FCC Cryo-magnet Logistics Part 1

Production, assembly and testing of cryo-units

Review Overview Production Strategies for Supply Network and Assignment of Processes Responsibility Cern / Supplier Production Coldmass Production Cryostat Assembly Cryo-Unit Test Coldmass Test Integration Alternative 1: „Fully Built Up“ and „Tested at CERN“ CERN Supplier Alternative 2: “Fully Built Up“ and „Tested at Supplier plant“ Alternative 3: “Fully Built Up at Supplier plant“ and „Test at CERN“ Alternative 4: “Semi Knocked Down” (with Assembly and Test at CERN) Alternative 5: “Semi Knocked Down with Partial Tests“ (with Assembly and Integration Test at CERN)

Review Overview Production Strategies for Supply Network and Assignment of Processes Responsibility Cern / Supplier Production Coldmass Production Cryostat Assembly Cryo-Unit Test Coldmass Test Integration Alternative 1: „Fully Built Up“ and „Tested at CERN“ CERN Supplier Alternative 2: “Fully Built Up“ and „Tested at Supplier plant“ Alternative 3: “Fully Built Up at Supplier plant“ and „Test at CERN“ Alternative 4: “Semi Knocked Down” (with Assembly and Test at CERN) Alternative 5: “Semi Knocked Down with Partial Tests“ (with Assembly and Integration Test at CERN)

Review Overview Production Strategies for Supply Network and Assignment of Processes Production at CERN Process Safety - full control of all processes high and equal process and product quality, security against blackout, strike, etc. Relatively short transport distances (depending on assembling/testing scenario) Less logistics cost Less damages on product due to less handling processes High structural costs for Infrastructure: production capacities need to be build up Employees: labor cost, associated labor cost Operational costs: Energy, Mainenance, .. Less robustness regarding production shortfalls due to one production facility Production at Supplier Side Less structural costs for infrastructure, operational costs, employees Distributed production increases robustness of supply chain – shortfalls can be better compensated Existing production facilities can be used for maintenance and minor reparation Increase of Logistic costs due to long transport distances Risks for Damages increases due to additional handling effort and unfavorable means of transport have to be used, e.g. containter ships Decrease in process safety due to reduction of control by CERN Several fields of actions when outsourcing production like quality management measures, assessment supplier location, transport security and packaging, etc.

Review Overview Production Strategies for Supply Network and Assignment of Processes Responsibility Cern / Supplier Production Coldmass Production Cryostat Assembly Cryo-Unit Test Coldmass Test Integration Alternative 1: „Fully Built Up“ and „Tested at CERN“ CERN Supplier Alternative 2: “Fully Built Up“ and „Tested at Supplier plant“ Alternative 3: “Fully Built Up at Supplier plant“and„Test at CERN“ Alternative 4: “Semi Knocked Down” (with Assembly and Test at CERN) Alternative 5: “Semi Knocked Down with Partial Tests“ (with Assembly and Integration Test at CERN)

Review Delivery Scenarios Geneva PS SPS LHC Alternative 1: Central assembly and testing facilities - Surface transports Central assembly and testing facilities - Underground transports Alternative 2: Decentral assembly and testing facilities with several shafts Alternative 3: Underground assembly and integration Test (Coldmass Testing at Supplier Side or overground at CERN) Geneva PS SPS LHC Geneva PS SPS LHC

Rough System Description Construction FCC Length: 97,75 m Magnet Ring consist of: 4664 Magnet Dipole (L/W/H 13,4m x 1,5 x 1,64m´) 800 Magnet Quadropole (shorter, lighter MD) others like kicker, high frequency accelerator modules, warm magnets, collimators, etc. Section 1 4 3 2 Sector A-B B-C C-D D-E E-F F-G G-H H-I I-J J-K K-L L-A Length Sector (m) 5000 10000 Length Section (m) 25000

Rough System Description Installation, Schedule Section 1 4 3 2   Sector A-B B-C C-D D-E E-F F-G G-H H-I I-J J-K K-L L-A Magnet-Dipoles (MD) 233 466 Magnet-Quadropoles (MQ) 40 80 MD 1166 4664 MQ 200 800 2036 2037 2038 2039 Section Sector Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 1 A-B B-C C-D 4 D-E E-F F-G 3 G-H H-I I-J 2 J-K K-L L-A

Rough System Description Magnet Process Sequence according to LHC project from Delivery at CERN to Installation Part Delivery (Cryo-Stat, Coldmass) Material Storage Transport Assembly (SMA 18) Transport Storage (PA 18) Transport Cold Test (SM 18) Transport Integration Test (SMI 2) Transport* Storage* Transport Shaft / Installation Point * probably not existent in LHC process flow

Rough System Description Facilities Bottleneck Process Current Infrastructure (LHC) and Process Steps: SMA 18 (Process Assembly Cryo Stat, Coldmass incl. Geometry tests, Warm-test etc.) 6 Assembly Lines Magnet Dipole 2 Assembly Lines Magnet Quadropole 15 Magnets per Week (2-shift System, 5/7d, 50/52w)  750 per year Are capacities usable also for FCC? Doubling of amount of assembled magnets per week possible when increase production time - (24/24h, 7/7d, 50/52w) ~1575 magnets per year PA 18 (Process Storage Assembled magnets) Capacity unknown Coordination output SMA 18 with input SM 18 minor storage capacities necessary SM 18 (Process Cold-test) 12 test benches 13 Magnets per Week (24/24h, 7/7d, 46/52w)  600 per year Are capacities usable also for FCC? Increase of test rate only by acceleration of test procedure or increase of amount of test benches SMI 2 (Process Integration Test) Capacity, Duration unknown Coordination with output SM 18 should avoid idle times and cause minor storage capacities

Rough System Description SM 18 (Process Cold-test) : Test Duration Total duration cold Test per Magnet: 4,75 days (2,5 Magnets per Day) Accoding to A. Siemko: 600 Magnets per year (46/52w)  6,44 days per Magnet Assumtion for Duration of Cold Test for following investigation: 5 days per Magnet  120h

Investigation SM 18 Analysis material requirement per section / sector on basis of current construction schedule Investigation of central and decentral positioning of SM 18 central scenario means positioning of SM 18 at CERN and using existing facilities (as fas as possible or new) for testing and storing decentral scenario means close to each shaft one new test area and additional storage Variation of amount of test facilities to reduce storage area Balancing of construction schedule to reduce amount of test facilities and storage area Assumption: Scenario investigations consider a magnet throughput time cold test of 5 days.

Investigation SM 18 Daily Magnet Demand Required Amount of Magnets per Day varies between 3 to 6 magnets Section 2 Section 1 Section 3 Section 4

Investigation SM 18 Daily Magnet Demand Required Amount of Magnets per Day varies between 3 to 6 magnets

Investigation SM 18 Central 2800 Tested Magnets Assuming: Single Layer Storage Storage Area per Magnet 15 x 2 m Required Storage Area in Total* (tested magnets): 84.000 m² Attention: material storage + SMA 18 + PA 18 + SMI 2 not yet included 2300 Tested Magnets Start of Magnet Testing: Nov. 2032 Magnet Installation Phase

Investigation SM 18 Central

Investigation SM 18 Central Analysis with balanced construction schedule: Average Demand: ~3,7 Magnets 12 Test Benches max. inventory of 2300 magnets start of testing in Nov. 2032 22 Test Benches no pre-testing and no magnets inventory Further Analysis Results: ~ 22 test benches allow finishing of tests of ~3,9 magnets per day tests in advance installation can be avoided additional buffer (1.300 tested magnets) is necessary to supply installation over construction in time ~ 36 test benches allow finishing of tests of ~6,4 magnets per day production and test in advance installation can be avoided additional buffer (tested magnets) can be avoided

Investigation SM 18 Central Analysis with balanced construction schedule: Average Demand: ~3 Magnets / ~ 5 Magnets 12 Test Benches max. inventory of 2800 magnets start of testing in Nov. 2032 22 Test Benches no pre-testing but still inventory of 1100 magnets 30 Test Benches no pre-testing and no magnets inventory Further Analysis Results: ~ 22 test benches allow finishing of tests of ~3,9 magnets per day tests in advance installation can be avoided additional buffer (1.300 tested magnets) is necessary to supply installation over construction in time ~ 36 test benches allow finishing of tests of ~6,4 magnets per day production and test in advance installation can be avoided additional buffer (tested magnets) can be avoided

Investigation SM 18 Decentral (4 test facilities per section) Section 1,2: 940 Tested Magnets Storage Area Section 3,4: 20.500 m² Storage Area Section 1,2: 28.500 m² Section 3,4: 680 Tested Magnets Start of Magnet Testing (3,4): Juni 2033 Start of Magnet Testing (1,2): Aug. 2034

Investigation SM 18 Decentral Analysis with balanced construction schedule: Average Demand: ~3,7 Magnets 4 Test Benches (each section) max. inventory of 840 magnets start of testing in Aug. 2032 12 Test Benches no pre-testing and no inventory magnets Further Analysis Results: ~ 10 test benches (each section) allow finishing of tests of ~1,76 magnets per day (each test area) tests in advance installation can be avoided additional buffer (290 / 420 tested magnets) is necessary to supply installation over construction in time Section 3,4: 170 * (15*2) = 5100 m² Section 2,1: 420 * (15*2) = 12600 m² ~ 18 test benches (each section) allow finishing of tests of ~3,18 magnets per day (each test area) additional buffer (tested magnets) can be avoided

Investigation SM 18 Decentral Analysis with balanced construction schedule: Average Demand: ~3 Magnets / ~ 5 Magnets 4 Test Benches (each section) max. inventory of 770 / 960 magnets start of testing in Febr. 2033 / Aug. 2034 14 Test Benches no pre-testing and no magnets inventory Further Analysis Results: ~ 10 test benches (each section) allow finishing of tests of ~1,76 magnets per day (each test area) tests in advance installation can be avoided additional buffer (290 / 420 tested magnets) is necessary to supply installation over construction in time Section 3,4: 170 * (15*2) = 5100 m² Section 2,1: 420 * (15*2) = 12600 m² ~ 18 test benches (each section) allow finishing of tests of ~3,18 magnets per day (each test area) additional buffer (tested magnets) can be avoided

Overview scenarios Schedule Schedule balanced I Schedule balanced II Amount test benches Storage capacity Test start central 12 2800 Nov 2032 2300 22 1300 - 1100 36 30 decentral 4 680/ 940 Juni33/ Aug 34 840/ 840 Aug32/ Aug34 770/ 960 Febr32/ 10 170/420 14 18

Findings I/III Central Assembly at CERN Existing facilites can be used* but further investment in modernization is necessary Separated transport of cold mass and cryo stat reduces logistics effort regarding requirements for transport protection Longer Transport distances of assembled cryo units to installation point compared to decentral Decentral Assembly at CERN Short transport distances of assembled cryo units Separated transport of cold mass and cryo stat reduces logistics effort regarding requirements for transport protection High costs due to new facilites Increased number of employees though distributed assembly facilities * Positive if existing infrastructure can be used for FCC otherwise additional costs for new facilities need to be considered.

Findings II/III Central Cold Test at CERN Existing facilites can be used* but further investment in modernization or extension of benches is necessary Equal test settings secure high and equal process quality Longer Transport distances of assembled and tested cryo units to installation point compared to decentral If supplier production: less robustness caused by late quality / performance checks Decentral Cold Test at CERN Short transport distances of assembled and tested cryo units Higher robustness due to distributed test facilities (redundancy) High costs in infrastructure due to new facilites Decrease in process safety due to distributed test facilities Increased number of employees through distributed assembly facilities If supplier production: less robustness caused by late quality / performance checks * Positive if existing infrastructure can be used for FCC otherwise additional costs for new facilities need to be considered.

Not discussed yet Assembly, Cold test and Integration test at Supplier Side Responsibility Cern / Supplier Production Coldmass Production Cryostat Assembly Cryo-Unit Test Coldmass Test Integration Alternative 1: „Fully Built Up“ and „Tested at CERN“ CERN Supplier Alternative 2: “Fully Built Up“ and „Tested at Supplier plant“ Alternative 3: “Fully Built Up at Supplier plant“ and „Test at CERN“ Alternative 4: “Semi Knocked Down” (with Assembly and Test at CERN) Alternative 5: “Semi Knocked Down with Partial Tests“ (with Assembly and Integration Test at CERN)

Discussion Feasibility of Logistics Scenarios Delivery Scenarios Geneva PS SPS LHC Alternative 1: Central assembly and testing facilities - Surface transports to shafts (C,E,I,K) Central assembly and testing facilities - Underground transports (1 shaft CERN / 2 shafts (C,K)) Alternative 2: Decentral assembly and testing facilities close to shafts (C,E,I,K) NEW! Decentral assembly and testing facilities close to shafts (C,K) Alternative 3: Underground assembly and integration Test (Coldmass Testing at Supplier Side or overground at CERN) Geneva PS SPS LHC Geneva PS SPS LHC

Discussion Feasibility Delivery Scenarios costs (Structure e.g. infrastructure, employees, operating costs and logistics e.g. inventory, process costs) and expected process quality (e.g. Damages, Process Security, Robustness) Discussion Feasibility Delivery Scenarios Cost Quality Infrast. Operations transport storage Damages safety Robustness o/+ + - - - ++ -/imposs.? o Alternative 1: Central assembly and testing facilities - Surface transports to shafts (C,E,I,K) Central assembly and testing facilities - Underground transports (1 shaft CERN / 2 shafts (C,K)) Alternative 2: Decentral assembly and testing facilities close to shafts (C,E,I,K) NEW! Decentral assembly and testing facilities close to shafts (C,K) Alternative 3: Underground assembly and integration Test (Coldmass Testing at Supplier Side or overground at CERN)

Outlook further investigation Identified Supply Chain Alternatives and Delivery Scenario are analyzed regarading necessity and interdependencies of Production capacities Storage and Transport capacities Assembly and Testing Facilities Current construction schedules is basis for investigation Experimental model is developed allowing analysis of different scenarios/alternatives presented (except excluded ones) concerning necessary capacities over time through parameterization of process allocation process duration construction schedule variants PRODUCTION CAPACITIES Costs Robustness Process Safety LOGISTICS CAPACITIES ASSEMBLING AND TESTING FACILITIES

Further Investigation Needs verification and additional information regarding Process Sequence Part Delivery (Cryo-Stat, Coldmass) Material Storage Transport Assembly (SMA 18) Transport Storage (PA 18) Transport Cold Test (SM 18) HD-Transport Integration Test (SMI 2) Transport Storage HD- Transport Shaft / Installation Point Assumtions regarding SMA18, SM 18, SMI 2: Process times, Capacities, Production intervall Storage Capacities, Locations Process Sequence verification