Transcript EDMS-PLM_TeamCenter140331

Electronic Document
Management System:
A tool for Product Lifecycle Management
Marc Ross
31 March 2014
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.
2
Agenda
SLAC Building 52 Mad River Conference Room
Title
Speaker
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
2
Introduction
LCLS-II Project construction planning
CM Production Preparations at Jlab
JLab SRF QA Tools
BREAK
Fermilab Cryomodule QA
Introduction to PLM tools for project
development and construction
LUNCH
Implementation of Siemens Team
Center PLM at the European XFEL
Consideration of hybrid PLM /
Production QA schemes
BREAK
XFEL Series Cavity fabrication –
Documentation issues
Application of EDMS to XFEL
Cryomodule asssembly
OPEN DISCUSSION
J. Blowers
L. Hagge / B. List
Monday 31 March
time (PDT)
09:00
09:20
09:20
09:40
09:40
10:00
10:00
10:20
10:30
10:50
10:50
11:10
11:10
12:00
L. Hagge / B. List
12:00
13:30
13:30
14:30
L. Hagge / B. List
14:30
15:00
J. Iversen (go-to-meeting)
Tuesday 1 April
time (PDT)
08:00
08:30
M. Ross
M. Ross/ L. Plummer
E. Daly
V. Bookwalter
C. Madec (go-to-meeting); C. 08:30
Cloué
09:00
3
Attendees from E-XFEL and LCLS-II Partner Labs:
E-XFEL
Lars Hagge
Benno List
Jens Iversen
Catherine Madec
Christel Cloué
LCLS-II
Ed Daly
Partner Labs
Valerie Bookwalter
John Mammosser
Jamie Blowers
Don Mitchell
Tony Metz
DESY
DESY
DESY (go-to-meeting)
CEA / Saclay (go-to-meeting)
CEA / Saclay (go-to-meeting)
JLab
JLab
JLab
Fermilab
Fermilab (go-to-meeting)
Fermilab (go-to-meeting
4
PLM (Wikipedia):
5
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
•
•
Technical Requirements
Management
Vendor Oversight;
Travellers
Maintain and support
Dispose
6
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 realworld physical technology, implementing those solutions which this
technology is most suited to. When these bottom–up solutions have realworld 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?"
7
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.
8
LCLS-II
Methodology for Interface Control
Technical
Requirements
Management
L. Plummer & D.
Marsh
Top – down
Design
Example
LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014
9
LCLS-II Project Controls Documents
describe:
L. Plummer & D. Marsh
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.
TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross
10
LCLS-II
Document / Configuration Control (Sharepoint)
11
LCLS-II
Document / Configuration Control - 2
12
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
LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014
13
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
LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014
14
LCLS-II:
Accelerator
Superconducting linac: 4 GeV
Undulators in
existing LCLS-I
Tunnel
New variable gap (north)
New variable gap (south), replaces existing
fixed-gap und.
4 GeV SC Linac
In sectors 0-10
14 GeV LCLS linac still
used
for x-rays up to 25 keV
North side source:
0.2-1.2 keV (≥ 100kHz) NEH
FEH
South side source:
1.0 - 25 keV (120 Hz, copper” linac )
1.0 - 5 keV (≥100 kHz, SC Linac)
Commissioning
LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014
planned for late 2019
15
LCLS-II - Linac and Compressor Layout for 4 GeV
L0
j=*
V0 =94 MV
Ipk = 12 A
Lb = 2.0 mm
L1
j =-21°
HL
V0 =223 MV
Ipk = 12 A j =-165°
Lb =2.0 mm V0 =55 MV
CM01
CM2,3
GUN
E = 95 MeV
0.75 MeV R56 = -14.5 mm
sd = 0.05 %
L3
j=0
V0 =1447 MV
Ipk = 50 A
Lb = 0.56 mm
V0 =2409 MV
Ipk = 1.0 kA
Lb = 0.024 mm
CM15
CM04
3.9GHz
LH
L2
j = -21°
CM16
BC1
BC2
E = 250 MeV
R56 = -55 mm
sd = 1.4 %
E = 1600 MeV
R56 = -60 mm
sd = 0.46 %
100-pC machine layout: Oct. 8, 2013; v21 ASTRA run; Bunch length Lb is FWHM
Linac
Sec.
V
(MV)
j
(deg)
Acc.
Grad.
(MV/m)
No.
Cryo
Mod’s
No.
Avail.
Cav’s
Spare
Cav’s
LTU
E = 4.0 GeV
R56 = 0
sd  0.016%
2-km
* L0 cav. phases: ~(3.4, -15.2, 0, 0, 0, 15,15)
P. Emma, L. Wang,
C. Papadopoulos
Includes 2.2-km RW-wake
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
LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014
CM35
LCLS-II SRF Linac
Closely based on the European XFEL / ILC / TESLA Design
LCLS-II Linac consists of:
Component
Count
Parameters
Linac
4 cold segments
35 each 8 cavity Cryomodules (1.3
GHz)
3 each 4 cavity Cryomodules (3.9 GHz)
1.3 GHz
Cryomodule
8
13 m long. Cavities + SC Magnet
cavities/CM 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)
TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross
17
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
TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross
18
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
19
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
Cryomodule schedule and milestones - Fermilab
LCLS-II Cryomodule Milestones
Long Lead Procurements start: 10/15/14
Cryomodule production start: 10/15/15
Cryomodule production complete: 11/12/18
Last cryomodule delivered to SLAC: 12/15/18
21
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.
TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross
22
Product Breakdown Structure:
23
XFEL EDMS shall:
24
TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross
25
TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross
26
12.1 EDMS
27
12.1 EDMS (cont)
28
29
Modified Process Flow Scheme (2)
TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross
30
Modified Process Flow Test
31
Modified Process Flow Test (2)
TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross
32
TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross
33
TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross
34
TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross
35
TTC Closing Plenary 140327 M. Ross
36
LCLS-II QA/QC End Item Data Package Collection



LCLS-II CD-1 DOE Review, Feb 4-6, 2014
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
37
LCLS-II Preproduction Cryomodule
1.3 GHz, modified for CW operation
LCLS-II cryomodule
38
End
39