Comments on the EDR and Magnet Systems

1. Comments on the EDR and Magnet Systems JCT for the Magnet Systems Group 070201 J. Tompkins

2. The ILC EDR(Engineering Design Report) • What is it? • Detailed design report as a basis for a detailed cost estimate and approval to proceed as a project • What is the Scope? • Early information: “~25-30% design level” • Sufficient detail to establish technical design package • 3-D magnetic field calculations • Define all interfaces – pedestals, stands, power, lcw, sensors, etc. • Develop accurate beamline layouts with real space allocations • Estimate of tooling requirements, design concepts • Sufficient information for detailed cost estimate J. Tompkins

3. EDR Scope, cont. • Scope, recent information… • “complete design package” for all magnets • Detailed design of all components completed • Tooling design completed • Drawing packages completed • Ready to begin procurement… • In either case, the resources required are a factor of ≈3x (30% design) – ≈10x (100% design) more than have been used in the RDR • Magnet physicist/engineers • Design/drafters • Tooling designers • Etc. • Clearly, an EDR definition needs to be “published” by management J. Tompkins

4. Organization of EDR Work • We are told that work will be done through Work Packages issued by Area Systems Groups • Nominally consistent with organization of RDR/BCE, but… • Area Systems, in general, didn’t fund design work • Management structure above Area Leaders still to be developed • Program manager yet to be installed • Integration function still lacking in ILC organization • Quasi-independence of work packages leaves some concerns on uniformity of approach, duplication of effort, ‘enforcement of standards” • Are we designing 6 independent machines…? J. Tompkins

5. Work Package Organization, cont. • Funding mechanisms most likely to remain very similar to those at present • No significant ILC (i.e., area/country independent) funds • Funding through governmental agencies to laboratories and universities • One Area System might have several different work packages corresponding to different funding sources and/or organizations providing the effort • No information as yet about how funding for work packages might be structured J. Tompkins

6. Our View of Magnet Systems Work Packages • Three distinct components • Magnets • Power Systems • Test and Measurement Facilities • Magnets and Power Systems divide among Area Systems in a natural fashion • Exception – pulsed magnet systems are still R&D intensive and have significant commonality across several areas; it is not sensible to split it up J. Tompkins

7. Magnet Systems View, cont. • Test and Measurement Facilities • Warm magnet test and measurement for all area system magnets • Building - CFS responsibility • Measurement systems, stands, and associated infrastructure defined by Magnet Systems • Cold test facility is defined in conjunction with Cryogenic Systems and Main Linac • Building - CFS • Magnet measurement systems, test stands, and associated infrastructure defined by Magnet Systems J. Tompkins

8. Magnet System Work Packages • Magnet SpecificWork packages • Separate special magnets from more ‘routine’ conventional designs • A separate work package for ‘pulsed magnets’ • Note: magnet movers included here J. Tompkins

9. Magnet System Work Packages, cont. • Power System work packages • Includes magnet interfaces to Controls System • Does not include Pulsed Magnets J. Tompkins

10. Magnet System Work Packages, cont. • Magnet Facilities • Conventional magnet facility design – test, measurement, storage, and repair • Cold magnet test facility design – shared with cryomods/SRF folks – test & measurement systems J. Tompkins

11. A Generic Magnet Design Work PackageReady for Procurement • Format stolen from P. Bellomo, M. Zisman, M. Palmer, et al. 1. Objective 1.1 Develop and design Area System conventional DC magnets, support stands, and interfaces to other systems. 2. Task Description 2.1 Work with Area System physicists, engineers, and designers to develop conventional magnet designs and specifications which meet the magnetic field requirements, alignment and stability requirements, aperture, length, and other dimensional requirements, availability requirements, electrical power requirements, heat generation requirement, radiation hardness requirements, and any other achievable system requirements. 2.2 Explore options to provide a cost-effective design meeting the above criteria and carry out the necessary engineering design work required by the Engineering Design Report. 2.3 The scope of work includes DC magnets, associated support stands, and definitions of interfaces with other systems; it does not include pulsed magnet systems. 3. Deliverables 3.1 Furnish, by <completion date> the following: performance specifications, drawings and cost estimates: 3.1.1 Magnet specifications, including field strength, effective length, field uniformity/magnitude of allowed , aperture, physical dimensions, total weight, electrical properties, including total resistance and inductance, required LCW flow rate and pressure drop (if applicable), operating temperature, conductor cross section, and other parameters necessary for design, fabrication, installation, and operation. 3.1.2 Magnet support stand specifications, including support points, adjustment range along and transverse to beam line, adjustment resolution, 3.1.2 Definition of interfaces with other systems: including vacuum systems, power systems, LCW, alignment, installation fixtures, etc. 3.1.3 Complete set of design and fabrication drawings suitable for procurement 3.1.7 Other information as necessary for the Engineering Design Report J. Tompkins

12. Work Package Discussion, cont. • “Bottom line” questions: • Can Area Systems manage the magnet design and cost work? • Do Area Systems have the budget to do it? • Is an overall Magnet System coordination/management function required? • Answers to the questions • Possibly, depending on Area, but neither their priority nor strength • Probably not • Yes J. Tompkins

13. Some Comments • What is needed in this approach? Coordination, integration, and avoidance of duplication… • If the magnet and power system design work is carried out through multiple separate work packages between Areas and magnet groups, how will the following be accomplished? • Application of design standards - operational characteristics and availability/reliability? • Minimization of the number of individual magnet styles? • Pulsed Magnets: R&D on fast pulsers needed by several Areas - how does this get done without duplication?This task shouldn’t be carried out in multiple Areas J. Tompkins

14. Work Package Coordination • There needs to be a work package for coordination/integration the Magnet Systems work: • Magnet System design standards, review of designs, availability/reliability, minimization of number of magnet styles • Power System design standards, review of designs, availability/reliability, minimization of number of component styles • Pulsed Magnet System R&D and design • And there must be ‘teeth’ to enforce standards across Area Systems J. Tompkins

15. EDR Comments, cont. • A Magnet Systems Design Coordination/Management function is necessary • It should be independent of specific Area Systems • It should set standards, review work, and be responsible for magnet system interfaces to other Technical Systems • Vacuum • Controls • CFS – LCW, power, etc. • It should have three components • DC Magnets – both conventional and SC – (Tompkins, Kashikhin, Spencer, …) • Power Systems – (Bellomo, Tartaglia) • Pulsed Magnet Systems – (Mattison) J. Tompkins

16. Magnet Systems Design Coordination/Management • General Tasks • Review of requirements • Design implications • Cost implications • Justification/Attainability/trade-offs • Material and component standards • Material specifications • Cu conductor sizes • Flow rates, pressure drops • Insulation techniques • Connectors, manifolds, flow switches • Design Reviews – with external reviewers - where appropriate • Major systems • Cost drivers • R&D issues J. Tompkins

17. Design Coordination/Management, cont. • General Tasks, cont. • Availability/reliability studies • FMEA - several magnet styles • FMEA - power system components • Integration of magnet styles across Area Systems to minimize cost • E.g., one magnet design to meet two slightly different sets of requirements • One point of contact for systems integration issues with other Technical Systems J. Tompkins

18. More General Issues • At present there is no formal connection between R&D programs and Magnet RDR work • There is no mechanism for Magnet Systems input into R&D plans or proposals • At the EDR level there must be coordination between R&D plans and magnet system designs and cost estimates • Magnet and Power Systems R&D must be pursued where necessary to allow design and costing • R&D should not be constrained by Area System boundaries, (e.g., Pulsed Magnet Systems) J. Tompkins

19. Coordination with R&D, cont. • R&D results should flow directly into the EDR • In certain areas, results from R&D are necessary before a component or system design can be completed and its cost estimated • R&D proposals – the level of review needs to be examined • Major proposals should be sent to independent, expert reviewers (cf. SBIR proposals) • Level of review could be determined by the amount requested, but it would be prudent to have all proposals evaluated by at least one outside expert reviewer J. Tompkins

20. Now let’s get realistic… • Support for EDR (US) • US EDR effort is being added to previously existing budget plans for FY07-FY09 • Funding for FY07 is already extremely difficult (late, at best) without adding EDR • Funding for FY08-FY09 was planned w/o EDR • Guidance is already below levels requested to carry out full R&D programs • Addition of EDR design effort is not at levels necessary to support the “30% design”... • EDR magnet design and cost estimate cannot be carried out without sufficient funding • Funding cannot compete with Area System R&D needs, it will always lose J. Tompkins

21. Getting real, cont. • There are ≥130 different magnet styles to be designed and estimated • Magnet engineers, physicists, alignment engineers • Tooling designers • Design/drafters • Buyers (for estimates) • This is not the RDR cost estimate • Detailed drawings required • All external interfaces need to be determined • No estimates based on “engineering experience” • Drawing packages, ‘bills of materials”, etc., needed for estimates • Availability/reliability needs to be “designed-in” • FMEA studies must be conducted • Management expectations must be consistent with resources allocated to the task J. Tompkins

22. Summary • A formal definition of EDR scope is needed • Level of design detail • Target completion date • Resources to be committed • Without sufficient support, this is a futile exercise • Cannot carry out the EDR at the RDR level of support for Magnet Systems • At present, there does not appear to be sufficient resources in existing US R&D budgets for the EDR work (even for the 25-30% design level) J. Tompkins

23. Summary, cont. • There must be a mechanism for overall management & coordination of Area System based ‘magnet’ work packages: • Coordination/integration issues • Minimize number of different magnet styles for cost savings • Design standards for availability/reliability and cost savings • Review function • R&D overlap or gaps • Design should be coupled to R&D results in EDR • R&D and Work Package review and assignment needs a more formal approach with external reviewers J. Tompkins