Third LHC Splices Review SMACC Organisation Scope of work (What’s new since Nov 2011) Organization chart update Human resources Budget Unforeseen? Unexpected?  Contingencies Worksite organisation concerns Conclusions 13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review 1/25 J.Ph. Tock

SMACC Organisation: Scope of work  Consolidation of the 13 kA superconducting splices  In the continuous cryostat (From Q7 to Q7)  In the DFBAs  In the quadrupole diodes (one type) Including operations to give access and to reclose after  Consolidation of the superconducting circuits  Replacement of non-conform cryomagnets  Consolidation of the connection cryostats  Correction of the known and new NCs (best effort)  Consolidation of the cryomagnets & interconnections  Installation of the remaining pressure relief devices  Repair leaking Y-lines  Consolidate SAM Helium level gauges  Correct triplet cryogenics configuration  Consolidate PIM (Preventive and corrective)  Investigate and fix known and new leaks 13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review NEW ? ? ? ? 2/25 J.Ph. Tock

SMACC Organisation: Scope of work 13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review Working day starts at the top of the lift; Infrastruc ture will be provided High inner splice SSS Highest leak Electrical integrity issue Beam optics Spread all around : work on leaks, PIMs, SAM (He, DN160) Y-lines repair CC Consolidation / Inspection DN 200 installation Triplet braid (End of LS1 for rad prot) Cryo-dipole Circuit and splices issues Critical reversed beam screen Canteen, cloakroom, meeting rooms, toilets, showers,… 3/25 J.Ph. Tock

SMACC Organization Chart 13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review SMACC J.Ph. Tock (# 255) Superconducting Magnets And Circuits Consolidation Open/Close IC [DN200] A Musso (A Chrul) #36 Main arc splices cons. F Savary (H Prin) #75 -Sleeves cutting -BB surfacing -Shunt installation -Insulation -Splice de- & resoldering [15%] -Quadrupole diodes connection -Experts Special interventions “SIT” N Bourcey (G Maury) #18 -Cryomagnets exchange -Connect. Cryostat cons. -PIMs -Specific issues -Heavy NCs -Opening/ Closure of IC Partial and complete W bellows & ther. shields -Installation of DN200 Quality Assurance R Ostojic #39 -Electrical QC: #16: C.Scheuerlein (P.Thonet) -Welding QC: # 6 : JM Dalin -Beam vacuum QC: #6 : C Garion -Open/close IC QC: #7 [Shared]: D Bodart -QA manager support: #2 -Audits: #3 ELQA [TE-MPE] K Dahlerup (G D’Angelo) #28 -Continuity -HV test Leak Test [TE-VSC] P Cruikshank (C Garion) #19 -Beam lines -Cryogenics lines -Insulation vacuum Project Office M Pojer (R Giachino) #11 -Radiation protection -Safety, Access -General logistics -Pressure test -Link to visits, media -Coordination with Survey, BLM, Instrumentation, Transport, planning, QPS, cryogenics, VSC, MPE, CRG, … Test teams on a chain of IC -Reporting tools -Administrative support (Budget, human resources, scientific secretary) DFBA [TE-CRG] A Perin (O Pirotte) [#10] -Splices and BB TIG welding [EN-MME] S Atieh (D Rey) #18 (+5) - Orbital & manual Long Shutdown 1 F. Bordry 4/25 J.Ph. Tock

SMACC: News in the Organization Chart Increase from 206 to 255 persons ! (+49 / 24 %)  Experience of test on mock-ups (SM18 and MT1) : + 16  Integration of DFBA consolidation including AK&P : + 10  Consolidation of the quadrupole diodes :+ 9  ELQA team :+ 5  Reinforcement of SIT : + 3  New IC thermal shields : + 3  Reinforcement of logistics : + 2  Spiders and lyras inspection : + 1 Alternates have been defined for all activities Interfaces are (being) defined within the SMACC meetings 13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review 5/25 J.Ph. Tock

SMACC Human resources 13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review Since Nov 2011:+ 31 FSU + 11 coll + 7 staff (TBC) [Some were not counted] Main increase amongst FSUs * The most flexible solution  Ratio of staff/collaborators decreased 6/25 J.Ph. Tock

SMACC Human resources availability Collaborations 13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review  74 Collaborators  5 are at CERN presently and will stay up to the start  6 agreements out of 9 are signed and finalised  3 to be finalised accounting for 19 persons / Planned for end of November 2012  For tasks with long training period and wherever possible (ELQA, ICIT, DN200), revival of previous teams  2/3 are experienced  Arrival 4 to 8 weeks prior to intervention in the tunnel (depending on task and CERN rules)  Individual duration of stay : from 6 months to 2 years / Most frequent: 9 months  Overlap of 1 to 3 months depending on function  Training to be ensured in parallel with work in the tunnel 7/25 J.Ph. Tock

SMACC Human resources availability Collaborations 13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review 1: NTUA 2: WUT 3: DUBNA 4a: PAEC 4b: PAEC 5a: HNINP 5b: HNINP(#3) 6: FNAL 8/25 J.Ph. Tock

13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review  94 Persons  52 are at CERN  41 are trained and (very) experienced  9 are under training, 2 are at CERN but not available yet  42 have to be hired (on-going)  Arrival between 6 weeks (goal) and 4 months prior to start of intervention Budget is foreseen For training, integration, qualification  Normally for the entire duration of the project (Rotation exists)  Training to be ensured in parallel with the work in the tunnel  Is “local” recruitment being saturated ? [About 100 for the whole CERN]  69 Persons  45 are experienced (and are training newcomers)  6 are under training  18 are foreseen but are working on other activities (LHC operation for example)  Part time availability from January 2013 on For training, integration, qualification  FTE equivalent: in fact more persons available but partially  Part time availability (Typically 40-50%)  Training and know-how transfer have to be ensured in parallel with the work in the tunnel CERN staff SMACC Human resources availability FSU / Industrial Support + 18 persons as contractors (Leak test, weld inspection) 9/25 J.Ph. Tock

SMACC Human resources Training status 13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review  Persons are not at CERN  69 Collaborators Amongst them, 26 are experienced  43 remains  42 FSUs  Persons are not available  2 FSUs  19 CERN staff (FTE eq)  Typically 35 persons Why not more training ?  “New” resources towards task with a short training period (Ex: Open/Close IC)  Error proof “automatic” procedures (Ex ELQC)  Tooling sent to collaborators (Ex cutting machine) so pre training  Revival of previous teams (ELQA, ICIT)  Low ratio for splices, due to new activities and recent resizing of the teams following mock-up tests (Insulation, shunt soldering, cu machining, QDiodes)  Detailed procedures  Good ratio easier to ensure for small teams 10/25 J.Ph. Tock

SMACC Human resources 13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review Safety Motivation Coordination Team work Competent and equipped The only way to success 11/25 J.Ph. Tock

SMACC Budget 34.5 MCHF 13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review Human resources oriented project (71%) (Almost) no contingency  45 % for splices consolidation proper From sleeve machining to rewelding (excl QA)  23 % for QA/QC outside production teams  Rest for:  Giving access and reclosure (11%)  Specific consolidation (13%)  Logistics, management, others  Budget structure put in place (12 budget codes) 12/25 J.Ph. Tock

SMACC Budget Time evolution 13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review  Material budget spent before start of the work Remains maintenance, logistics, consumables  Means oriented expenditures  What matters:  Quality  Deviations  Progress rate 13/25 J.Ph. Tock

 Contingencies 13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review How to cope with :  Unforeseen developments ?  > 15 % of splices to redo  New non-conformities  …  Unforeseen scenarios ?  Contingencies in available man power  Sizing the team for 60 IC/week eq and planning assumes 53 [13 %]  6 efficient working hours are assumed (2 hours for displacement) [Realistic – 0%]  No work planned on weekends : Limited impact because of legal limitations Limited experienced and trained staff available  Some experienced staffs are presently not in SMACC. In case of need and priority given by management, they could be redirected to SMACC. [5%]  Staff collaboration profile [A few %]  In manpower  In the SIT  In the schedule  In the budget (Almost none) Training Overlap and know-how transfer “Realistic”? workload profile Start-up issues Contingency ? (schedule delays ) 14/25 J.Ph. Tock

13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review  Increase of Special Intervention Team capacity  Outsource standard interventions (Opening, closure, main BB soldering, ….) to the train team [Gain of expertise]  Increase its size : + 3 persons (20% increase)  This ensures a theoretical (optimistic) availability of minimum 30 % to handle NCs and full (theoretical) availability for the last 6 months Courtesy N Bourcey / M Bernardini  Contingencies  In manpower  In the SIT  In the schedule  In the budget (Almost none) 15/25 J.Ph. Tock

13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review  Contingencies  In manpower  In the SIT  In the schedule  In the budget (Almost none)  Contingencies in the LS1 schedule ?  Sizing the team for 60 IC/week eq and planning assumes 53 [13 %]  SMACC is on the critical path (See K Foraz’s presentation)  Looking by sectors, there are some margins (Are they real ?) beware of coactivity, access constraints and limitations of other resources 16/25 J.Ph. Tock

13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review  Contingencies after CD are not usable if < 3 months (Warm-up & Cool-down durations)  These periods are used by other teams so there will be access constraints (Powering test, pressure tests,….) and coactivity  Shifting some sectors would increase parallelism of subsequent activities with obviously also limited resources so would impact on the overall schedule  3 last sectors without usable time slot  If issue detected after CD, interventions can be envisaged in only 2 sectors (67/78) with a limited but non negligible impact  For 56 (the first one), there is a possibility to correct if the issue is/can be identified before cool-down  Using these contingencies would greatly impact the whole LS1 (ALMOST) NO CONTINGENCY IN THE LS1 SCHEDULE  Contingencies  In manpower  In the SIT  In the schedule  In the budget (Almost none) 17/25 J.Ph. Tock [months]

13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review  Time windows are foreseen in the detailed schedule for unsoldering and resoldering all splices [Baseline is 15 %]  Corresponding teams are slightly oversized wrt 15%  Tooling is available  Contingencies  In manpower  In the SIT  In the schedule  In the budget (Almost none) 18/25 J.Ph. Tock

13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review SMACC Organisation concerns:  Schedule  Manpower  Technical  Logistics First sector validated 15 months after start, Too late for feedback -Thorough beforehand testing and reviews -Training -Qualification -Intermediate QA/QC SMACC Train will extend on 3 sectors SMACC will extend on the 8 sectors  Supervision will be an issue -Reduces coactivity -Worksite coordinator -Logistics foreseen +Cars and equipped trucks, +Canteen, storage, meeting rooms on the points 19/25 J.Ph. Tock

13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review SMACC Organisation concerns  Schedule  Manpower  Technical  Logistics  Availability  Collaboration agreements to finalise  Potential difficulty in FSU recruitments  Staff turnover  Planned for collaboration  Short notice with FSU  Ratio of experienced staff -Training is planned -But will have to be simultaneous to work in the tunnel -Detailed procedures -Overlaps ? Can we do more ? 20/25 J.Ph. Tock

13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review SMACC Organisation concerns  Schedule  Manpower  Technical  Logistics  DFBA consolidation  Technical solutions still under development  Could impact the overall schedule and divert critical resources  Newly discovered NC Beam operation so far has only identified a few new issues  Experience shows that there will be many ? How Critical is it? ? Are available contingencies sufficient ? ? Can we do more ? 21/25 J.Ph. Tock

13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review SMACC Organisation concerns  Schedule  Manpower  Technical  Logistics  Access modalities Relaxation of access constraints (No biometry)  What will be the next bottleneck ? Lifts ? Solution for bikes under study  General logistics  Efficient logistics for RP vacuum cleaners handling  Parking places shortage Shuttle services ? How Critical is it? ? Can we do more ? 22/25 J.Ph. Tock

13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review SMACC Organisation concerns  Schedule  Manpower  Technical  Other From my “little” experience, most things happen... And many more… 23/25 J.Ph. Tock

13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review SMACC Organisation Conclusions  Schedule  Optimised baseline is available for LS1 and SMACC in particular  No global contingency / Some little local ones included  Manpower  Ratio of experienced staff is about 50 % thanks to  Advanced hiring of FSU and training  Reintegration of experienced collaborators  Turnover to be minimised  To be finalised (FSU, collaboration agreements)  Technical  DFBA consolidation is late wrt other activities  Logistics  Actions are taken to avoid bottlenecks  We are not ready YET but we are confident that we will be ready for the start of the interventions in April 2013  Continuous efforts, commitments and works are required 24/25 J.Ph. Tock

13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review Third LHC Splices Review Thanks to everybody 25/25 J.Ph. Tock

13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review Third LHC Splices Review 26/25 J.Ph. Tock

13th of November 2012 Third LHC Splice Review 27/25 J.Ph. Tock