LHC machine Schedule, coordination & WAT

1. LHC machineSchedule, coordination & WAT K. Foraz March 22nd, 2011 IMWG - LHC machine

2. Initial « constat » Beginning of last year, situation was: • On the intervenants side: • Information to the different coordination teams • Edition in the TIOC list • Negotiation to get a date • Safety analysis: VIC, fiche de tache… • Edition of ADI • Edition of AOC, fire permit… • Performance of the task (hopping that nobody is sick..else re-ADI) • Progress report to different coordination teams IMWG - LHC machine

3. Initial « constat » • On the coordination sides: • Edition of the information in our own system • Coming from mails, phone calls, meetings • Check information with the other system • i.e. with TIOC • Scheduling • Safety check with safety coordinators • Check in EDH that ADIs were correctly signed by the OP group !!! • Vocabulary problems • Some work scheduled and approved were rejected • Some work not scheduled were rejected • LHC operator granted access thanks to the ADI numbers (awful job) IMWG - LHC machine

4. Initial « constat » • Discussions were held between OP, EN and GS • We need a tool • As time was running towards the end of the year, We took the decision to start simple: create and test a tool, which was respecting a simple workflow, not linked to objects, but to activities (as a first stage), allowing us to : • Avoid multiple edition of the same information • Have an accurate control of activities • Ease the access IMWG - LHC machine

5. General Workflow IMWG - LHC machine

6. 1. Intervenants make a Work Request (1/2) Same type of work covering different areas in the machine • What • Title • Type: consolidation, upgrade, inspection, maintenance, repair, test… • System type: based on the LHC naming convention • Long description • Technical Approval from LMC needed • Who • Work responsible • Max participants per location (needed to estimate the number of keys) • Number of teams (needed for schedule purposes) • Participants names IMWG - LHC machine

7. 1. Intervenants make a Work Request (2/2) • When • Date constraints • Intervention date • Intervention period type • Duration per area • Comments • Locations • Safety • Activity risks (anoxia, Chemical/industrial hygiene, Compressed air, Cryogenics, Electrical, Fire/Explosion, Gas, Ionizing radiation, Mechanical. Non Ionizing radiation) • & compensatories measures • Lock-out type: CV, compressed air, cryogenics, DIMR, electrical lock-out level 2, electricily, Fire permir, Gas, IS37, RP Send IMWG - LHC machine

8. 2. Coordination team analyzes the request • Can add activity risks/ Locations / Participants • Can specify whether AET is needed or not • WAT generates automatically tasks with the same characteristics as its Work Request, but for the spectrum of location defined. IMWG - LHC machine

9. 3. Scheduling phase (1/3) • From all the requests • 1. Constraints schedule • Identification and schedule of the blocking activities IMWG - LHC machine

10. 3. Scheduling phase (2/3) • Schedule of the otheractivitiesw.r.t. • The constrainstsschedule • Resourcesavailable • Minimizeco-activities • First draft in MsProject….. But not all the participants readit… • Insert correct dates in WAT, thanks to an excelsheet IMWG - LHC machine

11. 3. Scheduling phase (3/3) • Extraction from WAT in Excel….. Macro… • Schedule underexcelreadable by all IMWG - LHC machine

12. 4. Safetypreparation • Each Work Request is discussed in preparation meetings with work responsible and safety coordinators • If an AET is needed, then • Automatic generation of the AET(one week before the start), thanks to the information already edited in WAT • For the last Xmas break, derogation from HSE to have all the AET send only for approval… • Else it will have followed the AET-EDH workflow (future presentation by Serge ?) • If AET isapproved, then the taskisapproved IMWG - LHC machine

13. 5. Access and Progress • Providing that today • One has the access right to the machine • A work for a specific location • Declared • accepted technicaly • Scheduled • approved in matter of safety • Access will be granted • If access is in restricted, this person will be delivered a key • Schedule isupdatedthrough the Excel schedule EDH Access IMWG - LHC machine

14. WAT Inside: WorkRequestWorkflow IMWG - LHC machine

15. WAT Inside: TaskWorkflow IMWG - LHC machine

16. WAT Inside: Integrationwithexistingsystems ADAMS Access Control (person/place/time) Notifications Signatures LHC Locations Access Points EDH WAT LayoutDatabase Schedule Export, Bulk Update (Upload) Persons, OrganicUnits Excel Foundation IMWG - LHC machine

17. WAT Inside: Integrating the AET (EDH) Direct URL to access a task EDH buttons: authorizationwithoutleaving WAT (or stillfromwithin EDH) Adams accesscontrol EDH Document status / Info lines IMWG - LHC machine

18. WAT debriefingafter the break • Powerful Tool • Very good feed-back form all the actors: users, coordination teams, access control… • Strong control of activities with flexibility for users (intersite doors opened, addition of intervenient..) • The operator is no longer a bottleneck with multiple access points in simultaneous access request, and more importantly no more waiting times of several minutes for the users to get the operator attention to get by. • Very good support form AIS • Some improvements already done and other in the queue IMWG - LHC machine

19. Conclusion • The Work Acceptance tool has demonstrated its usefulness and its performance • Before going to far… it would be nice to get your impression, and develop a common tool to fulfill the desire of our hard worker partners. Thank you IMWG - LHC machine