AD consolidation program Risk Analysis Mitigation options F

AD consolidation program Risk Analysis – Mitigation options F. Butin

Scope of Risk Analysis Ø Ø Ø The AD consolidation program is already well advanced A number of critical items remain to be consolidated The consolidation schedule plans for another 7 years Analysis of what can possibly go wrong with what consequences, both in terms of failure risk wrt operation and consolidation project delay / financial risk How could we propose mitigation options F. Butin What are the fallback solutions

Main risk critical items n n n Magnets: out of 26 B+28 QN magnets, 6 B + 3 QN have been renovated (the most damaged ones). Others remains to be treated. E-cooler: aging, although power converters renovated, 2 vac failures in 2018, running out of spares, replacement planned for 2023 RF: C 02 «wood» cavity to be replaced during LS 2 by Finemet cavity, C 10 spare RF valves being re produced, +HT ? Stochastic cooling: partly renovated but some knowledge lost Infrastructure (cranes, CV, EL, cryo, bdg): F. Butin

Lower overall project risk n n n Power converters: spares exist (but Bmain, Qmain 1, Qmain 2, Qtrim, FTA), consolidation project uses known components with low financial risk, although delays expected Kickers: lesser extent work remaining Horn testbench / ignitrons replacement: all parts produced and tested, low risk installation Instrumentation, LLRF: limited amount of work remaining to be done, with low risk Vacuum system: renovation essentially complete Target: dealt with by M. Calviani F. Butin

Magnet consolidation n n Ambitious extraction / refurbishment /re-installation planning for LS 2: 9 Bending and 9 quadrupoles F. Butin

Magnets risk matrix Main Magnets of the AD ring Probability Electrical fault, due to coil movement Repair in-situ Electrical fault, due to coil movement Repair in workshop Water leak, due to coil movement Repair in-situ Water leak, due to coil movement Repair in workshop Impact on scientific objectives Possible Moderate Possible Major Likely Moderate Likely Major Vacuum leak (refer to TE/VSC) Possible Moderate Rare (once in 10 to 25 years) Possible (once in 5 to 10 years) Likely (once in 2 to 5 years) Frequent (once a year) Consequence Comments Mitigation Limited electrical faults Continue 1 day to 1 week can be repaired refurbishment of of physics lost in-situ main units 1 month and Continue more of physics Spare coils have refurbishment of lost been procured main units Continue 1 day to 1 week Spare coils have refurbishment of of physics lost been procured main units 1 month and Continue more of physics Spare coils have refurbishment of lost been procured main units More spares could be Spare bellows produced and BHN (windows, 1 week chamber exist chambers) Courtesy A. Newborough, D. Tomasini F. Butin

Magnet consolidation program • • • The proposed program (1 to 2 units during YETS, up to 18 during LS’s) is adequate to continue ensuring the high reliability of magnets operation. To do more than the proposed program requires another workshop, ie an injection of a few MCHF would be required which does not seem justified considering the downtime caused by magnet faults. Fall back solution: delay, re-schedule Courtesy A. Newborough, D. Tomasini F. Butin

e-cooler risks matrix E-cooler Defective Element Impact on scientific objectives Probability Consequenc e Comments Mitigation Vacuum leak Possible to Likely Moderate to 1 week to high 1 month Depends Build a on spare location collector / Install new gun Magnet failure Rare Catastrophic Up to 1 year 1 spare Speed up solenoid with new exists cooler project Power converters Likely Moderate Spares exist Rare (once in 10 to 25 years) Possible (once in 5 to 10 years) Likely (once in 2 to 5 years) Frequent (once a year) F. Butin 1 day to 1 week

e-cooler consolidation program q The design – procurement – construction – test of a new q q q e-cooler is expected to take no less than 2 years. Will go along with optics modifications. Installation will require an EYETS (2023 ? ) Cause of possible delays is adequation of qualified and dedicated personnel for design / procurement /production follow-up, to be shared with remaining work for ELENA e -cooler ; risk in contractual production Financial risk is non negligible, depends on options chosen (single contractor, in-house production etc) Possible mitigations: secure dedication of adapted resources Fall back solution: produce spares, but cost and schedule not much different F. Butin

RF C 02 / C 10 risk matrix RF Defective Elements Vacuum Probability Impact on scientific objectives Consequence Comments Possible Moderate 1 week + 2 weeks for bake-out Power Possible converters / Triodes failure Moderate 1 week or C 10 degraded performance Shortcut Moderate 1 week Possible Rare (once in 10 to 25 years) Possible (once in 5 to 10 years) Likely (once in 2 to 5 years) Frequent (once a year) F. Butin C 10 more exposed than C 02 C 10 Mitigation Depends on location Replace HV system (40 y. o)

RF consolition program ¨ C 10: Cause of possible delays is risk in contractual production, spare parts availability ¨ C 02: Risk of integration – installation. Financial risk is moderate, parts already available. Beam commissioning effort probably significative. ¨ Mitigations: Spare parts (TH 116) being procured for AD/ELENA life span – HV replacement advisable ¨ Fall back solution: delay C 02 replacement by Finemet till next YETS F. Butin

Stochastic cooling risk matrix SS Defective Elements Probability Vacuum Possible High Internal mechanics Rare High to 2 month to 1 catastrophi year c Some knowledge lost 1 ancient repair Low to moderate Spares exist Build new Refurbishment amplis (1 plan TBD MCHF) ? Change components ? Amplificators Frequent Impact on scientific objectives Consequence Comments Repair time + 2 weeks for bake-out up Mainly performance is impacted Redesign and new tank for LS 3 ? Courtesy W. Hofle F. Butin Mitigation Open to inspect Rare (once in 10 to 25 years) Possible (once in 5 to 10 years) Likely (once in 2 to 5 years) Frequent (once a year)

Infrastructure risk matrix Defectiv e Element Probability Cranes Possible Low CV Unlikely EL Building 193 Impact on scientific objectives Consequence Comments Mitigation No direct beam availability impact Yearly maintenance shows good condition Could delay restart of AD and or physics program Moderate 1 week HVAC Runs on tap water Preventive maintenance on cooling station Likely Low A few hours of beam loss Unlikely High to catastrophic A few hours beam to several months Sub station HV will be replaced by 2021 Water leak could dammage equipment Improve buidling maintenance (roof)

Infrastructure consolidation program Cryogenics consolidation program: ¨ Cause of possible project delays is availability of dedicated personnel, risk in contractual production ¨ Fixed distribution installation adresses the safety aspects, but not l. He production limitation ¨ Possible mitigations: secure dedication of adapted resources, consider extension of current consolidation program to additional local l. He production unit, securing financial aspects. F. Butin / ELENA collaboration

Other mitigation options On top of consolidation program: -Facilitate element extraction from the ring (keep shielding roof accessible); need more storage possibilities for experiments, ensure new experiments have preparation and storage space -Maintenance on the building is essential (roof, walls) and needs to be intensified -Ensure availability of ELENA for H- ions delivery as pbars «substitute» F. Butin

Budget wise Regular general infrastructure, coordination and safety needs for 2019 – 2023 n Coordination, planning, etc. ensured by EN -EA and BE-OP (incl. LS 2 support) n Integration studies (FSU team) n FSU support and related material for mechanical works, gas infrastructure etc. : n Estimated budget based on activities/expeinditures over the last years F. Butin / ELENA collaboration 40 k. CHF/y (200 k. CHF total) n