Slit System Q1FY09 - FDR Pulse Picker Controls Q1FY09 - PDR XPP Controls Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 39 p. 39 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Summary Instrument teams have made significant design progress LUSI has established designs with a consistent cost estimate. The majority of materials estimates came from vendor quotations, catalogs, or previous orders XPP ~80% CXI ~ 90% XCS ~ 75% DCO ~ 65% Controls & DAQ ~ 95% The technical scope of LUSI has converged Resource loaded schedules and Basis of Estimates are complete Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 40 p. 40 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Summary (2) Engineering Staff Staff consists of experienced SLAC mechanical engineers and design engineers Additional staff will be available when AMO work ramps down – September 2008 Staff is informed in quality and trained in ES&H issues in their area of expertise Actively looking for additional engineering resources Working organization with well understood processes Excellent communication and interfacing with partner labs, LCLS and sub-systems Engineering staff ready for CD-2 approval! Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 41 p. 41 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu End of Presentation Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 42 p. 42 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Design Review Standards Insert pic here Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 43 p. 43 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Review Template Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 44 p. 44 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu ESD LUSI DOE Review, Aug. 19, 2008 Engineering, Cost & Schedule, p. 45 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu Value Management Forms Director’s LUSI DOE Review Review, March Aug.4 19, & 5,2008 2008 Engineering, EngineeringCost Overview, & Schedule p. 46 p. 46 Nadine Kurita kurita@slac.stanford.edu
