Proposals for conceptual design of the CLIC DR RF system at 2 GHz
CLIC RF structure development meeting Structure cost study (introduction)
17
CLIC RF structure development meeting Structure cost study (introduction) G. Riddone, 18.08.2010
description
CLIC RF structure development meeting Structure cost study (introduction). G. Riddone, 18.08.2010 . Content. Introduction and method Learning curves Manufacturing flow Parameters affecting the cost Some comparative numbers Cost study in industries. Introduction. Accelerating structures - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of CLIC RF structure development meeting Structure cost study (introduction)
CLIC RF structure development meeting
Structure cost study (introduction)G. Riddone, 18.08.2010
2
Content
G. Riddone, 18/08/2010
Introduction and method Learning curves Manufacturing flow Parameters affecting the cost Some comparative numbers Cost study in industries
3
Introduction
G. Riddone, 18/08/2010
Accelerating structures Two cases are considered:
Accelerating superstructures in quadrants Accelerating superstructures in disks
For both cases: Sealed structures Diffusion bonding at ~1000 ˚C under hydrogen 3 production lines
PETS Octants and mini tank concept 3 production lines
4
Method
G. Riddone, 18/08/2010
Definition of the manufacturing
flow
Prototype cost based on current
design
Application of learning curves
Calculation of cumulative cost
Calculation of average unit cost
Identification of the main steps
Usually cost of the first third/fourfh
unit
Learning curve - Theory
T.P. Wright, Factors affecting the cost of airplanes, Journ. Aero. Sci. (1936)
Unit cost c(n) of nth unit produced
with a = « learning percentage », i.e. remaining cost fraction when production is doubledCumulative cost of first nth units
with C(n)/n = average unit cost of first nth units producedn = number per production line ≠ total number in project
ancnc 2log)1()(
ancnC
a
2
log1
log1)1()(
2
We have to define c(1) and a
5 G. Riddone, 18/08/2010
6
Learning percentage
G. Riddone, 18/08/2010
Typi
cal l
earn
ing
perc
enta
ge v
alue
s(N
ASA
Lear
ning
Cur
ve C
alcu
lato
r)
Learning percentage
7 G. Riddone, 18/08/2010
Accelerating structures DISKS (142812)
G. Riddone, 18/08/20108
3. Assembly and brazing 285624 couplers
6. Baking 71406 ss
5. Final bonding and assembly (HOM, manifolds), incl. RF check
- 71406 ss
Sequ
ence
2. Machining4284360 disks (including HOM,
manifolds), QC and cleaning
4. Alignment and bonding 71406
disk stacks
8 couplers /cycle[35703 cycles]
4 ss/cycle[17852 cycles]
4 ss/cycle[17852 cycles]
Assumptions:1 as = 30 disksBonding of superstructures (2 as)
4 ss/cycle[17852 cycles]
a: 0.93
a: 0.85
a: 0.9
1. Raw material a:1
a: 0.85
a: 0.85
Accelerating structures QUADRANTS (142812)
G. Riddone, 18/08/20109
6. Baking 71406 ss
5. Final bonding and assembly (HOM, manifolds), incl. RF check
- 71406 ss
Sequ
ence
2. Machining285624 quadrants (including
HOM, manifolds), QC and cleaning
4. Alignment and bonding 71406 structures 4 ss/cycle
[17852 cycles]
4 ss/cycle[17852 cycles]
Assumptions:1 as = 4 quadrantsBonding of superstructures (2 as)
4 ss/cycle[17852 cycles]
a: 0.93
a: 0.9
1. Raw material a:1
a: 0.85
a: 0.85
PETS (71406)
G. Riddone, 18/08/201010
7. Baking 71406
6. Final bonding and assembly(HOM, minitanks), incl. RF check
- 71406
Sequ
ence
2. Machining571248 bars (including HOM),
QC and cleaning
5. Brazing 71406 couplers 8 couplers/cycle[8926 cycles]
8 ss/cycle[8926 cycles]
a: 0.92
a: 0.9
1. Raw material a:1
a: 0.85
a: 0.85
4. Machining71406 couplers, QC and
cleaning
3. Machining71406 minitanks, QC and
cleaning a: 0.92
a: 0.92
Assumptions:1 PETS: 8 bars, 1 couplerMini-tank concept
11
Some parameters affecting the total cost
G. Riddone, 18/08/2010
Choice of learning factor (+++) Saturation value: value above which
learning stops, no average cost reduction (negligible)
Number of production lines (+)
12
Learning factor
G. Riddone, 18/08/2010
CLIC
13
Saturation
G. Riddone, 18/08/2010
Examples [a= 0.9]:Sat 0.8 learning process stops after 80 % of the productionCumulative cost increase 0.31 %
Sat 0.5 learning process stops after 50 % of the productionCumulative cost increase 2.7 %
For CLIC RF structure quantities
Influence of production lines
14 G. Riddone, 18/08/2010
(no saturation)
Examples [a = 0.9]:Cost increase of 18% from 1to 3 production lines
15
RF structure cost
G. Riddone, 18/08/2010
Accelerating structures
Cost of test structure disk (ref . VDL)
Cost of 300-mm quadrant (ref. VDL) linearly scaled to 500-mm quadrant (maybe optimistic)
Cost of machining = 90 % of total
Total cost of machining of AS in quadrants = 75 %Total cost of machining of AS in disks
PETS
Cost of PETS octant @ 11.4 GHz (ref . VDL, Unitek)
Cost of machining: 75 % of total
16
Two beam module cost
G. Riddone, 18/08/2010
BREAKDOWN RF system: 65 % Alignment system: 10 % Supporting system: 6 % Magnet system: 5 % Beam instrumentation: 5% Magnet powering system: 3% Vacuum system: 2.5 % Other systems: 3.5 %
The highest contribution!
17
Industrialization and mass production study
G. Riddone, 18/08/2010
Launched industrialization and mass production studies in 3 industries/institutes: VDL KERN VTT/HIP
CLIC structures, with HOM damping material, vacuum material,….
Cost study will include both capital and running cost (CERN cost study only running cost)
Study currently under way. Analysis of the preliminary results confirm tendency of CERN
cost study
