Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byMaximilian Black Modified over 8 years ago
1
Procurement of Nb 3 Sn strand, cable fabrication, and quality control for the U.S. Hi-Lumi LHC Accelerator Upgrade Project Lance Cooley, Fermilab L3 manager for strand and cable MQXF International Review – CERN, June 7 th – 10 th, 2016
2
logo area Overview - strand The U.S. team is moving forward with an acquisition plan for 10 tons of conductor The present LARP procurement of 208 km = ~1 ton, to conclude early 2017, has exhibited properties well above specification Pre-production issues have emerged as well The AUP profile requires a LARP procurement of 1.5 ton = 300 km at FY17 start with option for 1700 km = 8.5 additional tons after CD-1 / CD-3a Magnets are critical path; procurement start is important for schedule margin The acquisition plan assumes a phased procurement The schedule addresses risks for raw material delay by adding 20% of (year+1) needs to yearly procurement Cooley – US Strand, Cable, and QC - MQXF International Review, June 7th-10th 20162
3
logo area Overview - cable The AUP plan assumes fabrication of 100 cables will be needed for 90 coils Risk for cable failure is incorporated into the project baseline procurement Mitigation requires procurement of more unit lengths … … However, the UL will reduce, so net procurement is same 6 long cables have been fabricated with no issues; the 7 th long cable was started and then halted due to a strand break 15 m after start of run Resolution and corrective actions will be discussed LARP will have produced 17 long cables by close of program Cooley – US Strand, Cable, and QC - MQXF International Review, June 7th-10th 20163
4
logo area Overview – QA / QC Quality Assurance International standards, written procedures, personnel and facility qualification, and benchmarking are integrated into the project Quality Control Primary strand QC responsibility is the supplier Testing at each end of billet mandatory Interior piece testing shall be triggered by breakage QC test is a ~3% cost penalty, encourages long pieces Labs will verify supplier tests with graded testing approach 50% at start; lower as production continues Benchmarking has been completed Cables qualified by RRR and microscopic analyses Addition of cable scanning and strain sensors on Turk’s head Cooley – US Strand, Cable, and QC - MQXF International Review, June 7th-10th 20164
5
logo area Specification table for LARP and HL-LHC AUP strand Cooley – US Strand, Cable, and QC - MQXF International Review, June 7th-10th 2016 Magnet length and field gradient Field quality Magnet protection 5 Field quality
6
logo area Specification table, p.2 Cooley – US Strand, Cable, and QC - MQXF International Review, June 7th-10th 2016 < 5% reduction of properties upon cabling Cooling 6 Magnet length Cooling
7
logo area Conductor acquisition plan for HL-LHC AUP 100 cable ULs x 40 strands = 4000 unit lengths = 2000 km = 10,000 kg 1 cable UL = 500 m 1 cable UL = 20 km strand = 100 kg = $175k (per basis of estimate) or $155k (present LARP cost) About 250 billets 8 potential suppliers (next slide) Only OST was qualified under LARP Best value procurement Technical review panel identified Cost-performance balance defined Cooley – US Strand, Cable, and QC - MQXF International Review, June 7th-10th 20167
8
logo area Suppliers and qualification A source evaluation board will not be used for HL-LHC AUP Cooley – US Strand, Cable, and QC - MQXF International Review, June 7th-10th 20168 Only vendor to meet LARP qualification = Vendors with significant potential to respond to Project RFP
9
logo area RRR vs Ic for present LARP procurement Statistical process control at 3-sigma (99.1%) level Statistics (11 billets, 22 spools) for 665 °C / 75 h HT Shipment B received 31 March 2016, Lab measurements not yet available Hotter, longer HT promotes higher 15 T Jc RRR difference was found to be arise from different sample preparation by benchmarking, and possible actions are being considered at this time Cooley – US Strand, Cable, and QC - MQXF International Review, June 7th-10th 2016 3 = 48 A 3 = 59 A 2738 A/mm 2 1486 A/mm 2 3 = 90 9
10
logo area N-values and copper to non-copper ratio Cooley – US Strand, Cable, and QC - MQXF International Review, June 7th-10th 201610 3 = 6.8 3 = 4.8 Cu:NC = 1.2 ± 0.1 Average Dia. Spec. 0.850 ± 0.003 mm
11
logo area Delivered piece length distribution (162 of 308 km) Cooley – US Strand, Cable, and QC - MQXF International Review, June 7th-10th 2016 11 550 m 1100 m 2200 m3300 m4400 m5500 m6600 m7700 m8800 m9900 m Max length for 45 kg billet = 9250 m LARP = 141 UL (i.e. 3.5 cables) CERN = 123 UL
12
logo area Diameter measurements along axes – example of QC A discrepancy at supplier was corrected after shipment A Average diameter = (dx + dy) / 2 12 Verification at labs identified a faulty laser micrometer, a die out of calibration, and vertical axis vibration on supplier’s line non-conformity, corrective actions completed Cooley – US Strand, Cable, and QC - MQXF International Review, June 7th-10th 2016
13
logo area Deviations and Non-conformance While the QC plan outlines procedures for handling discrepancies, established procurement policies at the supplier and the labs work very well Supplier is required to receive authorization to deliver, and must provide a certificate of compliance Request for authorization to deliver must include all QC data, billet pedigree report, and piece report Verification samples are sent to lab when request is made; lab can hold shipment until QC data are verified NC, DR, and discrepancy processes have all been exercised during the present LARP procurement Non-conforming: diameter at specification limit, corrective actions Deviation request for piece shorter than minimum length RRR test discrepancy revealed difference in sample preparation Cooley – US Strand, Cable, and QC - MQXF International Review, June 7th-10th 201613
14
logo area QA as a continuous process Diameter non-conformity: fault at 2 levels A round-robin test (OST, LBNL, BNL) revealed the discrepancy Laser micrometer out of calibration and was replaced; drawing die was retired; new equipment and dies were installed Raw material: boron impurity caused hard NbB precipitates to occur Boron was not included in material specifications (e.g. ASTM) Documentation allowed OST and sub-contractor to trace defect to ore source at sub-contractor New spec, QC and testing have been added Cable: fault at 2 levels and production learning A clean room defect was present within “manually scan” length QC procedure was not followed by 2 nd shift tech in production Cooley – US Strand, Cable, and QC - MQXF International Review, June 7th-10th 201614
15
logo area Conclusions A comprehensive acquisition plan, QC plan, and strand specification have been completed These were exercised in a pre-production LARP procurement LARP will request proposals for 1.5 tons, with option for additional 8.5 tons (AUP), this summer, for contract award Oct-Dec 2016 Start of procurement at beginning of FY17 is required to provide adequate schedule margin for magnet production The 0.85 mm RRP ® 108/127 strand meets or exceeds specifications, with significant margin for I c and RRR Delivered piece lengths are consistent with past performance and cost model, no surprises Cooley – US Strand, Cable, and QC - MQXF International Review, June 7th-10th 201615
16
logo area Conclusions - 2 Risks were uncovered during the pre-procurement run Strand production has been delayed by 9 months due to raw material issue Phased procurement will add 20% of (year+1) strand needs to mitigate risk of raw material gap A strand break occurred during the 7 th long cable run Location was in startup length, cause appears to be an inclusion that escaped supplier QC at a “manually scan” region At OST: R&D teams are handing off responsibility for conductor to production teams If this had occurred in the middle of the run, the cable would have been lost Total acquisition will support 100 cable unit lengths to address a 10% cable failure rate Cooley – US Strand, Cable, and QC - MQXF International Review, June 7th-10th 201616
Similar presentations
© 2024 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.