Early Thoughts on the Reference Design Report

1
Early Thoughts on theReference Design Report

• Peter H. Garbincius
• for the
• GDE Design / Cost Board

2
Barry showed the overall organization for RDR
yesterday
3
GDE Design/Cost Board

• Peter H. Garbincius, Chairman,
• Wilhelm Bialowons, Atsushi Enomoto,
• Jean-Pierre Delahaye,Robert Kephart,
• Olivier Napoly, Ewan Paterson,
• Nan Phinney, Tetsuo Shidara, and
• Nobuhiro Terunuma
• ( Cost Engineering Group)
• With backup by the Accelerator Physics Group
• Tor Raubenheimer, Nick Walker, Kaoru Yokoya

4
Design / Cost BoardMission Statementagain, from
Barry, yesterday
5
Preparation of the Reference Design Report

• Design Cost Board will provide guidance and
  structure, define depth requirements for the
  elements of cost effort, develop, advise, lead,
  review, and manage the preparation of RDR.
• Area Systems Groups are led by full-time teams,
  coordinate Technical Global System Groups, and
  are responsible for providing detailed designs,
  text, and cost estimates
• Work together with Change Control Board, RD
  Board, and Cost Engineering Team
• Final Publication Deadline end of 2006

6
Interaction w Area System Groups

• DCB soon has to tell them what we need.
• Gotta make sure they have the
• manpower resources to do the job
• on the needed schedule.
• Determine scope, schedules, goals,
• and deliverables.
• DCB definitely reviews and approves!
• will require monthly reports

7
the RDR Design Matrix
8
one-line attributes for cost est.

• inclusive cant neglect anything important
• parametric quantities, escalation, overheads,
  labor rates, cost vs size or performance (e.g.
  gradient)
• Barry - how does cost vary with a performance
  parameter? e.g. bunches?
• bottom-up some elements, but many
• will be top-down, scaled, parametric, etc.
• flexible easily follow any scope changes !!!

9
Global issues will be important thanks
Jonathan!

• Cant leave anything out follow all items
  from conception, design, procurement, testing,
  inventory, material handling, installation,
  commissioning
• Be careful at boundaries, interfaces, and
  hand-offs between groups systems
• Performance requirements specs will determine
  engineering effort at cost
• Make sure you specify what you need,
  but dont over-specify (driving up costs)

10
Quality of evolving cost estimate

• Use whatever we have at any given time
• e.g. today we have TESLA TDR USLCTOS
• Update as new and better info is available
• a living document
• Need to carry along status date of estimate
• basis of estimate tag for each element
• Goal is to get adequate and sufficient cost
• estimate for RDR deadline

11
We do have some prior examples

• NLC Copper Book, TESLA TDR, GLC,
• and the USLC Options Study
• We should review the approach
• and adopt what is good
• while improving what is not

12
Tor sent suggested WBS - PHG updated (112 active
cost packages at this time)will expand to gt 1000
internal elements

13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
OK, what did we leave out, what do we do next?

• Exploit our collective
  project management experience, both
  within and external to ILC
• Your input and collective wisdom
• are vital elements in this process!
• Please help us prepare the RDR!

16
End Presentation Backup Slides to Follow
17
What information do we need?

• Scope (text/pix), Cost Estimates, Schedule
• Schedule input to cost estimates, e.g.
• needing 600 klystrons over 5 years
• may be substantially more expensive
• than same 600 klystrons over 8 years
• Two funding models (differ betw regions)
• technically limited (no time constraint)
• or flat funding same per year

18
Cost Estimate Elements

• How many parallel estimates do we need (from
  Asia, Americas, Europe)?
• 3 or 4 or 5 site studies!
• How do you handle multiple inputs into
• determining value?
• World-market cost for common items,
• must do studies for unique elements

19
Industrial Cost Estimate Studies

• TESLA content and cost estimates confidential
• Dieter Trines promised copy of tender for
  studies
• I requested reports without costs did not say
  yes/no
• XFEL will have CryoModule Assembly and
• RF Coupler studies back by mid-2006
• content will be public, cost est confidential
• B. Petersen T. Garvey will send copies of
  tender
• U.S. Studies cavities, CM, coupler, CFS ?
• not before latter half of 2006 at earliest
• Asian Studies content and status?

20
Will Industrial Studies be useful?

• Will they be in time to be useful for RDR?
• Will we get any lower level cost estimates?
• or just total cost of XFEL Main Linac?
• How can we insure confidentiality of
• sensitive cost information?
• We surely dont want to bias XFEL bidding!

21
Nitty-Gritty

• What is in/out of cost estimate?
• How do we present cost/value?
• as the lowest value (world-market)
• average value, range of estimate,
  probabilistic? 90 CL?
• What about different SITE-dependent ests?
• Gotta DOCUMENT what we are presenting provide a
  translation guide for each region

22
WWS Group led by Hitoshi Yamamoto and Jim Brau

• Preparing major physics sections
• The Physics case for the ILC
• Detectors incorporating 3 ideas
• Simulations of machine detector interaction
• Detector performance, resolution, backgrounds
• initially using model of beam phase space,
• momentum spread, disruption, etc.
• will soon need fully simulated beam

23
Value (rather than cost) approach

• Value is worth to the ILC project,
• rather than worth to contributing country
• Approach developed by ITER (R. Aymar)
• vetted through Dan Lehman (US DOE)
• Countries bid to provide some piece of
• project and not funds. Internally apply their
  own overheads, contingency, and labor rates
• to determine their cost, without changing value
• Yes, ITER has common fund (some of value
  assessmentacts as management contingency)

24
ITER used 100 cost packages

• ITER assigned value units to only
• 100 cost packages
• a pretty high level WBS roll-up
• many more lower level items
• had to have been cost estimated
• and rolled-up to form these packages
• upon which member countries could bid
• Does that number make sense for ILC-RDR?

25
Although some people will tell you that they know
exactly how we should define value,

• I dont think we can possibly know at this
  beginning stage.
• We dont want to leave anything out, or close
  avenues, so we should gather all reasonable
  information from multiple studies, and
  combine/average/select only when we better
  understand the trade-offs of how to present cost
  or value.

26
Program Management Tools

• for Project Definition EXCEL, SLAC WBS, MS
  Project
• we will eventually need to migrate to a more
  powerful,
• integrated cost schedule management system
• Primavera is the choice at SLAC, ANL, JLab,
• but not at Fermilab, DESY, KEK, CERN, DESY
• maybe not so useful for project definition
• costs licenses, business computing support
• experts (consultants), users (us)
• learning curves for us
• using sophisticated tool will show that we are
  serious players