Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #1
Risk Based R&D Plan
Martin Cooper
Los Alamos
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #2
Outline
• The Process• Reevaluation of the Program• Iteration on the Contents• Risk Methodology
• The Plan• Assumptions• Schedule Overview• Risk Overview• Contract Project Manager Actions
• The Schedule Challenge
• News
• Summary
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #3
The Process
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #4
Reevaluation of the Program
• One day of the October collaboration meeting was devoted to reevaluating every part of the R&D plan
• The CPM appointed an advisory committee• Jan Boissevain (Consultant) – Chief Engineer• Bob Golub (NCSU)• Geoff Greene (Tennessee/ORNL)• Mike Hayden (SFU)• Steve Lamoreaux (Yale) – Co-spokesperson
• Committee reported their evaluations individually
• CPM made decisions
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #5
Iteration on Contents
WBS 1.1.2.1 Title 3He relaxation time
Funding Source DOE Constr. Institutions Duke, Illinois
Funding Avail. $20k Opportunity
Goal (Completion Dates): The overall goal is to measure the 3He relaxation time from 0.3-0.6 K to insure that the neutrons and 3He remain polarized throughout the measurement cycle. At 30,000 sec, there is essentially no impact on the sensitivity. Any value greater than the neutron storage time provides a small degradation to the sensitivity. At Duke, the result for a cell coated with dTPB is a subsidiary measurement to the geometric phase measurement. (4/1/07). At Illinois, the measurement is to be made on materials used in the valves and transfer lines as well as dTPB (6/1/07)
Risk Descriptions: Obtaining a value >1000 sec at 0.5K is crucial to having a small impact on the EDM sensitivity. No measurements have been made at the operating temperature. The advisory committee judged this quantity to be the major scientific unknown in the design.
Risk Likelihood Impact Overall Risk
Technical Likely Critical High
Schedule Unlikely Marginal Low
Cost Unlikely Marginal Low
CPM Actions: Support both efforts at Duke and Illinois. The measurement on dTPB is difficult and important enough to warrant duplicate effort. The measurement on materials to be used in the valves is important.
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #6
Risk Methodology
Marginal Significant Critical
Cost
Impact on project contingency is:
<$25K $25-$100K
>$100K
Schedule
Impact on project schedule is:
All else Level 1 or 2 Milestones
Impacts project completion date
Technical
Impact on project performance is:
Optimal specification will be within 20%
Minimal specification will be bettered by 80%
Minimal specification may not be met
Marginal Significant Critical
Cost
Impact on project contingency is:
<$200K $200-$500K
>$500K
Schedule
Impact on project schedule is:
All else Level 1 or 2 Milestones
Impacts project completion date
Technical
Impact on project performance is:
CD-4 will be met and performance will exceed Minimal Specifications
CD-4 will be met and performance will be degraded from Minimal Specifications
CD-4 will not be met
R&D Project
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #7
Risk Methodology
Overall Risk Rating
Likelihood of
Occurrence
Impact/Consequence
Marginal Significant Critical
Very Likely Medium High High
Likely Low Medium High
Unlikely Low Low Medium
Risk Likelihood
Very Likely >90%
Likely >50% and <90%
Unlikely <50%
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #8
The Plan
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #9
Assumptions
• Most R&D will be completed by the end of CY’07
• Technical feasibility will be established by the end of CY’07
• Resources will move as needed
• Some small amount of new funding will be found
• The R&D will be evaluated by the impact of all results on the sensitivity of the EDM experiment
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #10
Cost during FY’07
Funding Source* Investment ($k)
DOE Project Funds 300
DOE Operations 40
LDRD 457
Opportunities 90
Total 887
*Only $300k applies to TPC at present
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #11
Schedule Overview
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #12
Schedule Overview
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #13
Risk Overview
Risk Type Risk Number
Technical High 6
Medium 8
Low 6
Schedule High 0
Medium 2
Low 18
Cost High 0
Medium 2
Low 18
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #14
Risk Overview
A high risk subsystem due to unpredictable outcomes of R&D
Risk Name Risk Type Probability Impact Risk
3He Relaxation Time Technical Likely Critical High
Light Collection Technical Likely Critical High
Valve Development Technical Likely Critical High
High Voltage Studies Technical Likely Critical High
4He Evaporative Purification Technical Likely Critical High
3He Injection Technical Likely Critical High
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #15
Contract Project Manager Actions
•Promote duplicate effort on 3He relaxation•Get other institutions to assist in valve development•Search for addition funding for full valve test•Encourage NCSU team not to distract Duke team•Get agreement on magnet uniformity requirement•Search for addition funding for the 3He holding coil•Increase scientific staffing on the HV tests•Redirect engineering and technician efforts to the new cryostat•Get Yale to coordinate the SQUID effort•Get other institutions to assist in the 3He injection test•Decide whether to fund the laser fluorescence work•Withhold funding of the slow controls prototype•Request a set of standards for slow controls
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #16
The Schedule Challenge
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #17
HV Test Cryostat
ABS
The New Cryostat
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #18
“Film Burner”
“Film Burner” pump out
“Cs Region”
Transition Region
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #19
Tri-coil Helmholtz magnet
Holding Coil
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #20
NMR pickup coil
Polarized 3He beam
40mm Pyrex O-ring joint
Kapton seal
3He Collection Volume
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #21
Cesium ring
Teflon O-ring to seal Cs when warm
Cs Film Controller
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #22
Heat sink to DR still
Super-fluid film flow
Heat sink to 4K shield
Heat sink to 1 K pot
“Film burner” pump out
Solenoid magnet, Φ4”
The Film Burner
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #23
.5mm gap to create gas flow impedance
Super-fluid film flow
Knife edge
Film Burner Detail
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #24
News
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #25
Storage Time
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time from Switch Opening (min.)
Co
un
ts in
n D
etec
tor/
min
.
Delay 11
Delay 7
Delay 21
Delay 17
Delay 4
Storage Time
1/Fill Time = Production Rate - Loss Rate
Absorption Time
1/Detector Loss Rate
Storage Time
Measurement Concept
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #26
100 s holding time
Time (s)
Cou
nts
(/s)
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #27
Results – 300 & 50 K
y = 0.4365e-0.0085x
y = 0.3128e-0.0046x
y = 0.2544e-
0.0042x
y = 0.26125e-
0.01
0.1
1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
y = 0.4365e-0.0085x
y = 0.3128e-0.0046x
y = 0.2544e-
0.0042x
y = 0.26125e-
0.01
0.1
1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Delay Time (s)
ln(c
ou
nts
)
230±5 s
110±10 s
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #28
Crazing
Office of Nuclear Physics
R&D 12/14/06 #29
Summary
• The Process• Reevaluation of the Program – No major changes but some
additions where possible in response to the CD-1 review• Risk Methodology – Separate impact evaluation from the main
project
• The Plan• Assumptions – The technical challenges dominate• Schedule Overview – New cryostat is the critical path• Risk Overview – 6 high and 12 medium evaluations out of 60• Contract Project Manager Actions – Working to optimize our
effectiveness
• The Schedule Challenge – The new cryostat is a significant experiment in its own right
• News – Storage time measurement