1. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 Requirements and feedback form LARP structure review Ruben Carcagno February 2, 2016 1

2. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 Requirements - Introduction It will take ~9 months and ~$7M (U.S. Project accounting) to fabricate and test each MQXFA magnet (x20) It will take an additional ~6 months and ~$1.5M to assemble and test two MQXFAs into an LMQXFA/B Cold Mass Assembly (x10) For such fabrication project scale, it is essential that requirements, verification procedures, and acceptance criteria are clearly defined, documented, and approved. This is also mandatory by our funding agency, DOE. – Requirements documents must be ready prior to CD-1 Typical CD-1 DOE review charge question is: “Does the conceptual design satisfy the performance requirements”? CD-1 director’s review anticipated before the end of 2016 2

3. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 Requirements Classified into two groups: – Threshold Requirements (T): project must meet Usually related to “nominal” parameters, but not always (e.g., we must train to ultimate current, which is 108% of nominal current) – Objective Requirements (O): project should meet and will strive to achieve Usually related to “target” or “ultimate” parameters (e.g., magnetic field harmonics table or ultimate gradient) Requirements verification procedures and acceptance criteria will be defined in a separate document (not started yet) – At CERN’s discretion, deliverables that fall short of the threshold requirements may still be acceptable Example: a magnet deliverable trained to 107% of nominal current instead of 108% (the threshold requirement) – Acceptance procedure of objective requirements need to be clearly agreed upon Acceptance related to objective requirements is less straightforward than threshold requirements Example: a magnet that does not meet the magnetic field harmonics target 3

4. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 MQXFA Requirements Status (Magnet) A draft MQXFA requirement specification (US- HiLumi-doc-36) has already gone through several iterations with CERN – First draft May 2015, latest draft Oct. 13, 2015: – https://us-hilumi-docdb.fnal.gov:440/cgi- bin/ShowDocument?docid=36 https://us-hilumi-docdb.fnal.gov:440/cgi- bin/ShowDocument?docid=36 22 Threshold requirements and 10 objective requirements were identified 4

5. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 MQXFA Requirements Table 5 Items in red are less certain and need more discussion Threshold Requirements Objective Requirements

6. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 MQXFA Requirements Status The main MQXFA requirements parameters that need further discussion and agreement are: – Maximum operating voltage and hipot requirements – Alignment requirements (mechanical/magnetic twist and straightness) – Splice Resistance (target is now 2 nΩ, may be reduced to 1 nΩ pending measurements on MQXFA prototypes) – Magnetic field harmonics target table is expected to evolve as more experience with MQXFA prototypes is gained Interface documents are to be done 6

7. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 MQXFA Requirements Status Formal CERN “Launch Safety Agreement” to be done – Main MQXFA safety requirements is expected to be a list of all materials with composition and mass details for activation estimates From October 2015 meeting at CERN – MQXFA preliminary list provided to HL-LHC Safety Officer on January 19 2016 Need to make sure is OK before proceeding with procurements 7

8. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 LMQXFA/B Requirements Status (Cold Mass Assembly) The first draft LMQXFA/B requirement specification (US-HiLumi-doc-34) was presented at CERN on Oct. 28, 2015. – https://us-hilumi-docdb.fnal.gov:440/cgi- bin/ShowDocument?docid=64 https://us-hilumi-docdb.fnal.gov:440/cgi- bin/ShowDocument?docid=64 27 Threshold requirements and 4 objective requirements were identified Many items are undefined, this workshop will help 8

9. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 LMQXFA/B Requirements Table 9 Items in red are less certain and need more discussion Threshold Requirements Objective Requirements

10. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 LMQXFA/B Requirements Status The main MQXFA requirements parameters that need further discussion and agreement are: – MQXFA relative alignment target (offset, roll, pitch and yaw) and alignment stability (e.g., risk of alignment changes during shipping and cryostat insertion) – Triplet superconducting bus bar routing (internal, external) and instrumentation wiring routing (pass-through or not) – Hipot requirements – Splice Resistance (target is now 2 nΩ, may be reduced to 1 nΩ pending measurements on MQXFA prototypes) – Parts supplied by CERN (e.g., heat exchangers tubes, beam tubes, instrumentation and instrumentation wires) Interface documents are to be done – End dome piping/flanges details – Wiring terminations details – Cryostat interface details – etc 10

11. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 LMQXFA/B Requirements Status Formal CERN “Launch Safety Agreement” to be done – Main issue is conformance to CERN pressure vessel safety – Discussions with CERN HL-LHC Project Office started in October 2015 – Potential project cost and schedule driver How much deviation from standard U.S. Laboratories pressure vessel safety conformance certification process? 11

12. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 Conclusions - Requirements MQXFA magnet and LMQXFA/B cold mass assembly requirements are converging, and this workshop is an important step – MQXFA requirements more mature than LMQXFA/B cold mass assembly Requirements document needed to answer expected DOE CD-1 review charge question “does conceptual design satisfy performance requirements?” – Performance requirements must be clearly identified in stand-alone document – CD-1 director’s review anticipated before the end of 2016, DOE CD-1 review to follow a few months after Need to start thinking and documenting requirements verification procedures and acceptance criteria – These will be needed for DOE CD-2/3 reviews – Acceptance criteria of objective requirements will be more challenging 12

13. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 LARP MQXF Structure Design and Requirements Review Held July 16-17, 2015 at LBNL Reviewers: Ruben Carcagno (FNAL, Chair), Michael Anerella (BNL), Schlomo Caspi (LBNL/CERN), Tom Nicol (FNAL), Fred Nobrega (FNAL) Observer: Juan Carlos Perez (CERN) 13

14. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 Charge 1.Are the Functional Requirements and Technical Specifications for the MQXFA Mechanical Structure properly developed, reasonably finalized and documented? 2.Is there any basic flaw in the Requirements to prevent an expedited transition to the design and procurement phase of the MQXFA Mechanical Structure? Is all tooling properly considered? Are plans for Value Engineering properly taken into account? 3.Is the experience gathered in the 10-year long LARP program and, especially, in the preparation and assembly of the mechanical structure and complete magnet assembly for the latest MQXFS (Short QXF model) properly incorporated in the Functional Requirements and Specifications? 4.Is there enough knowledge to validate, at this time, the basic cost estimate and schedule for the procurement by LARP of one or two MQXFA Mechanical Structure(s)? 14

15. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 Recommendations Review Report: US-HiLumi-doc-63 – https://us-hilumi-docdb.fnal.gov:440/cgi- bin/ShowDocument?docid=63 https://us-hilumi-docdb.fnal.gov:440/cgi- bin/ShowDocument?docid=63 29 recommendations (13 for 1 st structure prototype, 16 for 2 nd and 3 rd prototypes) Response to recommendations: US-HiLumi-doc-69 – https://us-hilumi-docdb.fnal.gov:440/cgi- bin/ShowDocument?docid=69 https://us-hilumi-docdb.fnal.gov:440/cgi- bin/ShowDocument?docid=69 Initial November 9, 2015. Updated January 21, 2016. Recommendations tracking table: US-HiLumi-doc-70 – https://us-hilumi-docdb.fnal.gov:440/cgi- bin/ShowDocument?docid=70 https://us-hilumi-docdb.fnal.gov:440/cgi- bin/ShowDocument?docid=70 15

16. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 Charge #1 Recomendations 1.Are the Functional Requirements and Technical Specifications for the MQXFA Mechanical Structure properly developed, reasonably finalized and documented? – Yes for the first prototype, but no for the second and third – LARP and CERN should finalize requirements and specifications on time to provide input for the 2 nd prototype design and fabrication Status: MQXFA Functional Requirements Specification draft, this workshop, etc. – Establish and verify allowable stresses for critical materials and justify choices (e.g., the yoke) Status: in progress, a table snapshot was delivered 16

17. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 Charge #2 Recommendations 2.Is there any basic flaw in the Requirements to prevent an expedited transition to the design and procurement phase of the MQXFA Mechanical Structure? Is all tooling properly considered? Are plans for Value Engineering properly taken into account – No “show stoppers” for the first long structure, concern that tooling design is less advanced and still at conceptual stage for several items, likely underestimation of effort. Value Engineering plans OK at this stage. – Proceed without delay to the final design and procurement of the 1 st MQXFA mechanical structure High level of schedule risk Status: proceeding. A snapshot of a procurement tracking “Smartsheet” was delivered – For 1 st prototype, focus on quench and magnetic performance issues; defer alignment and cryostat interface issues to the 2 nd prototype and value engineering to the 3 rd prototype Status: agreed and closed – Evaluate adopting more advanced CERN tooling design, provide metrics to estimate effort (e.g., number of drawings) Status: agreed and in progress, drawing tracking documents provided 17

18. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 Charge #3 Recommendations 3.Is the experience gathered in the 10-year long LARP program and, especially, in the preparation and assembly of the mechanical structure and complete magnet assembly for the latest MQXFS (Short QXF model) properly incorporated in the Functional Requirements and Specifications? – Good review of extensive LARP history and lessons learned, but overview table of lessons learned was lacking – Prepare a consolidated table of lessons learned and corresponding solutions Status: a revised table of lessons learned with improved clarity was delivered – Identify open issues from lessons learned that need to be resolved Status: included in the table, resolved by date needed. 18

19. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 Charge #4 Recommendations Is there enough knowledge to validate, at this time, the basic cost estimate and schedule for the procurement by LARP of one or two MQXFA Mechanical Structure(s)? – Sound structure M&S cost estimate, but structure labor and tooling M&S and labor were not presented. Concern for a high level of schedule risk. – Include labor cost in the structure and tooling cost estimate Status: a resource-loaded MQXFA structure schedule was delivered – For tooling, develop and M&S cost estimate using a process similar to the one used for the structure Status: in progress, preliminary total estimate provided – Consider using FNAL and BNL vendors to increase the bid pool Status: agreed and closed – Consider reducing scope by adopting more advanced CERN tooling design and transferring scope to BNL for magnet shipping and handling tooling Status: agreed and closed – Develop a resource-loaded schedule and use it to identify the need of additional staff Status: a link to the MQXFA structure LBNL resource-loaded schedule was provided 19

20. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 Additional Recommendations 2 nd and 3 rd prototype 16 technical recommendations that must be addressed before procurement of 2 nd and 3 rd prototype structures – Response details in tracking table Status: many responses state “under consideration” or “under evaluation” Need to provide response completion date consistent with schedule needs 20

21. MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA – Feb 2-4, 2016 Conclusions – Structure Review A LARP structure review was held at LBNL July 16-17, 2015 – Recommended to proceed without delay with procuring the 1 st long MQXFA structure prototype Focus on quench and magnetic performance issues – Recommended several items before proceeding with procuring the 2 nd and 3 rd long MQXFA structure prototypes Focus on alignment and cryostat interface issues for the 2 nd prototype (this workshop), and value engineering for the 3 rd prototype – Review report, response reports, and a recommendations tracking table is available at the US-Hilumi docdb site. 21