ESS RFQ PROJECT RISKS Anne-Catherine CHAUVEAU 14 January 2016.

ESS RFQ PROJECT RISKS

Anne-Catherine CHAUVEAU 14 January 2016

Identification Rating Pre-Mitigation Disposition Rating Post-

Mitigation

Risk IDRisk Label

Level Treatment Mitigation Strategy / main actions Level("As a result of...") ("There is a risk that...")

Organization / Specific managerial aspects            

M1 ERIC finalisation Unknown admistrative process with potential impact on-going call for tenders and schedule 32 MAJOR Mitigation Mitigations at management level (see

Management RR) 16 MAJOR

M2 Time schedule reduction Procurement financial offers should be higher than expected 32 MAJOR Transfert Additional cost to be transfered to ESS    

M3 Time schedule reduction of RFQ contract

No single manufacturer able to sustain the schedule constraint 32 MAJOR Transfert Delay to be tranfered to ESS    

M4 Time schedule reduction of RFQ contract

Auxilairies + Tuner + couplers contracts nor reaching RFQ contract on target time (from schedule point of view)

64 SEVERE Mitigation

Set sub-critical contracts as priority in order to put them outside the critical path : ressources allocations, special adlinstrative procedure, pre-selection of bidders. Close follow-up of adminstrative durations

32 MAJOR

M5Time schedule reduction > End plate final assembly no RF tested (only dummy finger tested)

End plate RF specification not achieved (with final components) 16 MAJOR Transfert Delays and additional cost to be tranfered to ESS    

M6Time schedule reduction > No final vacuum system integrated and tested @ Saclay

Vacuum system performance not reaching its specifications (RFQ vacuum integrity still tested ) during validations at Saclay

16 MAJOR Mitigation Delays and additional cost to be transfered to ESS if issues arise after shipment. 16 MAJOR

M7Time schedule reduction > No final vacuum control system integrated and tested @ Saclay

Vacuum control system not reaching its specifications during validations at Saclay 16 MAJOR Mitigation

Mitigation : Vacuum CS partially tested on 1 or 2 sectionsTransfert : Delays and additional cost to be tranfered to ESS to correct problem after shipment

8 MINOR

M8Time schedule reduction > Cooling system FAT only, no SAT (leak test, skid performance test)

Cooling system performance not reaching its specifications during check-out at Saclay 32 MAJOR Mitigation

Mitigation : Water loss of pressure simulations in FAT (new in contract), Transfert : Cooling system assembly and leak test to be performed directly by ESS / Delays and additional cost to be tranfered to ESS to correct problem after shipment

32 MAJOR

M9 Only partial tests at sacaly More manmpower needed in Lund to finish CEA contribution 32 MAJOR Mitigation

Change contract approach (with limitation in ressources according to intial cost) + all correcivtes cost to be supported by ESS => Cost & fee

32 MAJOR

M10 Accelerator System team not stabilized. Engineering process not stable

External RFQ interfaces not frozen in due time (CDR2) to finalize Tech Specs 64 SEVERE Mitigation

CDR2 before manufacturing with high priority interfaces specification.Interface specification reviewed both by CEA and ESS

8 MINOR

No mitigation With the tight schedule,

final end plates will not be tested in Saclay

Mitigation : Water loss of pressure simulations in

FAT Issues discovered in Lund

will take longer to solve

Cooling system performance not reaching its specification first timeAuxilairies + Tuner + couplers contracts not

reaching RFQ contract on target time (from schedule

point of view)

Procurement financial offers should be higher

than expected because of shorter manufacturing time

No single manufacturer able to sustain the

schedule constraint of 20 months

More CEA manpower needed in Lund to finish

CEA contribution.Overcost

Set sub-critical contracts as priority in order to put them outside the critical path (ie: tuner prototype)

No mitigation No mitigation

WP2: ESS RFQ RISKS LIST (PAGE 1)

| PAGE 2

Change contract approach with limitation in

ressources according to intial cost and correctives cost to be supported by

ESS

Identification Rating Pre-Mitigation Disposition Rating Post-

MitigationRisk ID Risk Label Level Treatmen

t Mitigation Strategy / main actions Level("As a result of...") ("There is a risk that...")Individual components performance              

C1 Beam Dynamics design issues … RFQ RF design does not match the all the performance requirements 32 MAJOR MitigationCDR0 has reviewed all design topics / Qualification

plan / Bead pull / 16 MAJOR

C2 Peak power very high, design based on SP2 under installation,

Couplers not reaching specifications (800 kW) 64 SEVERE Mitigation

The couplers will be tested on the test cavity / One coupler spare / Additional windows spares / Qualification plan (progressive steps)

32 MAJOR

Procurements              

P1 Not enough applicants, over cost from tenderers, bad tendering process

tenders process not conclude in due time 32 MAJOR Mitigation

Anticipate as much as possible call for tenders even if specifications are not completely defined.The markets are closely followed.

8 MINOR

P2

Several company to deliver the auxiliairies parts, technological challenges (SS/Cu brazing), process qualification to reach, manufacturing schedules slippage

Auxiliaries parts (esp. RFQ ports) to brazed delivered too late to RFQ manufacturer

32 MAJOR MitigationClose follow-up of manufacturers, Enhanced QA 4 MINOR

P3 Manufacturing workload and internal bad arbitration from the manufacturer RFQ manufacturer late delivery 32 MAJOR Mitigation

Define precise steps with the manufacturer to follow process datesWe will request frequent meetings with manufacturer to follow process.Higher delivery penalties / incitationsMarket survey (Industry proper selection)

16 MAJOR

P4 ESS issues Vacuum and its control system not delivered on time by ESS 16 MAJOR Mitigation

Enhance communication with vacuum and control teams. If possible, the pump used for all anticipated tests during prototyping and RFQ assembly will be identical to the final pumps in order to prove mechanical adjustment.Send 3D to vacuum team ASAP

16 MAJOR

Manufacturing process              

MP1Bad behaviour of materials during brazing, senstive and new process for the selected company

Difficulties to perform RFQ sections brazing 64 SEVERE Mitigation

Check brazing experience prior to tender approval / Follow up process during manufacturing / Brazing process qualification / Cu Spare parts / Brazor expert is working with us to help on and follow brazing procedure.

16 MAJOR

MP2 Difficult manufacturing process (ceramic window brazing …)

No manufacturing acceptance of Couplers (leaks, conditioning barriers, …)

64 SEVERE Mitigation

One coupler spare + Manufacturing process with validation steps (NOT considered in current risk analysis : 2 or 3 spares in option / pre-serie qualification inc conditioning / Contract provisions)

32 MAJOR

Acceptance              

A1 RF archs damaging critical parts of the cavity RFQ compromised during conditioning 64 SEVERE MitigationProgressive RF power ramp / Cleanliness cautions during manufacturing and assembly at Lund / RF expert for conditionning

16 MAJOR

One coupler spare + Manufacturing process with validation steps.

The couplers will be tested on the test cavity.

Manufacturing process issues for the couplers

(ceramic window)

Couplers not reaching specifications because peak power is very high

WP2: ESS RFQ RISKS LIST (PAGE 2)

| PAGE 3

| PAGE 4

PROJECT RISKS SUMMARY

No “RED” level risks after mitigation

Most risks concern the time schedule as it contains no margin.

Most critical technical part is the coupler because it is a complex part and the power required is very high.

RISKS LEVEL BEFORE MITIGATION

RISKS LEVEL AFTER MITIGATION

CEA Saclay/Irfu projet ESS | DATECommissariat à l’énergie atomique et aux énergies alternativesCentre de Saclay | 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette CedexT. +33 (0)1 69 08 xx xx | F. +33 (0)1 69 08 99 89

Etablissement public à caractère industriel et commercial | RCS Paris B 775 685 019

| PAGE 5