big science projects - cernaccelconf.web.cern.ch/accelconf/ipac2014/talks/weib05_talk.pdf · big...
TRANSCRIPT
Big Science Projects What is it that makes some a success and others fail?
IPAC 2014
Dresden, 18 June 2014
James H. Yeck ESS CEO & Director General
www.europeanspallationsource.se
Personal experience with large science projects
• Compact Ignition Tokamak at Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (~0.5B) – Cancelled
• Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at Brookhaven National Lab (~0.75B) – Successful…
• US Large Hadron Collider at CERN: US “In-Kind” Project (~0.75B) – Successful
• IceCube Neutrino Observatory at the South Pole Antarctica (~0.3B) - Successful
• National Synchrotron Light Source II at Brookhaven National Lab (~1B) – Commissioning
• European Spallation Source at a new site in Lund Sweden (~2B) – To be determined
• Plus some experience with DUSEL/LBNE, LIGO, FRIB, and others
Experience from other projects: A few ingredients to success
NSLS II
Facility must be a priority of the science community!
Funding agency commitments and strong host role
Collaboration leadership enables success of others
Establish realistic goals – “Experience over hope”
Credibility through openness with transparency
Collective ownership of problems & solutions
Populate the organization with experience
Compact Ignition Tokamak at PPPL (~20% contingency)
• Lack of priority within the US plasma science community
• Declining US fusion funding required redirection of existing funding – winners
and losers
• Slow decision-making on technology choices – better enemy of good enough
• Host priority conflict between existing operating facility and new project
• Expectation that a better facility/experiment (BPX) @ 1B would be supported
• CIT cancelled, team redirected to BPX, BPX also cancelled
Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider @ BNL (~15%)
• Priority established within US nuclear physics community - long range plan
• Priority of the US funding agency, within annual funding limits
• Highest priority of host lab with generous external resources and support
• Hired key individuals and engaged NP community leadership
• Initial cost and schedule goals unrealistic, but morphed into achievable goals
• Limited scrutiny allowing work on problems in the shadow of the focus on SSC
• Completed when ground rules were changing – to deliver on initial promises!
US LHC (ATLAS, CMS, Machine) @ Labs & Universities (20% & 40%)
• Unquestioned priority within the US high energy physics community – post SSC
• Explicit internationally agreed upon annual funding profile
• Priority of host laboratory and universities – people and management support
• Highly experienced and motivated collaborations and leadership
• Maximized US deliverables within a fixed total budget
• Realistic goals including high initial contingency resulting in more deliverables
• Collective ownership in challenges and success
IceCube @ South Pole (~22% contingency)
• Academy studies confirmed priority based on new funding (NSF MREFC)
• US National Science Foundation Major Research Equipment and Facility
Construction (MREFC) funding – stable annual profile based on requirements
• Priority for NSF South Pole Station (support) and University of Wisconsin-
Madison (project and collaboration host) – resources and management
• Unique challenges due to seasonal installation - austral summer ~ 3 months
• Realistic goals - contingency resulted in more 20% more deliverables
• Collective ownership in challenges and success
8
15.0
39.5
85.7
140.1
199.4
235.3
260.8
273.6 279.2 279.5
231.6
$0M
$50M
$100M
$150M
$200M
$250M
$300M
FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12
FISCAL YEAR
DEPLOY INITIAL STRINGS & TANKS
INITIAL OPERATIONS & DATA ANALYSIS CAPABILITY
FULL SCALE DOM PRODUCTION
FULL OPERATIONS
& DATA ANALYSIS CAPABILITY
DETERMINE FULL DEPLOYMENT RATE
COMPLETE EHWD INTEGRATION & TEST
Initial In-Ice Strings & IceTop Tanks Installed Jan-2005
Initial Operational Capability Mar-2007
Project Completion & Closeout Aug-2012
Total Project Cost $279.5
Value of Foreign Contributions $37.4
NSF Funding $242.1
Remaining Contingency $0.1
Strings Installed 86
31-Aug-12Performance and Cost through:
IceCube Project Baseline (M$)
___Total Funds (US & NonUS)
___Original Budget (BCWS)
___Current Budget (BCWS) 100.00 %
___Earned Value (BCWP) 100.00 %
___Actual Cost (ACWP) 99.60 %
IceCube Performance (Funding, Plan, Actual)
9
29.5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Apr
-04
Jul-0
4
Oct
-04
Jan-0
5
Apr
-05
Jul-0
5
Oct
-05
Jan-0
6
Apr
-06
Jul-0
6
Oct
-06
Jan-0
7
Apr
-07
Jul-0
7
Oct
-07
Jan-0
8
Apr
-08
Jul-0
8
Oct
-08
Jan-0
9
Apr
-09
Jul-0
9
Oct
-09
Jan-1
0
Apr
-10
Jul-1
0
IceCube Contingency % of Remaining Work
Project Year 3
33.3%
29.5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Apr
-04
Jul-0
4
Oct
-04
Jan-0
5
Apr
-05
Jul-0
5
Oct
-05
Jan-0
6
Apr
-06
Jul-0
6
Oct
-06
Jan-0
7
Apr
-07
Jul-0
7
Oct
-07
Jan-0
8
Apr
-08
Jul-0
8
Oct
-08
Jan-0
9
Apr
-09
Jul-0
9
Oct
-09
Jan-1
0
Apr
-10
Jul-1
0
IceCube Contingency % of Remaining Work
Project Year 4
Annual Planning of Estimate To Complete
33.3%
26.2%29.5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Apr
-04
Jul-0
4
Oct
-04
Jan-0
5
Apr
-05
Jul-0
5
Oct
-05
Jan-0
6
Apr
-06
Jul-0
6
Oct
-06
Jan-0
7
Apr
-07
Jul-0
7
Oct
-07
Jan-0
8
Apr
-08
Jul-0
8
Oct
-08
Jan-0
9
Apr
-09
Jul-0
9
Oct
-09
Jan-1
0
Apr
-10
Jul-1
0
IceCube Contingency % of Remaining Work
Annual Planning of Estimate To Complete
Add 10 IceTop Stations & Installation Season
Project Year 5
23.6%
29.5%26.2%
33.3%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Apr
-04
Jul-0
4
Oct
-04
Jan-0
5
Apr
-05
Jul-0
5
Oct
-05
Jan-0
6
Apr
-06
Jul-0
6
Oct
-06
Jan-0
7
Apr
-07
Jul-0
7
Oct
-07
Jan-0
8
Apr
-08
Jul-0
8
Oct
-08
Jan-0
9
Apr
-09
Jul-0
9
Oct
-09
Jan-1
0
Apr
-10
Jul-1
0
IceCube Contingency % of Remaining Work
Annual Planning of Estimate To Complete
Add 10 IceTop Stations & Installation Season
Instrumentation for 5 Additional Strings
Project Year 6
26.4%
33.3%
26.2%29.5%
23.6%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Apr
-04
Jul-0
4
Oct
-04
Jan-0
5
Apr
-05
Jul-0
5
Oct
-05
Jan-0
6
Apr
-06
Jul-0
6
Oct
-06
Jan-0
7
Apr
-07
Jul-0
7
Oct
-07
Jan-0
8
Apr
-08
Jul-0
8
Oct
-08
Jan-0
9
Apr
-09
Jul-0
9
Oct
-09
Jan-1
0
Apr
-10
Jul-1
0
IceCube Contingency % of Remaining Work
Annual Planning of Estimate To Complete
Add 10 IceTop Stations & Installation Season
Instrumentation for 5 Additional Strings
Project Year 7
26.4%
33.3%
26.2%29.5%
33.6%
23.6%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Apr
-04
Jul-0
4
Oct
-04
Jan-0
5
Apr
-05
Jul-0
5
Oct
-05
Jan-0
6
Apr
-06
Jul-0
6
Oct
-06
Jan-0
7
Apr
-07
Jul-0
7
Oct
-07
Jan-0
8
Apr
-08
Jul-0
8
Oct
-08
Jan-0
9
Apr
-09
Jul-0
9
Oct
-09
Jan-1
0
Apr
-10
Jul-1
0
IceCube Contingency % of Remaining Work
Annual Planning of Estimate To Complete
Add 10 IceTop Stations & Installation Season
Instrumentation for 5 Additional Strings
Project Year 8
PY7 & RPSC FY08 Closeout
RPSC FY11 6 Str. & PY9 Pre-Ops.
Contingency Experience Contingency % of Remaining Work
Dimensions of ESS A Next Generation Materials Research Infrastructure
SCIENCE The most powerful spallation source with the highest flux and realtime data acquisition • Life science • Soft condensed matter • Chemistry of materials • Energy research • Magnetism and superconductivity • Engineering materials and
geosciences • Archaeology and
heritage conservation • Fundamental and particle physics
SOCIETY Research directly related to societal values Opportunity to benefit from the innovation capacity of industry. Driver for job creation
PROJECT/FACILITY A partnership of 17 European nations committed to the goal of collectively building and operating the world’s leading facility for research using neutrons by the second quarter of the 21st century.
GEO SCIENCE
LIGHTNING
TAILOR MADE
MATERIAL
MEDICINE
SOLAR ENERGY
BIO FUEL
TRANSPORTS
COSMETICS
FUNCTIONAL FOOD
MOBILE PHONES
PACE- MAKERS
IMPLANTS
NEW MATERIALS
ESS - Bridging the Neutron Gap
• ESS long pulse is more powerful and 30 - 100 times brighter than existing facilities • Compliments existing short pulse neutron scattering facilities
Berkeley 37-inch cyclotron
350 mCi Ra-Be source
Chadwick
1930 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
105
1010
1015
1020
1
ISIS
Pulsed Sources
ZINP-P
ZINP-P/
KENS WNR IPNS
ILL
X-10
CP-2
Steady State Sources
HFBR
HFIR NRU MTR
NRX
CP-1
1940 1950 1960
Effe
ctiv
e th
erm
al n
eutr
on
flu
x n
/cm
2-s
(Updated from Neutron Scattering, K. Skold and D. L. Price, eds., Academic Press, 1986)
FRM-II
SINQ
SNS
Reactors
Spallation
J-PARC (1MW)
J-PARC LANSCE
OPAL
PIK
ESS long pulse potential
time (ms)
Inte
nsity (
n/c
m2/s
/ste
r/Å
)
10
5
x1013
ISIS TS1
ISIS TS2
SNS JPARC
ILL
(JPARC 1MW)
ESS
0 1 2 3
Recent improvement in ESS performance
wavelength [Å]
pea
k b
righ
tnes
s [n
/cm
2/s
/sr/
Å]
TDR Moderator
3cm Tall Moderator
Cold Thermal
Sweden and Denmark:
47,5% Construction
15% Operations
100% Cash
Partner Countries:
52,5% Construction
85% Operations
IKC/Cash ~ 70% / 30%
European science project
Road to realizing the world’s leading facility for research using neutrons
2014 Construction work starts on the site
2009 Decision: ESS will be built in Lund
2025 ESS construction complete
2003 First European design effort of ESS completed
2012 ESS Design Update phase complete
2019 First neutrons on instruments
2023 ESS starts user program
ESS transition from ESS AB to an ERIC
• ESS member countries will submit application this summer to establish a European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC) for ESS. ERIC will be in place in early 2015.
ESS transition from ESS AB to an ERIC
• ESS member countries will submit application this summer to establish a European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC) for ESS. ERIC will be in place in early 2015.
European Spallation Source Council
Preparing the project
• Deliver on the Technical Design Report performance and Steering Committee commitments
- 5 MW accelerator capability
- Construction cost of 1,843 B€
- Operations cost target of 140 M€
- 22 “public” instruments
• Start w/ unconstrained resources (technically limited schedule) and develop credible project execution plans
• Comprehensive review of project baseline and execution plans
• Secure funding and resources and align schedules with the available resources
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
ESS Program
Conventional
Facilities
Accelerator
Target
Neutron
Scattering
Systems
Integrated
Control Systems
Building
Commissioning
Concluding
Design
Design
Construction
Commissioning Design &
Prototyping Procurement
Installation
Commissioning
Design
Procurement
Installation
Commissioning
Installing
Construction
Ground Break
First installations (of Machine Systems)
First Neutrons
Machine 2.0 GeV
Accelerator, Target, Aux, Office, Lab & Instr Bldngs*
570 MeV
Instrument Selection - Decision
Design
Commissioning
Construction
Design
Development
Commissioning CS Network Operational
3 Instruments ready for Comm.
Initial Operation
Installed for 2.0 GeV
16 Instr
End Of Construction Start Of Construction
Concept
Devlopment
Licensing Preliminary Design Acccelerator Bldngs
Detailed Design Accelerator Bldngs
Earth Works
G01 Linac Tunnel G02 Klystron Bldng
Cryo Kompressor Bldng
Medium Beta Fabrication Spoke Series Procurement
High Beta Fabrication
Installation Phase 1
Installation Phase 2
Innstr 16 – Cold Comm.
Innstr 16 – Constr & Inst.
Top-Level ESS Project Schedule
1st Call for User Proposals
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
ESS Program
Conventional
Facilities
Accelerator
Target
Neutron
Scattering
Systems
Integrated
Control Systems
Building
Commissioning
Concluding
Design
Design
Construction
Commissioning Design &
Prototyping Procurement
Installation
Commissioning
Design
Procurement
Installation
Commissioning
Installing
Construction
Ground Break
First installations (of Machine Systems)
First Neutrons
Machine 2.0 GeV
Accelerator, Target, Aux, Office, Lab & Instr Bldngs*
570 MeV
Instrument Selection - Decision
Design
Commissioning
Construction
Design
Development
Commissioning CS Network Operational
3 Instruments ready for Comm.
Initial Operation
Installed for 2.0 GeV
16 Instr
End Of Construction Start Of Construction
Concept
Devlopment
Licensing Preliminary Design Acccelerator Bldngs
Detailed Design Accelerator Bldngs
Earth Works
G01 Linac Tunnel G02 Klystron Bldng
Cryo Kompressor Bldng
Medium Beta Fabrication Spoke Series Procurement
High Beta Fabrication
Installation Phase 1
Installation Phase 2
Innstr 16 – Cold Comm.
Innstr 16 – Constr & Inst.
Top-Level ESS Project Schedule
1st Call for User Proposals
Swedish Environmental Court Verdict on June 12 Permission to Start Construction!
ESS, Max IV and Science Village near Lund
Max IV
Science Village
Lund
ESS
E22 Highway
Target station and experimental halls
Accelerator
24
€ 42
€ 109
€ 228
€ 382
€ 29
€ 47
€ 123
€ 127
€ 0
€ 100
€ 200
€ 300
€ 400
€ 500
€ 600
IKC Cash
Construction cost: € 1,84 Billion
In-kind: € 750 Million
Accelerator NSS Target ICS
65%
59%
65%
75%
€ 509 M
€ 350 M
€ 155 M
€ 71 M
ESS In-kind Goals
Ingredients to Success
• Facility is a priority of the science community!
• Funding agency commitment and clarity of roles and responsibilities
• Strong host role as an equal partner with the funding agencies
• Populate the organization with high quality people – recruit experience
• Project & Collaboration Leadership
- Makes timely decisions, seeking consensus whenever possible
- Serves as an umbrella for the team so they can focus on their jobs
- Manages expectations and communicate plans and results
• Understand the project – determine characteristics that are common to other
large projects and those that are unique
• Establish realistic project goals (experience over hope)
• Maintain credibility with stakeholders through openness and transparency
• Seek collective ownership of problems and solutions
Thank you for your attention!