1. Electron Beam Systems ETC and Methodology
David Schultz
E-Beams Systems Manager
Recent progress
e-beams Costs Estimation and ETC
Progress against milestones
Risks

2. Recent progress LCLS Injector, and Bunch Compressor 1
Installed and commissioned
Commissioning goals achieved
Bunch Compressor 2 and Linac
The down is under way, installation is proceeding
No show stoppers are seen for installation and checkout.
The downtime schedule remains very tight.
BC2 commissioning schedule is generous.
Undulator
All Undulator segments now at SLAC
Controls and component fabrication for LTU -> Dump installation is proceeding well.

3. Recent progress Enhanced Undulator staffing: Jose Chan
CAM for Undulator System Integration at SLAC
Carl Rago
Integration Engineer at SLAC
Bill Berg
Integration Engineer at ANL
Don Schafer
Design Engineer at SLAC

4. ETC major contributing factors
The Continuing Resolution added cost to the system
Lost productivity while the impact was assessed.
Costs to recover and perform to the new schedule.
There were major increases in mechanical and cable plant installation cost estimates
Estimates are based on experience with
Injector -> BC1 installation.
Further cost increases with increased scope
LTU/UH/ED Controls networks

5. e-beams ETC cost increases
Cost increases associated with the CR
Effort associated with schedule replanning
Lost productivity during uncertainty
Very significant with the ANL Undulator effort
Cost to accelerate production and procurements to meet the schedule

6. e-beams ETC cost increases
Basis of estimate is experience with the installation of the Injector and BC1. Estimate is done top-down and confirmed with a bottom-up estimate.
2007 Installation $740k
LTU Installation $886k
Undulator Installation $203k
E-Dump Installation $254k
total increase $2.08M

7. e-beams ETC cost increases
For cable plant installation, the estimate is done by the SLAC cable group using RS Means. Recent estimates have been accurate.
LTU/Dump Cable plant Installation $247k
Undulator Cable plant Installation $698k
total increase $945k

8. e-beams ETC cost increases
Controls network scope had to be added. The bottoms up cost estimate has been reviewed.
LTU/UH/ED networks $800k addition

9. e-Beams ETC

10. e-Beams Level 3 Milestones

11. Risk registry entries
The Linac BPMs may not have sufficient sensitivity for FEL commissioning.
The upcoming BC2 commissioning will determine if an upgrade is warranted.
The cost of an upgrade would be ~$800k.
Beam diagnostics upstream of BC2 may be needed to optimize beam parameters as needed for FEL commissioning.
The cost of an upgrade would be ~$250k.

12. Risk registry entries
The assembly of the Undulator Girders is on the project critical path for Undulator commissioning.
Several parts are, or are near, the limiting factor
1) RF BPM production
The RFBPM is performing very well in the 3-BPM test at ANL.
Fabrication has begun on some parts,
but design is just now finishing.
Prototype fabrication (brazing) was problematic.

13. Risk registry entries
2) Undulator Vacuum chamber
The Stainless Steel ‘4-Weld’ design has been abandoned due to tight constraints on magnetic permeability.
Three alternate designs were taken up,
Extruded Al design
Clamshell Al design (now halted)
Cu tube design
The extruded Al design is the front runner
Mechanical tolerances have been met
Interior surface finish tolerances have been met
Down select design at the end of September

14. Risk registry entries
3) Undulator Component Deliveries
There are a large number of parts coming to SLAC from ANL and ANL vendors
These parts need to be assembled onto the Undulator girders and precision aligned.
Any rework or modification of parts at SLAC will delay girder assembly.
We have instituted weekly video meetings with ANL and are in the process of starting quarterly Undulator collaboration meetings to ensure coordination.
Integration engineers at ANL and at SLAC have been established to coordinate the receipt and assembly.

15. Summary
Progress to-date has been good, especially with Injector commissioning. Progress towards completion of the current installation is good.
CR related costs have been incurred, and we are prepared to perform to the new CR driven schedule.
Revised installation costs, based on experience, lead to a substantial increase in the ETC.
With the new CR driven schedule, there is sufficient cost and schedule contingency to complete the project.

16. end