Electronic Document Management System:

Electronic Document Management System: Marc Ross31 March 2014

A tool for Product Lifecycle Management

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:

1. Share experiences with the use of EDMS for project development, review, and production.

2. Discuss the systems in place that link DESY, DESY-XFEL partners, and XFEL industry in order to understand the technical (QC/QA), oversight (management), and safety (e.g. PED) functionality.

3. Evaluate possible application of parts of these systems to LCLS-II, including, possibly, application of the full-system in specific, specialized examples – such as cavity fabrication vendor oversight. This example is of direct, immediate interest as we consider cavity fabrication and processing.

4. Discuss paths forward, including EDMS development, licensing, use of alternate platforms and etc.

3

Agenda

SLAC Building 52 Mad River Conference Room Title Speaker Monday 31 March

time (PDT)1 Introduction M. Ross 09:00 09:202 LCLS-II Project construction planning M. Ross/ L. Plummer 09:20 09:403 CM Production Preparations at Jlab E. Daly 09:40 10:004 JLab SRF QA Tools V. Bookwalter 10:00 10:20 BREAK 10:30 10:505 Fermilab Cryomodule QA J. Blowers 10:50 11:106 Introduction to PLM tools for project

development and constructionL. Hagge / B. List 11:10 12:00

LUNCH 12:00 13:307 Implementation of Siemens Team

Center PLM at the European XFELL. Hagge / B. List 13:30 14:30

8 Consideration of hybrid PLM / Production QA schemes

L. Hagge / B. List 14:30 15:00

BREAK Tuesday 1 April

time (PDT)1 XFEL Series Cavity fabrication –

Documentation issuesJ. Iversen (go-to-meeting) 08:00 08:30

2 Application of EDMS to XFEL Cryomodule asssembly

C. Madec (go-to-meeting); C. Cloué

08:30 09:00

OPEN DISCUSSION

4

Attendees from E-XFEL and LCLS-II Partner Labs:

E-XFEL Lars Hagge DESY Benno List DESY Jens Iversen DESY (go-to-meeting) Catherine Madec CEA / Saclay (go-to-meeting) Christel Cloué CEA / Saclay (go-to-meeting) LCLS-II Partner Labs

Ed Daly JLab

Valerie Bookwalter JLab John Mammosser JLab Jamie Blowers Fermilab Don Mitchell Fermilab (go-to-meeting) Tony Metz Fermilab (go-to-meeting

Participants:

5

PLM (Wikipedia):

6

Process:

• 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

Technical Requirements Management

Vendor Oversight;Travellers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specification

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

Technical Requirements Management

L. Plummer & D. Marsh

LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014

Top – down Design Example

10TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross

LCLS-II Project Controls Documents

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.

L. Plummer & D. Marsh

11

LCLS-IIDocument / Configuration Control (Sharepoint)

12

LCLS-IIDocument / Configuration Control - 2

13LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014

Necessary LCLS-II Documentation

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

Available on Website

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


15LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014

LCLS-II:

Accelerator Superconducting linac: 4 GeVUndulators in existing LCLS-I Tunnel

New variable gap (north) New variable gap (south), replaces existing fixed-gap und.

South side source:1.0 - 25 keV (120 Hz, copper” linac )1.0 - 5 keV (≥100 kHz, SC Linac)

4 GeV SC Linac In sectors 0-10

NEH FEH14 GeV LCLS linac still usedfor x-rays up to 25 keV

North side source:0.2-1.2 keV (≥ 100kHz)

Commissioning planned for late 2019

LCLS-II - Linac and Compressor Layout for 4 GeV

CM01 CM2,3 CM04 CM15 CM16 CM35BC1

E = 250 MeVR56 = -55 mmsd = 1.4 %

BC2E = 1600 MeVR56 = -60 mmsd = 0.46 %

GUN0.75 MeV

LHE = 95 MeV

R56 = -14.5 mmsd = 0.05 %

L0j = *

V0 =94 MVIpk = 12 A

Lb = 2.0 mm

L1j =-21°

V0 =223 MVIpk = 12 A

Lb =2.0 mm

HLj =-165°

V0 =55 MV

L2j = -21°

V0 =1447 MVIpk = 50 A

Lb = 0.56 mm

L3j = 0

V0 =2409 MVIpk = 1.0 kA

Lb = 0.024 mm

LTUE = 4.0 GeV

R56 = 0sd 0.016%

2-km

100-pC machine layout: Oct. 8, 2013; v21 ASTRA run; Bunch length Lb is FWHM

3.9GHz

LinacSec.

V(MV)

j(deg)

Acc. Grad.

(MV/m)

No. Cryo

Mod’s

No. Avail.Cav’s

Spare Cav’s

L0 94 * 13.2 1 8 1

L1 220 -21 14.3 2 16 1

HL -55 -165 14.5 3 12 1

L2 1447 -21 15.5 12 96 6

L3 2409 0 15.4 20 160 10

Includes 2.2-km RW-wake

* L0 cav. phases: ~(3.4, -15.2, 0, 0, 0, 15,15)


P. Emma, L. Wang, C. Papadopoulos


Closely based on the European XFEL / ILC / TESLA DesignLCLS-II Linac consists of:

LCLS-II SRF Linac

Component Count ParametersLinac 4 cold -

segments35 each 8 cavity Cryomodules (1.3 GHz)3 each 4 cavity Cryomodules (3.9 GHz)

1.3 GHz Cryomodule

8 cavities/CM

13 m long. Cavities + SC Magnet package+ BPM

1.3 GHz 9-cell cavity

280 each 16 MV/m; Q_0 ~ 2.7e10 (avg); 2 deg. K; bulk niobium fine-grain sheet-metal

Cavity Auxiliary per each cavity

Coaxial Input Coupler; 2 each HOM extraction coupler; lever-type tuner

Injector 1 each 1 each special cryomodule (TBD)


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 cryomodule design 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

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

https://www.jlab.org/

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

20

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


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.

23

Product Breakdown Structure:

24

XFEL EDMS shall:



27

12.1 EDMS

28

12.1 EDMS (cont)

29


Modified Process Flow Scheme (2)

31

Modified Process Flow Test


Modified Process Flow Test (2)





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 Preproduction Cryomodule1.3 GHz, modified for CW operation

LCLS-II cryomodule

38

39

End

Date post:	23-Feb-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	yvonne
View:	87 times
Download:	25 times