DESI Project Overview Henry Heetderks UCB Project Manager
DESI Project Overview Henry Heetderks (UCB) Project Manager
Outline • DESI System Overview — — — Science Requirements Block Diagram Instrument Requirements Key Performance Parameters Major Technical Challenges Descope Strategy 2 • DESI Project Management Overview — — — Collaborating Institutions Participation Rules WBS showing major responsibilities Agency Org Chart DESI Project Org Chart • Schedule and Cost Summary — — — Top Level Summary Schedule Level 1 and Level 2 Baseline Milestones Cost Table by WBS showing Base Cost and Contingency Risk Management and Contingency Funding Profile Table Funding Profile Graph • CD-1 Preparations Status • Summary 2
3 DESI System Overview
DESI Instrument Block Diagram 6 4
Key Instrument Design Parameters (Subset of the Level 3 Instrument Requirements) Subsystem Parameter Value Corrector performance in Mayall telescope Focal Ratio f/3. 9 ave. FOV 3. 2 deg. Blur XX arc-sec Fiber Diameter 107 microns Throughput > 90% Resolution 360 to 660 nm: R>1, 500 620 to 840 nm: R>3, 000 800 to 980 nm: R>4, 000 Number of channels per spectrograph 500 Spectrograph performance 7 Number of channels 5, 000 Fiber position error (all sources incl <0. 35 arc-sec astrometry) Overall System Throughput >12% 5
Major Technical Challenges • Design of high resolution wide field corrector 9 • Development of compact, high accuracy, low power and high speed positioners for focal plane • Control of throughput and FRD in fiber • Development of techniques to produce a high accuracy focal plane structure • Development of spectrograph with sufficient resolution and throughput • Development of red-shift calculation pipeline • Minimizing cost of all instrument subsystems 6
Scope Contingency • Reduce number of spectrographs manufactured 10 • Number of positioners is also proportionally reduced • Can be done anytime until close to CD-4 delivery • Can be reversed if funding situation improves 7
11 DESI Project Management Overview
DESI Project Org Chart 16 9
17 Schedule and Cost
DESI Top Level Schedule 18 11
Level 2 Milestones WBS Nr. 1. 4 1. 6 1. 7 1. 5 1. 9 1. 6 1. 8 1. 5 1. 4 1. 9 1. 2 1. 3 1. 4 1. 2 1. 7 1. 8 1. 6 Level 2 Milestone Actuator downselect Prototype detectors and FEE delivered to cryostat supplier ICD's for all of the subsystems controlled by the ICS released Bulk fiber in house All ICDs completed and approved Prototype spectrograph fully verified Data reduction pipeline preliminary version operating at scale First fiber cables with Spoolboxes fabrication complete First two Slitheads (with fibre from cable) fabrication – Focal plane structural and thermal equipment fabrication complete First batch of 500 positioners fabrication and verification with installed fiber Mayall facility improvements completed Polishing complete for corrector lenses C 1, C 4, ADC 1, and ADC 2 Lens Cell installation in barrel complete Guider tracker hardware manufacture and test complete Full assembly and verification of Ring, Cage, and barrel or prototype barrel Focal plane decapus assembly complete Lens installation into cells complete Lens alignment in barrel complete L 2: ICS Integration and Installation Complete Target analysis pipeline operational at scale Unit 2 -5 spectrographs fully assembled and verified Schedule Date Jun-14 Aug-14 Nov-14 Jan-15 Mar-15 Sep-15 Dec-15 Feb-16 Mar-16 Apr-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Nov-16 Mar-17 Jul-17 Sep-17 Oct-17 Dec-17 Jan-18 21 12
MIE Project FTE’s by Year DOE Computing Designer Engineer Management Non-costed Scientist * Technical Common Fund Engineer Management Non-costed Scientist * Technical Foreign Designer Engineer Management Non-costed Scientist * Technical NOAO Admin Computing Contract Engineer Management Technical Totals by Year 2014 19. 48 0. 58 0. 87 7. 41 1. 54 7. 80 1. 28 1. 01 0. 11 0. 01 0. 89 5. 64 0. 24 2. 25 0. 31 1. 66 1. 18 0. 45 0. 22 0. 23 26. 58 2015 28. 31 1. 30 2. 72 9. 37 1. 57 11. 27 2. 08 3. 14 0. 03 2. 98 0. 13 7. 62 0. 12 2. 74 0. 12 1. 17 3. 47 0. 94 0. 02 0. 25 0. 06 0. 25 0. 34 0. 02 40. 01 2016 30. 12 2. 82 0. 62 6. 19 1. 79 12. 58 6. 12 2. 86 0. 02 2. 80 0. 04 6. 34 0. 05 0. 81 0. 10 0. 82 4. 56 0. 11 0. 10 0. 01 39. 43 * Non-costed scientists currently under specified 2017 19. 44 2. 14 0. 07 3. 83 1. 78 8. 77 2. 85 1. 96 6. 63 0. 04 2. 73 0. 09 2. 10 1. 67 28. 03 2018 3. 17 0. 39 0. 63 0. 38 1. 34 0. 43 0. 31 4. 12 1. 53 2. 34 0. 25 7. 60 Total 100. 52 7. 23 4. 28 27. 43 7. 06 41. 76 12. 76 9. 28 0. 16 0. 01 8. 94 0. 17 30. 35 0. 45 10. 06 0. 62 8. 09 11. 13 1. 50 0. 02 0. 35 0. 06 0. 48 0. 57 0. 02 141. 65 13 22
Funding Source by Year Then Year $K FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 3, 288 6, 984 9, 645 7, 880 579 28, 376 485 2, 910 5, 239 5, 296 153 14, 083 2, 803 4, 074 4, 405 2, 585 426 14, 293 Common Fund 2, 301 1, 430 498 3 4, 232 Material 2, 262 1, 263 449 1 3, 976 Work 39 167 49 2 257 Foreign 972 2, 831 5, 809 1, 736 630 11, 978 Material 354 1, 994 5, 039 908 40 8, 335 Work 618 837 770 828 590 3, 643 181 486 667 6, 742 11, 731 DOE Material Work NOAO Work Totals by Year 15, 951 9, 619 1, 209 Total 45, 253 14 23
DOE MIE Project Cost at Level 2 WBS by Year 24 Then Year $K WBS 1. 1 1. 2 1. 3 1. 4 1. 5 1. 6 1. 7 1. 8 1. 9 Management, System Engineering, QA, and Safety Corrector and ADC Assembly Cage & Ring Assembly with Barrel Components Focal Plane System (FPS) Fiber System with Spectrograph Slit Assembly Spectrographs Instrument Control System (ICS) Survey Planning & Data Systems System Level Assembly, Integration, and Testing Totals without Contingency TPC FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 884 911 845 872 188 3, 699 88 1, 120 989 77 32 2, 307 749 1, 895 1, 134 187 284 1, 000 1, 803 208 12 3, 306 127 416 70 39 3 654 664 759 3, 245 5, 092 197 9, 957 115 447 597 340 6 1, 504 161 193 474 718 75 1, 621 217 244 489 349 66 1, 363 3, 288 6, 984 9, 645 7, 880 3, 965 579 28, 376 15
Contingency Analysis • Total Contingency is comprised of two components 25 — Cost estimate contingency — Risk contingency (developed from Monte Carlo analysis on risk registry) • Cost estimate contingency determination — Estimated material and labor costs from Level 2 managers are entered into the resource loaded schedule developed in MS Project — Level 2 managers generate Basis of Estimate (BOE) sheets at WBS level 3 which document the process used to develop costs — Each level 3 material and labor cost is classified according to a table into which the maturity of the design or cost is entered — Standard contingency values are assigned for each level 3 material and labor cost based on the chosen maturity classification 16
Risk Management and Contingency Calculation • Risk Management Plan developed and released 30 — DESI-doc-324 — Risks categorized using a 4 X 4 matrix — Follows DOE practice used on previous LBNL projects • Risk Registry developed following extensive discussion between Level 2 managers and Risk Manager — DESI-doc-376 • Monte Carlo calculation done for 80% confidence — Shows need for $5. 507 M management reserve added to contingency to account for known risks • A detailed presentation of DESI risk methodology and current risks and mitigation will be given in the Management Breakout 17
Cost Estimation Contingency on DOE Funding WBS Name Material 1. 2. 1 Corrector Activities Mgnt Corrector baseline dev’t and 1. 2. 2 performance characterization Lens manufacturing plan 1. 2. 3 development 1. 2. 4 Lens procurement 1. 2. 5 Lens Coating Development 1. 2. 9 Full optical test …. …. Data Transfer, Archive, and 1. 8. 7 Distribution 1. 8. 9 Data Systems Integrate 1. 8. 10 Target Analysis Pipeline 1. 9. 1 AI&T Management 1. 9. 3 Mayall Preparation Totals Work 272 3 5 1, 353 614 …. …. 250 76 14, 293 Material contin Labor contin Level % k$ 272 M 4 32% 0 L 2 20% 54 2 23 M 4 32% 0 L 4 32% 7 Total 39 …. …. 4 76 281 1, 006 282 14, 293 Total Material Total Labor 5 1, 353 614 39 …. …. 35 354 76 531 1, 006 358 28, 357 TPC M 4 32% M 2 12% M 3 20% M 5 50% …. …. M 2 M 2 M 2 0 162 122 0 …. …. 12% 12% 12% 21% AVE 0 0 30 0 9 3, 000 Total Contingency on Labor L 4 32% L 3 25% L 6 60% …. …. L 6 L 6 L 6 1 0 0 23 …. …. 60% 212 60% 6 60% 169 60% 603 60% 169 36% 5, 182 AVE Total Contingency on Labor Cost Estimation Contingency on Materials plus Labor = $3, 000 K + $5, 182 K = $8, 182 K or 29% of TPC 18
Leading Risks Risk description 31 Prob. Impact Foreign funding less than expected M M M Contingency, Drop to threshold KPP Corrector lens polishing takes longer than planned M M M Contingency and schedule float Accidental damage to lens L H M Contingency and schedule float L-M M L-M Lens coating failure L M L Contingency, Float Barrel late or accuracy not achieved L M L Contingency, Scope L-M L L Early prototype L L L Back up oiled design DOE funding profile shifted to later years Slit manufacture difficult Blue triplet bonding failure Risk Mitigation/Response Level Reduce scope 19
DESI Proposed DOE Budget Profile • • • Base cost comes directly from the resource loaded MS Project schedule Total Contingency is $8, 182 K from Cost BOE calculation plus $8, 507 K from the risk Monte Carlo for a total of $16, 689 K Total contingency is allocated by year to level funding profile 32 TY$K FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 TOTAL 3, 050 4, 100 4, 500 2, 600 500 14, 750 150 2, 900 5, 100 5, 300 13, 550 3, 200 7, 000 9, 600 7, 900 600 28, 300 Contingency 200 1, 500 4, 600 6, 300 1, 100 13, 700 Grand Total 3, 400 8, 500 14, 200 1, 700 42, 000 Labor Materials Total Base 20
33 CD-1 Requirements
CD-1 Key Documents Status CD-0 Approve Mission Need Acquisition Strategy (AS) prepared Preliminary Project Execution Plan (PPEP) prepared Federal Project Director (FPD) identified Integrated Project Team (IPT) identified Risk Management Plan Developed Conceptual Design Complete Conceptual Design Review (This review) Conceptual Design Report developed Preliminary Hazard Analysis Report Prepared Integrated Safety Management Plan in place at LBNL Quality Assurance Program (QAP) in place at LBNL National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation in process Independent Project Review in process 22 34
CD-1 Readiness • CD-1 criteria nearly complete — Instrument designs are at or beyond conceptual design and meet technical requirements — Baseline documents (functional, design, cost & schedule) developed and in place Programmatic WBS Dictionary - scope of project defined Risk Registry – risks defined and managed Cost Estimate – detailed Basis of Estimates developed Schedule – resource loaded approaching CD-2 maturity Long lead procurements defined Management plans drafted Technical Requirements & interfaces defined Corrector Requirements Focal Plane, Positioner, and Fiber Requirements Spectrograph Requirements Internal Interfaces In Process Technical design maturity exceeds CD-1 requirement (Conceptual Design) & provides sufficient information to develop a solid cost estimate range Design Reviews on Corrector and Spectrograph 23 35
Summary • Strong and experienced technical staff • Key personnel and management staff have been identified • Scope is well defined and organized. • Designs are mature and have been successfully reviewed by external 36 panels • Project risks are well defined and are actively being mitigated • Detailed cost estimates have created a robust cost range • Resource loaded schedule has been developed and leveled • Management interfaces defined • Required documents prepared and under review • Project is ready for CD-1 24
- Slides: 24