1 / 14

Fermilab Cryomodule QA/QC Model

Fermilab Cryomodule QA/QC Model. Jamie Blowers LCLS-II EDM/PLM Applications 31-Mar-2014. Outline. QA/QC “first principles” Fermilab QA, Procurement, and Engineering framework QA/QC staff and function infrastructure Process control software infrastructure, Vector

paiva
Download Presentation

Fermilab Cryomodule QA/QC Model

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Fermilab Cryomodule QA/QC Model Jamie Blowers LCLS-II EDM/PLM Applications 31-Mar-2014

  2. Outline • QA/QC “first principles” • Fermilab QA, Procurement, and Engineering framework • QA/QC staff and function infrastructure • Process control software infrastructure, Vector • Our approach to-date regarding cryomoduleassembly • Challenges • First order QA/QC scenario for LCLS-II • Second order scenarios • Discussion J. Blowers | FNAL QA/QC

  3. QA/QC “First Principles” • Apply our limited resources in the most effective way possible to minimize risk and assure that all requirements are met • Ensure that requirements/expectations, both in-house and external, are as clear as concise as possible • Culture counts; leverage its strengths, account for its weaknesses • As much as possible leverage proven and effective processes/tools J. Blowers | FNAL QA/QC

  4. Fermilab QA and Engineering Framework J. Blowers | FNAL QA/QC

  5. Staff/function Infrastructure Hiring Hiring J. Blowers | FNAL QA/QC

  6. Process Control System: Vector • All travelers are fully electronic; http://vector.fnal.gov/ • System is currently read-only to the world, so easy data sharing is in place • Current cavity travelers: J. Blowers | FNAL QA/QC

  7. Vector (con’t) • As much as we could, we replicated the functionality and flexibility of a paper traveler: J. Blowers | FNAL QA/QC

  8. Vector (con’t) • Reporting: choose any or all fields of any traveler, and the report is generated and can be saved to Excel: J. Blowers | FNAL QA/QC

  9. Vector (con’t) • CERN 11T magnet folks set up an instance of Vector at CERN, and they made a very detailed presentation of the system: http://tdserver1.fnal.gov/blowers/Projects/Vector/vector.pptx J. Blowers | FNAL QA/QC

  10. Cryomodule Fabrication Model • Purchase major components from industry, using detailed specifications and/or drawings • Everything is inspected prior to being released to production • Inspection records are maintained for all inspections, including non-conformances • Serialized parts are inspected using a traveler (Vector) • Every processing/testing/fabrication process is done according to a traveler, which outlines the steps to follow, the necessary data to record, and sign-offs. • All discrepancies are recorded and tracked to closure. This is all “motherhood and apple pie” J. Blowers | FNAL QA/QC

  11. Challenges • Fermilab does not have a robust, user-friendly "cavity database". • For ILC-related work, our cavity performance data were being entered into the DESY cavity database. • During our cavity R&D efforts (last many years), we have not been very successful in maintaining full traceability from cavity half-cells to the Nb material. • We plan to have this fixed for the LCLS-II cavity procurement. • Example for “CM2”: https://vector-offsite.fnal.gov/VectorHardCopy/13335.asp • Culture change: • Shifting from an R&D mode into a production mode is not trivial. • The needed infrastructure is there, but the mental shift to doing some things in a more structured manner will take time and effort. J. Blowers | FNAL QA/QC

  12. First Order Scenario • Like JLab, to first order, our present systems and processes have proven to be effective for cryomodule procurement and fabrication. • The path of least resistance would be to leverage the systems/processes in place at each Lab. • For Fermilab: • Procurement: provide sufficient oversight, tuned to the experience of each supplier, to ensure that we receive what we require, when we need it. Regular monitoring of progress. Most data received unstructured (e.g. PDF), with small subset structured (e.g. spreadsheet template) • Inspect what we receive • When it comes to SRF, cleanliness is next to godliness • Use Vector for all travelers • Deliver hardware and associated records/data to SLAC • Some small subset of data would be delivered structured, in the same format for both JLab and Fermilab • Work very closely with JLab to implement a consistent QA/QC cryomodule fabrication framework J. Blowers | FNAL QA/QC

  13. Second Order Scenarios • I’m looking forward to learning from the DESY/XFEL experience, and applying what they’ve learned to LCLS-II • Minimum: applying what they’ve learned to our processes • More aggressive: stand up the XFEL system, or use DESY’s installation • Vector can be modified (security model) to have suppliers enter data directly • I am open to the possibility of standardizing on a single traveler system (and we’ve set aside Wednesday to discuss that between the JLab and Fermilab folks) • Based on the known challenges, I believe some of our limited resources might be best applied to the issue of not having a robust cavity performance database, and creating one to be used by both Fermilab and JLab. J. Blowers | FNAL QA/QC

  14. Closing • Discussion For further information: Jamie Blowers blowers@fnal.gov o1: 630-840-4784 o2: 630-840-2800 c: 630-277-6520 J. Blowers | FNAL QA/QC

More Related