Electronic Document Management System:

1. Electronic Document Management System: • A tool for Product Lifecycle Management Marc Ross 31 March 2014

2. 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: Share experiences with the use of EDMS for project development, review, and production. Discussthesystems in place that link DESY, DESY-XFEL partners, and XFEL industryin order to understandthe technical (QC/QA), oversight (management), and safety (e.g. PED) functionality. Evaluatepossibleapplication of parts of thesesystems to LCLS-II, including, possibly, application of thefull-system in specific, specializedexamples – such as cavityfabricationvendoroversight. This exampleis of direct, immediateinterest as weconsidercavityfabrication and processing. 4. Discusspathsforward, including EDMS development, licensing, use of alternateplatforms and etc.

3. Agenda

4. Participants: Attendees from E-XFEL and LCLS-II Partner Labs:

5. PLM (Wikipedia):

6. Process: Technical Requirements Management Vendor Oversight; Travellers • 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 • Maintain and support • Dispose

7. 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 real-world physical technology, implementing those solutions which this technology is most suited to. When these bottom–up solutions have real-world 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?"

8. 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.

9. LCLS-II Methodology for Interface Control Top – down Design Example Technical Requirements Management L. Plummer & D. Marsh LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014

10. LCLS-II Project Controls Documents • L. Plummer & D. Marsh describe: 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

11. LCLS-II Document / Configuration Control (Sharepoint)

12. LCLS-II Document / Configuration Control - 2

13. Necessary LCLS-II Documentation Available on Website LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014 • 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

14. 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

15. LCLS-II: 14 GeV LCLS linac still used for x-rays up to 25 keV North side source: 0.2-1.2 keV (≥ 100kHz) NEH FEH 4 GeV SC Linac In sectors 0-10 South side source: 1.0 - 25 keV (120 Hz, copper” linac ) 1.0 - 5 keV (≥100 kHz, SC Linac) Commissioning planned for late 2019 LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014

16. LCLS-II - Linac and Compressor Layout for 4 GeV L2 j = -21° V0=1447 MV Ipk = 50 A Lb = 0.56 mm L3 j = 0 V0=2409 MV Ipk = 1.0 kA Lb = 0.024 mm L0 j= * V0=94 MV Ipk = 12 A Lb = 2.0 mm L1 j =-21° V0=223 MV Ipk = 12 A Lb =2.0 mm HL j =-165° V0 =55 MV CM01 CM2,3 CM15 CM35 CM04 CM16 3.9GHz LTU E = 4.0 GeV R56 = 0 sd 0.016% 2-km LH E = 95 MeV R56 = -14.5 mm sd = 0.05 % BC1 E = 250 MeV R56 = -55 mm sd = 1.4 % BC2 E = 1600 MeV R56 = -60 mm sd = 0.46 % GUN 0.75 MeV 100-pC machine layout: Oct. 8, 2013; v21 ASTRA run; Bunch length Lb is FWHM * L0 cav. phases: ~(3.4, -15.2, 0, 0, 0, 15,15) P. Emma, L. Wang, C. Papadopoulos Includes 2.2-km RW-wake LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014

17. Closely based on the European XFEL / ILC / TESLA Design LCLS-II Linac consists of: LCLS-II SRF Linac TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross

18. 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 cryomoduledesign 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

19. 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

20. 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

21. Cryomodule schedule and milestones - Fermilab LCLS-II Cryomodule MilestonesLong Lead Procurements start: 10/15/14Cryomodule production start: 10/15/15Cryomodule production complete: 11/12/18Last cryomodule delivered to SLAC: 12/15/18

22. 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

23. Product Breakdown Structure:

24. XFEL EDMS shall:

25. TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross

26. TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross

27. 12.1 EDMS

28. 12.1 EDMS (cont)

30. Modified Process Flow Scheme (2) TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross

31. Modified Process Flow Test

32. Modified Process Flow Test (2) 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. TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross

37. LCLS-II QA/QC End Item Data Package Collection • 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 LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014

38. LCLS-II Preproduction Cryomodule1.3 GHz, modified for CW operation LCLS-II cryomodule

39. End