Linac Proton Driver Cost Estimate

1
Linac Proton Driver Cost Estimate

• Rich Stanek
• March 15 , 2005

2
Outline

• Summary of the Linac Cost Estimate
• Whats in the Estimate
• Cost Drivers
• Detailed Cost Estimate Review
• The Next Steps
• Conclusions

3
Assembling the Cost Estimate

• Linac cost estimate is developed in a WBS format
  (Excel)
• It is separated into two major categories
• Civil Construction and Technical Systems
• Component cost estimates are based on
• Actual costs for existing equipment
• Vendor quotes
• Scaling from TESLA, SNS, FNAL/MI, and J PARC
  costs
• Detailed engineering estimates and
• High level estimates
• Labor estimates are made using Eng, Tech and Phys
  categories only and using TD SWF averages
  (actual)
• Detailed contingency analysis has not yet been
  performed
• Costs are shown in 2004 dollars without GA or
  contingency, unless explicitly noted
• GA and contingency are applied at the highest
  level of the estimate to arrive at an estimated
  Total Cost for the PD Project

4
Review of the PD/Linac Cost
Davis Bacon labor shows up as MS GA rate
will be lower on large POs
5
Whats IN / Whats NOT

• IN
• All costs associated with civil construction,
  power utilities
• Costs for procuring, fabricating and installing
  all technical components up to and including
  injection into MI
• Costs to set up tests of production cryomodules
  in SMTF
• (but not the costs of operating SMTF)
• Cost of Project Management (including reviews)
• NOT (all budgeted separately)
• Costs associated with MI Upgrades (ex. RF
  Upgrade)
• Costs for setting up SMTF and the cryomodule
  factories
• Costs associated with ongoing and near-term RD
  efforts
• Costs for spares

6
Cost Drivers
Total 319M (without GA and contingency)
Cost Drivers are the Cryomodules, Civil
Construction and Cryogenics
7
Assembling the Cost Estimate 2

• 2.0 Civil Construction
• PD Civil Working Group meets weekly gt lots of
  interaction between technical, civil and
  installation personnel
• Looked at different geographical locations for
  the Linac
• Good layout for the technical components
• Ability for adjustments and expansion in the
  future (if desired)
• Minimal environmental impact
• Viable routing for utilities (power, chilled
  water, communications)
• Reasonable impact on existing facilities (TeV
  crossing MI tie in)
• Cost generated using standard FESS methodology
• Nothing new about the construction techniques
• Using 20 EDIA (in-house) and 15 EDIA
  (contracted)
• Based on DOE recommendations for projects at this
  stage

8
Civil Construction Summary
EA work will begin soon to assure no negative
impact on cost/schedule
Enclosures _at_ MI depth cost based on MI actuals
Building Cost 315/sf high bay/industrial 215/sf
office/tech area Add in extras
Absorber cost scaled from MI
Numbers do not include GA or contingency
9
Example of FESS Worksheet
10
Assembling the Cost Estimate 3

• 3.0 Front End ( 8.1M) gt 3.8 of Technical
  Systems
• Current cost estimate based on cold option (use
  of cold SSR and DSR)
• Mostly high level estimates (Level 2 or 3)
• Draws on experience at FNAL, SNS, JPARC and
  scaling from ACCSYS PL-7 Linac
• Labor estimate is also high level with SWF/MS
  ratio 73

11
Assembling the Cost Estimate 4

• 4.0 Cryomodules (101M) gt Clearly the 1 Cost
  Driver
• MS Costs (86.7M)
• Based on RFQ (55), vendor communications,TESLA/S
  NS costs and Eng est.
• EDIA (Design Phase) Costs (3.3M)
• 500 drawings/CM design x 20 hrs/drawing (CMS, LHC
  experience _at_ FNAL)
• Assembly Costs (10.7M) gt assembly crew 18.5
  techs (combination of assembly, QC, alignment and
  testing personnel, spread over 2 facilities)
• Spokes 7 weeks/CM
• Elliptical 5 weeks/CM
• Assume 4 FTE engineers associated with assembly
  teams
• Installation Costs (1.1M)
• 10K MS (rigging/transportation) 2 techs for 2
  weeks EDIA
• Key decision that needs to be made (Value
  Engineering Stage)
• Spokes versus Elliptical cavities for low Beta
  (.47 .61)

12
Roll up of Cryomodule Costs

• Cryomodule costs are segmented by type
• 1 SSR, 2 DSR, 6 TSR, 6 Beta.81, 36 Beta1
  1 Cu cavity (Debuncher H20)
• MS costs vary by type although format (cost
  breakdown) is the same
• MS (SSR) 3.365M MS (Beta1) 1.53M

13
Assembling the Cost Estimate 5

• 5.0 Cryogenic System (28.6M) gt 13.4 of Tech
  Systems
• FNAL AD/Cryogenics Department leading the effort
• Cost estimate based on the estimated heat loads
  (TSR option) and vendor communication as well as
  analysis of recent procurements using an LHC
  model for refrigeration cost versus capacity

14
Assembling the Cost Estimate 6

• 6.0 Modulators Pulse Transformers (13.9M) gt
  6.5 of Technical Systems
• Modulator cost based on actual purchase and
  assembly of units by AD/EED which have been
  shipped to DESY/TESLA TTF.
• Credit taken for quantity/price reductions
• Assembly cost set equal to MS cost (rule of
  thumb based on years of experience building this
  type of equipment)
• Assume major assembly work gets done on outside
  by vendors

15
Assembling the Cost Estimate 7

• 7.0 Klystrons (6.9M) gt 3.2 of Technical
  Systems
• Current estimate includes three 325MHz Klystrons
  for Front End and TSR option cavities and ten
  1300MHz Klystrons
• Several possible vendors
• Costs based on actual costs (TESLA purchases)

16
Assembling the Cost Estimate 8

• 8.0 RF Distributions (18.1M) gt 8.5 of
  Technical Systems
• Includes both 325 MHz and 1300 MHz distribution
  systems
• Most components are standard industrial items
• Fast ferrite phase shifters are one of the key
  parts in this system
• Tests at FNAL have successfully demonstrated
  performance
• RD continues and vendor quotes exist for present
  configurations
• TSR Option is assumed and costed

17
Assembling the Cost Estimate 9

• 9.0 Utilities (6.7M) gt 3.2 of Technical
  Systems
• LCW System (Linac, Klystron Gallery, Pump Room
  and Dump)
• Vacuum System (ion pumps, gauges, controls and
  leak checking)
• LCW system is simplified due to a steady
  repeating pattern
• Allows for prefabrication of assemblies
• Main LCW headers could be added to the civil
  outfitting contracts (if this is more efficient
  or saves costs)
• LCW installation is assumed Davis Bacon work
  (MS)
• Labor estimate has 20 scope contingency included
  in the numbers

18
Assembling the Cost Estimate 10

• 10.0 Instrumentation, Controls Power Supplies
  (11M) gt 5.2 of Technical Systems
• An example of an estimate that is done at a high
  level
• Needs to be better defined gt will establish a
  Working Group to look at all aspects of
  Instrumentation Controls for the SC Linac
• Present estimates based on FNAL experience
  (Engineering Estimate)
• Estimate for Power Supplies for the Front End
  magnets is more detailed (only a small of the
  costs 336K)

19
Assembling the Cost Estimate 11

• 11.0 8 GeV Transfer Line Absorbers (8.5M) gt
  3.5 of Technical Systems
• Magnets (dipoles, C magnets, quads and trims)
• Power supplies
• Vacuum system (ion pumps, valves, gauges,
  controls leak checking)
• Instrumentation (BPM, BLM, CT, PM)
• Dumps (8 GeV Primary, Injection Foil)
• Foil Changer
• Collimation System
• Cost based on current technical design using
  FNAL/TD methodology for magnet cost estimation
  engineer estimates

20
Assembling the Cost Estimate 12

• 12.0 Infrastructure Integration (6.9M) gt 3.3
  of Technical Systems
• Picks up things that everyone else forgets
• Interlocks (very detailed estimate based on
  present layout)
• Installation Coordination
• Including Alignment
• Misc. Cabling Electrical Integration
• Support for Testing in SMTF
• Most of the items are engineering estimates
• Sum of the last three items
• 24 FTE of Engineering (3.1M)
• 36 FTE of Technician Support (2.9M)
• 21 FTE of Physicist time (Priceless)

21
Main Injector Upgrade

• The cost of the MI Upgrade is not included in the
  Linac cost estimate
• The Plan is still evolving and a number of the
  upgrades will be part of the Proton Plan
• A major item of the MI Upgrade is RF Upgrade
• Dual PA Tube Upgrade - 12M (Tech) 7M (Civil)
• Allows beam power up to 1 MW
• New RF cavities (more ambitious) - 20M (Tech)
  15M (Civil)
• Allows beam power up to 2 MW
• Improve electrical/power systems gt 6M
• Reduce MI cycle time to 1 sec. achieve beam
  power gt 2 MW
• Rough estimates (just for order of magnitude
  scale)
• Still unclear as to exactly what will be in the
  Proton Plan

22
Next Steps in Project Planning

• Starting with the current cost estimate
• Develop (in more detail) areas that have lump sum
  estimates
• Choose a standard methodology for risk evaluation
  and contingency analysis
• Develop the detailed list of tasks that need to
  be accomplished to complete the project
• Develop durations, schedules and resources needed
  for each individual tasks
• Load into Open Plan and create a Resource Loaded
  Schedule using standard resource categories
• Adopt the Lab standard EVMS (Cobra)
• Establish a Document Control Database System
• Set up a Project Management Plan and Project
  Office

23
Value Engineering Analysis

• As the Proton Driver Project moves farther along,
  the civil construction plan as well as the
  designs of all technical components will undergo
  a Value Engineering Analysis
• Technical/Cost/Schedule trade-offs will be
  examined and analyzed to arrive at a final design
  that is both technically and financially
  optimized
• Examples of the types of analysis that will be
  done
• Size of tunnels/buildings/access ways versus
  intended use
• Reuse of existing equipment (ex. cryogenic)
• Decision of TSR vs. elliptical cavities for the
  low Beta region
• To first order approximation this is cost neutral
  (technical/schedule?)

24
Conclusions

• The present Linac cost estimate establishes a
  reasonable and believable Range of Values for the
  cost of a SC Proton Driver at Fermilab
• It is the first step in establishing a proposed
  baseline cost estimate for the PD Project
• Coupled with a fully developed Technical Design
  Report, a risk based Contingency Analysis, and a
  Resource Loaded Schedule, this cost estimate will
  form the basis for managing the Proton Diver
  Project at Fermilab