LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory1 Adv. LIGO Installation (INS) Plans, Schedule, Costs, Team Plan, Schedule Costs Team

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory2 Adv. LIGO Seismic Isolation (SEI) WBS Structure

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory3 Adv. LIGO Seismic Isolation (SEI) Schedule Unconstrained by Subsystem Deliveries

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory4 Adv. LIGO Seismic Isolation (SEI) Schedule Unconstrained by Subsystem Deliveries

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory5 Adv. LIGO Seismic Isolation (SEI) Schedule Unconstrained by Subsystem Deliveries

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory6 Detailed Primavera Schedule Commissioning duration Compressed too much; Fixed in M E2 revisions Installation delayed by SUS deliveries; fixed in M E2 revisions

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory7 Schedule/Planning Methodology Two closely related schedules which iterate towards convergence as we continue to refine our planning for advanced LIGO »A top level systems engineering schedule (MS Project) –Guides the bottoms-up planning –Reflects/summarizes the results of detailed planning –Basis for executive decisions about the needed sequence (logic in the system level planning) and duration of major schedule activities »A bottoms-up, or detailed, schedule (Primavera) –“Informs" the top-level schedule on needed durations and what is possible –Spreads estimated costs over time in order to provide a project funding timeline Advanced LIGO is not yet a “Baselined” and controlled project »When funding is received, the project ‘machinery’ is in place to put the schedule under strict management control

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory8 Proposed Schedule Revisions Current departure between the top-level schedule (M E2) and the detailed schedule with regard to the Suspensions development plan results in: »Later installation start due to an overly lengthy design phase (3 years from starting a SUS controls prototype test at LASTI, 11/2004, to the start of SUS production, 11/2007 »Inadequate commissioning duration Proposed remedy: »Use the Photon drive prototype in SUS noise prototype testing at LASTI rather than a 1st article (Saves 5 months) »The SUS Prelim Design phase should not extend 6 months past the LASTI controls test. Reduce to 2 months. (Saves 4 months) »Start the long lead procurement for SUS prior to the completion of noise testing at LASTI, but after noise prototype assembly

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory9 Summary Level INS Schedule Detailed Primavera Schedule Compared to Proposed Changes (M E2) N.B: Primavera detailed schedule is summarized in top, gray bars Systems group proposed revision (M E2) is lower, blue bars Commissioning Period lengthened to match detailed schedule (Primavera) Operational dates; Might be shorter when revisions are integrated into Primavera

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory10 INS Costs All costs are in base year dollars (un-escalated) Total cost = $24,829K including 22% contingency Proposed construction cost = $24,829K – ~1.33 x $10,855K direct labor incl. Indirect (mostly observatory, low overhead staff) = ~$10.4M 232K in-house hrs + 52K hrs = 284K hours total Direct labor costs are borne by LIGO operations funds

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory11 INS Costs Equipment costs = $2,351K Approximately $7,270K per IFO total cost, of which $2,630K is proposed project costs ($7.27M – 1.33 x $3.49M = $2.6M)

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory12 INS Equipment Cost Estimate

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory13 INS Equipment Cost Estimate INS equipment estimate in the cost book is dated »Cost is dominated by vacuum equipment bake out equipment which is no longer planned and clean rooms which are covered under FAC »Revised Basis of Estimate (BOE): –Clean room supplies; BSC chamber“cartridge” SEI/SUS installation tooling/fixturing; HAM chamber SEI installation tooling/fixturing = $782K (incl. 25% contingency) plus 1120 hr. (covered under operations funding) –Initial LIGO experience: used ~$1.5M during installation and initial commissioning –$1.5M + $0.8M = $2.3M = the cost book number

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory14 INS Costs Interferometer-1 cost breakdown »46% for Commissioning »37% for de-integration and Installation »Costs based on initial LIGO experience and detailed bottoms-up estimation »Estimate re-done (2/2003) in more detail with a result within the contingency (331K hrs total, or +16% in labor hours) »Analysis of LIGO Lab available labor rate compared to estimated need resulted in request for ~50K hr in contract labor

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory15 INS Commissioning Costs Labor mix and hours based on team composition per task times expected task duration and times needed duty cycle for labor skills

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory16 Adv. LIGO Seismic Isolation (SEI) Team LIGO Lab manages the installation and commissioning effort »Leader: Dennis Coyne (LIGO Lab, acting) Key Participants: »All hardware development teams within the LSC, both from within and outside of the LIGO Lab (e.g. UG, UB, LZH, UFL, LSU, Stanford, etc.) support the installation and commissioning with visiting technical staff/experts in their subsystems »All technical staff at the observatories, including operators »Skilled trade/contract labor is used for labor intensive efforts for which LSC expertise is not essential (pulling cables, rigging, etc.)