Transcript May VV FDR.ppt

NCSX Vacuum Vessel
Manufacture
Mike Viola, Paul Goranson, Brad Nelson, Mike Cole
Phil Heitzenroeder, and Tom Brown
for the NCSX Engineering Team
NCSX Final Design Review
May 19-20, 2004
PPPL
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
1
Outline
 Review of the
NCSX Vacuum Vessel
 Risks Mitigated through a
successful PVVS program.
 R&D and Vacuum Vessel
Prototypes Complete
 Cost & Schedule
 Summary
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
2
NCSX’s Vacuum Vessel Was Recognized as
Unconventional Right from its Conception
• Highly shaped
• Forming of Inconel 625. Need for
tight tolerances
• Design has to accommodate
assembly needs
– Modular coils have to be positioned over
the VV; this requires all ports except mid
period ports to be welded in place after
the coils are installed.
– Vessel shape & size has to be compatible
not only with plasma, but with divertors
and space needed to “slide” the modular
coils over it.
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
3
Manufacture
• Dies are machined.
• Panels are cold pressed. (Segmentation determined by
Vendor.)
–
•
•
•
•
Prototype consisted of a 20° sector which involved about
5 segments
Measurements taken using CMM or gages
Panels welded together on fixture
Mirror every half period (60°)
More measurements taken
–
(Heat treatment requirements evaluated during R&D)
• 60° segments married
• Ports welded on before cutting holes.
–
–
60 Degree Half-Period
6 Piece Segmentation Scheme
permits leak check
minimizes distortion
• Main flanges attached
• Leak check entire vessel and port welds between thermal
cycling
• Ports cut off to leave stubs
–
•
reinforces vessel
permits port alignment
• Holes bored
• Vessel shipped
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
4
The PDR Committee considered the Technical Risks
Properly Identified and Appropriately Mitigated.
• Major Tool has completed its PVVS and qualified their MIT /
QA Plan. Rohwedder is right behind.
– The forming, welding, machining, polishing, port removal and reattachment, and
inspection processes have all been demonstrated and optimized.
– The prototype development and R&D Studies have provided a solid
understanding of the manufacture techniques and reduced risk factors.
•
•
•
•
A Final Design is in hand
The VVSA drawings and model are complete
The VVSA Statement of Work and Specification is written
We are ready to receive the final proposals and award contract
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
5
R&D of Vacuum Vessel Prototypes are Complete
Goals:
• To produce a prototype VV sector.
• To provide experience in
manufacturing prototypical parts so
firm fixed price proposals can be
developed which do not have
excessive contingency built in.
• Prototype consisted of a 20° sector
(chosen for good demonstration of
shape forming) and a vacuum port
assembly to demonstrate their
ability to produce vacuum-quality
welds.
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
6
Tolerances Were Developed with Prototype Suppliers
• Profile tolerance on outer vacuum surface is bilateral i.e. 0.1875
either side of reference surface.
• Material thickness tolerance shall be per requirements set forth
in ASTM B443. The minimum thickness after forming shall be
0.338. Thinning below the stock thickness shall not occur over
more than 10% of the total poloidal circumference of any crosssection.
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
7
Phase II of the Manufacturing Studies Is Now Underway
Goals:
• The two Prototype suppliers Major
Tool and Rohwedder submitted their
MIT plans and were authorized for
fabrication on August 7th.
• Both suppliers have completed their
PVVS fabrication.
• Initial review of Major Tools data
package .
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
8
Phase II of the Manufacturing Studies Is Now Underway
(Major Tool Die/Punch set)
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
9
Phase II of the Manufacturing Studies Is Now Underway
(Major Tool Inspection Gages)
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
10
Phase II of the Manufacturing Studies Is Now Underway
(Major Tool Welding Form)
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
11
Plans for the “Production” Subcontract
It is our intent to select one subcontractor for the (18) “production”
modular coil winding forms from the two Phase II
subcontractors .
• However, we are open minded about possibly of “splitting” the
subcontract between the two subcontractors if advantageous.
The selection will be based on:
• Evaluation of the prototypes,
• “Best value” evaluation of the proposals.
• Business factors, including experience in working with them during
the Phase II efforts.
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
12
Statement of Work (SOW) Summary
Quality Assurance Section specifically addresses:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Inspection / surveillance / audit by PPPL
Subcontrctor’s responsibility for conformance
Nonconforming items
Deviations to the Apprived MIT / QA plan
Subcontractor’s QA Program
Inspection and Test Procedures.
Document Traceability and Records
Equipment / Material Identification and Status
Calibration of Test and Measuring Equipment
Control of Special Processes
PPPL Receiving and Inspection
Deliverables include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Weekly reports
Monthly reports indicating schedule progress.
(18) winding forms conforming to Spec. NCSX-CSPEC-141-03, in accordance with the supplier’s
MIT/QA Plan and associated procedures.
Shipping release form
Process History
Toolling (subject to disposition per direction of PPPL)
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
13
Evaluation Criteria
I. Past Performance – 60%
Prototype Quality - performance relative to specification (40%
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Dimensional tolerances
Mechanical and Physical Properties of Casting Alloy
Poloidal break
Magnetic permeability
Non-destructive testing
Surface finish
Non-conformances
Management (Performance relative to the SOW) 20%
•
•
•
•
Communication
Adequacy of Proj. Mgt. staff
Response to technical issues & problems
Reliability of estimates
•
•
•
•
•
May 19-20, 2004
Cost growth
Schedule growth
Adequacy of QA oversight
Quality of the MIT/QA plan for the prototype
Compliance with the Subcontractor’s QA documentation requirements
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
14
Evaluation Criteria (cont’d.)
Capability for the Production Winding Forms – 40%
•
Technical Capability (25%)
−
−
−
−
Management (15%)
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
May 19-20, 2004
Adequacy and commitment of facilities and personnel and / or subcontract
arrangements.
Technical approach
Risk management
Review of Annual Financial reports for the past 2 yrs.
Organizational structure
Key personnel
Letters of commitment
Evidence of sufficient machine,skilled labor, and floor space to produce to the
schedule and has an adequkate document control system.
If a large business, their Small Business Subcontracting Plan.
Changes to their QA program since the Prototype Subcontract was completed.
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
15
Source Selection Schedule Overview
Initial meeting of SPEB
18 March 04
Draft copies of Specification & SOW released to subcontractors for
comment
23 April 04
Specification and SOW updated to reflect subcontractor’s comments
14 May 04
Prototypes due at PPPL
28 June 04
Firm fixed price and schedules proposals due
02 July 04
PPPL inspections of prototypes complete
19 July 04
Oral Presentations by Offerors
21-22 July 04
SPEB completes report on their evaluations and recommendations
29 July 04
SSO approval of SPEB recommendation; submit to DOE - PSO for
approval
03 August 04
Negotiations with subcontractor completed
10 August 04
Coil winding form production subcontract signed
30 August 04
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
16
Statement of Work (SOW) Summary
Quality Assurance Section specifically addresses:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Inspection / surveillance / audit by PPPL
Subcontrctor’s responsibility for conformance
Nonconforming items
Deviations to the Apprived MIT / QA plan
Subcontractor’s QA Program
Inspection and Test Procedures.
Document Traceability and Records
Equipment / Material Identification and Status
Calibration of Test and Measuring Equipment
Control of Special Processes
PPPL Receiving and Inspection
Deliverables include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Weekly reports
Monthly reports indicating schedule progress.
(18) winding forms conforming to Spec. NCSX-CSPEC-141-03, in accordance with the supplier’s
MIT/QA Plan and associated procedures.
Shipping release form
Process History
Toolling (subject to disposition per direction of PPPL)
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
17
Vacuum Vessel Phase II Manufacturing Studies /
Prototype Fabrication Schedules
Prototypes Completed
•
•
•
The Phase II manufacturing studies are well underway.
The expected delivery for both prototypes is March 04 to provide technical input for the Final Design
Review.
The FDR on the Vacuum Vessel is scheduled for April 04.
Produce a Final Manufacturing / Inspection / Test / Quality Assurance Plan for the “Production” Vacuum
Vessel
•
•
•
Mid May 04
This will be refined based on their experience in manufacturing the prototype.
Their Firm Fixed Price and Schedule Proposal will be developed based on this.
Produce a Firm Fixed Price and Schedule Proposal
•
•
•
•
To be completed by the end of May 04.
A Subcontract Proposal Evaluation Board (SPEB) will begin evaluations of the two teams’ Prototype
performance in June 04.
They will evaluate the two teams’ Proposals when received in late June and submit their findings and
recommendations for the Production Subcontractor to the Procurement Official by July 04.
This will lead to the Production Subcontract Award in July 04.
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
18
Phase III of the Vessel Fabrication Is Upcoming
Goal:
•
To build the Vacuum Vessel within Specification, On Time & Within Budget.
•
Scheduled to begin fabrication in July 04 with delivery in September 05
•
The detailed manufacturing studies have yielded a composite (i.e., neither the highest or lowest cost was chosen) projected
budgetary cost of the VVSA of $2.729M before overhead.
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
19
WBS2
12
Budget (loaded $ based on ECP6)
Sum of Budget (loaded $)
WBS
PHASE
Resource
1) Title I & II
LABOR
M&S
1) Title I & II Total
121
$1,004,275
122
$42,922
123
$31,127
124
$21,574
125
$20,979
$50,552
$1,054,828
Grand Total
$1,120,878
$50,552
$42,922
$31,127
$21,574
$20,979
$1,171,430
2) R&D
LABOR
$339,628
$339,628
M&S
$120,357
$120,357
$459,985
$459,985
2) R&D Total
3) Fabrication & Assembly
LABOR
$228,057
$21,461
$22,939
$9,601
$2,608
$284,667
$4,515,228
$110,493
$321,761
$31,451
$3,132
$4,982,065
3) Fabrication & Assembly Total
$4,743,286
$131,954
$344,700
$41,052
$5,740
$5,266,732
Grand Total
$6,258,098
$174,876
$375,827
$62,626
$26,720
$6,898,147
M&S
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
20
Vacuum Vessel Phase II Manufacturing Studies /
Prototype Fabrication Cost & Schedules
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
21
Bases of Winding Form Production Costs and
Schedules
The baseline cost of the (18) winding forms is $ 4.84 M. This is a
composite (i.e., neither the highest or lowest cost was chosen)
of the two subcontractor’s budgetary estimates developed
during the Phase II manufacturing studies.
The baseline schedule is 18 months. This is the higher of the
schedule estimates developed during the manufacturing
studies.
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
22
Modular Coil Winding Form Cost Summary
Labor (covers all Title I, Title II, and Title III):
PPPL: 2163 hrs.
$ 341,000
ORNL: 8172 hrs.
$1,055,000
Materials & Supplies:
Manufacturing Development (Phase II Studies) 2 suppliers:
1,175.000
Production Winding Forms
4,839,300
Travel for contract monitoring:
48,000
G&A & Escalation on non labor
580,000
Subtotal without contingency:
$ 8,038,300
40% contingency held by Project
2,474,000
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
23
Winding Form Cost Breakdown
Estimated Cost / Winding Form: $270 K
7.4 %
11.4 %
Mfg. Anal/Patterns
29.2 %
52.1%
Casting/HT/Inspection
Machining
Proj. Mgt.
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
24
Winding Form Schedule Breakdown for Production
The production time for the (18) winding forms is projected to be 18
months.
• Manufacturing analyses and pattern making is the first task required for
each of the (3) casting types (task time: ~12 wks. – most sub-tasks can
be performed in parallel)
• Casting / inspection / repair / heat treatment during the production phase
is estimated to take ~4 wks. / winding form.
• Machining on a 5 axis milling machine is required; for the production
phase, this is estimated to take ~4 wks. / winding form.
• Both teams have adequate machining capacity to process 2 castings
simultaneously.
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
25
Summary
We are completing the manufacturing development and prototype fabrication phase .
During this phase:
[1] we demonstrated that the proposed design is manufacturable
[2] we are on track to qualify two suppliers for building the production articles and
[3] these two suppliers should be in an excellent position to provide a leaner bid (lower contingency in both cost and
schedule) based on their experience fabricating the prototypes.
Our design is well documented in a product specification and accompanying Pro/E
models and drawings.
•
Pre-proposal versions have been provided to our suppliers for their review and comment and are reflected in the
final versions.
We are ready to enter into a contract for the production articles.
•
•
•
•
A SOW has been developed which defines the work to be performed.
We have agreement with the suppliers on the process and quality assurance requirements for fabricating
the production articles.
Detailed MIT/QA Plans were developed for the prototypes that are prototypical of what is required for the
production articles.
We have developed a good working relationship with our suppliers.
Our cost and schedule baselines are reasonable for completing these contracts on time and
within budget.
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
26
Summary
 We are following a sound acquisition plan. We are completing the manufacturing
development and prototype fabrication phase. During this phase,
[1] we demonstrated that the proposed design is manufacturable
[2] we are on track to qualify two suppliers for building the production articles and
[3] these two suppliers should be in an excellent position to provide a leaner bid (lower
contingency in both cost and schedule) based on their experience fabricating the prototypes.
 We have a well documented design. Our design is well documented in a product
specification and accompanying Pro/E models and drawings. Pre-proposal versions have
been provided to our suppliers for their review and comment.
 We are ready to enter into a contract for the production articles. A SOW has been
developed which defines the work to be performed. We have agreement with the suppliers
on the process and quality assurance requirements for fabricating the production
articles. Detailed MIT/QA Plans were developed for the prototypes that are prototypical of
what is required for the production articles. We have developed a good working rapport with
our suppliers.
 Our cost and schedule baselines are reasonable for completing these contracts on
time and within budget.
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
27
Summary
•
•
•
Phase I is complete.
Risks have been identified and steps put in place to mitigate them.
Phase II - The Prototype Vacuum Vessel is under construction.
– The experience gained from this 20° segment will provide the experience and
knowledge to build the Vacuum Vessel Subassembly with great confidence in the
design and cost factors.
– Major Tool has fabricated several die components
– Rohwedder is vigorously working a solution that will be acceptable to us.
•
Phase III is anticipated with great confidence.
– Each of the 2 prototype suppliers have already begun the draft of the MIT/QA plan
for the VVSA.
May 19-20, 2004
NCSX FDR
Mike Viola
28