takeyasu ito university of tennessee/oak ridge national laboratory edm cost and schedule review...
Post on 17-Jan-2018
215 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Takeyasu ItoUniversity of Tennessee/Oak Ridge National Laboratory
EDM Cost and Schedule Review February, 2005
Beam Splitter / State Selector,
Polarizing Magnet, and Spin Flipper
•WBS 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3: Splitter/State Selector Main Body•WBS 1.2.4, 1.2.5, 1.2.6: Polarizing Magnet•WBS 1.3.1, 1.3.2, 1.3.3: Spin Flipper
Takeyasu Ito 2
SNS FNBP UCN Beamline and EDM Experiment Layout
Takeyasu Ito 3
Purpose, Functions and Design Goals
• Split the beam into two, to feed the two measurement cells
• Polarize neutrons• Flip the polarization of each beam
independently• Maximize the beam delivered to the
measurement cells
Takeyasu Ito 4
Principle of Polarizer/Splitter with Polarizing Supermirror
Polarizing supermirror:One spin state: reflected up to the critical angle c
psm
The other spin state: transmitted at all angles
cguide c
psm
cguide
If the input guide has m=1.5, and PSM has m=2.4, then = 14mrad.Need 10 m for 15cm wide guide
In order for one spin state to be 100% reflected,
cpsm
Takeyasu Ito 5
One Possible Layout
12 cm wide, m=3.5 straight guide(buried under shielding)
Diverginghorn (7 m)
30 cm wide, m=1.5straight guide ( 2m)
Polarizer/Splitter (14 m)
m=2.4 polarizing supermirrorcoated on thin Si wafer
Rudimentary (2-dimentional) Monte Carlo study indicated 30% transmission and 90% polarization.
Takeyasu Ito 6
Cost Estimate - Overview (WBS 1.2)
• Design– $63,200 + $27,176
• Procurement– $953,940+ $410,194
• Installation– $12,640 + $5,435
Total + Contingency= $1,029,780 +$442,805Note: The diverging horn is not included in the budget although it is not included in the FNPB baseline. If this is proven to be beneficial for other experiments at the FNPB UCN line, we expect some kind of cost sharing between FNPB and EDM.
Takeyasu Ito 7
Cost Estimate - Design (WBS 1.2.1)
• Conceptual design/Monte Carlo simulation– Physicist x 100hrs = $0
• Shop drawings– Engineer x 200hrs = $31,600
• Preparation of equipment spec– Engineer x 200hrs = $31,600
Total + Contingency = $63,200 + $27,176
Takeyasu Ito 8
Cost Estimate - Procurement (WBS1.2.2)
• Preparation for procurement– Physicist x 30hrs = $0– Engineer x 30hrs = $4,740
• Splitter/State Selector– Engineering Design + Fabrication = $949,200
(=$840,000+13% overhead)
Total + Contingency = $953,940+ $410,194
Takeyasu Ito 9
Splitter/State Selector System
• Basis for estimate– Supermirror guides $30k/m for m=3.5 * Note: price of coating goes as m4
– Si wafer $30 / 4-inch disk * From semiconductor industry, roughness ~ 5Å
(source J.J.Ferme from Seso)• Cost estimate
– $30k/m x 14m x 2 = $840 k * Factor 2 for coating Si wafer and constructing
more complicated system than straight guide
Takeyasu Ito 10
Example: SNS FNPB UCN Beamline
• Guides = $25.1K/m• Vacuum housing=$3.84K/m• Support and Adjustment fixtures=$790/m
*Based on quote from Swiss Neutronics on FNPB UCN beamline with the following parameters:– The guide size is 100mm x 120mm– The guide will have m=3.5 all sides– The guide is straight– The guide has a total length of 30m
Takeyasu Ito 11
Cost Estimate - Installation (WBS1.2.3)
• Installation– Technician x 80hrs = $12,640
• Oversight– Physicist x 40hrs = $0
Total + contingency = $12,640 + $5,435
Takeyasu Ito 12
4Design AND manufacturing
2Material cost AND laborrate
Design OR manufacturing
1Same for allMaterial cost OR labor rate
Risk weightScheduleCostTechnical
Technical, cost, and schedule risk weights
15%Engineering judgmentNew design, way beyond the current state-of-the-art
10%Top-down estimate from analogous programsNew design, development of new technology whichadvances state-of-the-art
8%Delays completion of critical pathsubsystem item
In-house estimate for item with minimalexperience and minimal in-housecapability
New design, requires some R&D but does not advancethe state-of-the-art
6%In-house estimate for item with minimalexperience but related to existingcapabilities
New design, different from established designs orexisting technology
4%Delays completion of non-critical pathsubsystem item
In-house estimate based on previous similarexperience
New design, nothing exotic
3%Vendor quote with some design sketchesExtensive modifications to an existing design
2%No schedule impact on any other itemVendor quote from established drawingsMinor modifications to an existing design
1%Off-the-shelf or catalog itemExisting design and off-the-shelf hardware
Risk factorScheduleCostTechnical
Technical, cost, and schedule risk factors
Takeyasu Ito 13
Cost Estimate - Contingencyfor WBS 1.2.1-3
• Technical– Risk factor=10%– Risk weight=2
• Cost– Risk factor=15%– Risk weight=1
• Schedule– Risk factor=8
Total percentage contingency = 43%
Takeyasu Ito 14
Estimate for Duration
• Design: 88 days + 43% float – Conceptual design: 100 hours– Shop Drawing: 200 hours– Preparation of equipment spec: 200hours
• Procurement: 1 year + 43% float• Installation: 14 days + 43% float
Takeyasu Ito 15
Cost and Schedule Estimate for Polarizing Magnet (WBS 1.2.4-6)
• Design– Design work by physicists– $0– 255 days
• Procure– $158,200+ $68,026– 183 days
• Install– $12,640 + $5,435– 21 days
Takeyasu Ito 16
Cost and Schedule Estimate for Spin Flipper (WBS1.3.1-3)
• Design– Design work by physicists– $0– 21 days
• Procure– Flippers: $40,000– Power supplies, etc: $36,000– Total: $85,880 + $36,928– 183 days
• Install– $6,320 + $2,718– 14 days
Takeyasu Ito 17
Summary
•Splitter/State selector (WBS 1.2)•$1,200,620 +$516,266•662 days
•Spin Flippers (WBS 1.3)•$92,220 + $39,646•317 days
top related