1 / 17

# CLIC RF structure development meeting Structure cost study (introduction) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

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

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

## PowerPoint Slideshow about 'CLIC RF structure development meeting Structure cost study (introduction) ' - malaya

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

### CLIC RF structure development meetingStructure cost study (introduction)

G. Riddone, 18.08.2010

Introduction and method

Learning curves

Manufacturing flow

Parameters affecting the cost

Some comparative numbers

Cost study in industries

Accelerating structures

• Two cases are considered:

• 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

Definition of the manufacturing flow

Identification of the main steps

Prototype cost based on current design

Usually cost of the first third/fourfh unit

Calculation of cumulative cost

Application of

learning curves

Calculation of average unit cost

• 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 isdoubled

• Cumulative cost of first nth units

with C(n)/n = average unit cost of first nth units produced

• n = number per production line ≠ total number in project

We have to define c(1) and a

Typical learning percentage values

(NASA Learning Curve Calculator)

1 as = 30 disks

Bonding of superstructures (2 as)

Accelerating structures DISKS (142812)

1. Raw material

a:1

2. Machining

4284360 disks (including HOM, manifolds), QC and cleaning

Sequence

a: 0.93

3. Assembly and brazing 285624 couplers

8 couplers /cycle

[35703 cycles]

a: 0.85

Alignment and bonding 71406

disk stacks

4 ss/cycle

[17852 cycles]

a: 0.85

5. Final bonding and assembly (HOM, manifolds), incl. RF check - 71406ss

a: 0.85

4 ss/cycle

[17852 cycles]

a: 0.9

6. Baking

71406ss

4 ss/cycle

[17852 cycles]

Bonding of superstructures (2 as)

1. Raw material

a:1

Sequence

2. Machining

285624 quadrants (including HOM, manifolds), QC and cleaning

a: 0.93

4. Alignment and bonding 71406 structures

4 ss/cycle

[17852 cycles]

a: 0.85

5. Final bonding and assembly (HOM, manifolds), incl. RF check - 71406ss

a: 0.85

4 ss/cycle

[17852 cycles]

a: 0.9

6. Baking

71406ss

4 ss/cycle

[17852 cycles]

1 PETS: 8 bars, 1 coupler

Mini-tank concept

PETS (71406)

1. Raw material

a:1

2. Machining

571248 bars (including HOM), QC and cleaning

Sequence

a: 0.92

3. Machining

71406minitanks, QC and cleaning

a: 0.92

4. Machining

71406 couplers, QC and cleaning

a: 0.92

5. Brazing 71406 couplers

a: 0.85

8 couplers/cycle

[8926 cycles]

6. Final bonding and assembly

(HOM, minitanks), incl. RF check - 71406

a: 0.85

a: 0.9

7. Baking

71406

8 ss/cycle

[8926 cycles]

Some parameters affecting the total cost

Choice of learning factor (+++)

Saturation value: value above which learning stops, no average cost reduction (negligible)

Number of production lines (+)

CLIC

Examples [a= 0.9]:

Sat 0.8  learning process stops after 80 % of the production

Cumulative cost increase 0.31 %

Sat 0.5  learning process stops after 50 % of the production

Cumulative cost increase 2.7 %

For CLIC RF structure quantities

Influence of production lines

Examples [a = 0.9]:

Cost increase of 18% from 1to 3 production lines

(no saturation)

The highest contribution!

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 %

• 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