The Bunker Project Overview Zvonko Lazic www europeanspallationsource

The Bunker Project Overview Zvonko Lazic www. europeanspallationsource. se 05 December 2017

The bunker - content • • • Introduction Overview Design status Schedule status Neutronics status 2

The Bunker Review - Introduction Critical Design Review Charge The Review is divided in four distinct section Project Introduction/Background Design Description Integration/Operation/Safety Procurement/schedule/V&V 3

The Bunker - Overview - PDR Dec. ’ 16 - Internal Review June ‘ 17 - CDR Dec. ’ 17 Purchasing strategy has been defined. - Prequalification tender has been released, closing Dec. ’ 18 - Place purchase order Q 1. ’ 18 The projected cost has been revised to reflect feedback from the industry and potential supliers. Overall schedule is planned in accordance with the current ESS baseline. 4

The Bunker – PDR Dec. ’ 16 feedback Specific Recommendations Document stability of roof with missing cross members and double stacked roof blocks (e. g. , during installation / maintenance activities). Document and verify load cases for intermediate stages of roof stacking / unstacking. Complete and extend analyses of streaming gaps to include not only dose rates (high level requirement 3) but also high energy hadron fluxes (high level requirement 4). General Recommendations Eliminate door access to the bunker, including the associated PSS components, lighting, etc. This needs to happen, or be firmly dismissed, prior to beginning detailed design. Redesign the semi-permanent beam above the light shutters to give more of a chicane to block an identified radiological streaming problem. This can take place as part of detailed design. Install beam-line base plates, especially in the forward section of the bunker, prior to beam on target and installation of the bunker walls. This decision should be made prior to initiating detailed design. Consider a “can” design for the steel and PBC laminate used in the bunker walls and roof. Such a decision would need to be made early in the detailed design process. Ensure competitive bids for bunker materials and construction (nominally outside this committee’s purview). 5

The Bunker – IR Jun. ’ 17 feedback (ESS-0123255) Charge notes The full weight of the bunker is to be in place before instrument installation. This requirement is not satisfied by the current plan. The design solution adopted to fulfil the structural decoupling and behaviour in seismic event requires justification. The cost estimate is incomplete, missing a number of key items. A detailed and justified full costing to completion needs to be developed and supported with more robust inputs (for example design, manufacturing and assembly activities are not included). Comments Integrated Schedule to be updated. Procurement strategy and schedule needs to be completed. In case for “Open Book” contract it may be much easier to have information exchange, and decision of CDR may have a certain flexibility in a post change, resulting in a reduction of schedule risk. Although there are several preceding documents, additional documents are to be developed on verification (ESS 0060210), integration plan, operation and maintenance manual(ESS-003688) and configuration management plan (ESS 0068713). Management of dilatation joint and shielding performances. Gap streaming. The results on the streaming through the roof from the dilatation gap are preliminary but much more encouraging, if the gap is reduced from the unnecessary(? ZLa) constraint of 6. 5 cm. . Diagonal braces. It seems to be unclear at this point if the diagonal braces of the bunker structure would interfere with the instrument components. Their placement needs to be well communicated to the instrument teams and any clashes resolved quickly. Load requirement on the CF floor in D 01/D 03. Ola Jovall at CF BLT will forward a CF RFI “ Bunker Load specifications” to 6 the Bunker team to be returned to COWI by the 11 th July 2017

The bunker – Design status o ~ 7000 t of steel o ~ 300 t of Borated HDPE o ~ 750 t of virgin HDPE/LDPE o ~ 620 t of concrete o ~ 970 t of heavy concrete o ~200 t of construction steel o Each bunker side measures approx. 40 m long x 26 m wide x 5 m high o ~ 10, 000 tones total mass o ~1400 wall & roof blocks 7

The bunker – Design status Frame and roof position 1700 TCS-to-bottom of the roof 1500 TCS-to-bottom of the frame TCS 8

The bunker – Design status SUPPORT FRAME The bunker frame has to: o Support the roof load; o Sustain seismic loads (up to H 4); o Allow easy disassembly; o Ensure that blocks stacked on top, fit; o Ensure repeatability of stacking/unstacking of blocks; 9

The bunker – Design status WALLS The bunker walls function is to: o Shield (from radiation); o Support (roof above); o Integrate (beam feed-throughs); 10

The bunker – Design status ROOF The bunker roof function is to: o Shield (from radiation); It also has to allow for: o Reasonably fast access into the bunker cavity; o Ability to unstack and stack blocks repeatedly; 11

The bunker – Design status ROOF The bunker roof is made out of blocks; The blocks are arranged in 3 overlapping levels; Lifting times depend on the particular point of entry; 12

High level Bunker manufacturing and Installation Schedule R 6 (Jan 2019) LS & Insert (with Target) installation (Feb-Sep 2019) Sofie O. • Critical Design Review Dec 2017 • Contract for manufacturing Q 1 2018 • First Delivery to ESS site (R 6 & steel sructure) Dec 2018 • Mid delivery to ESS site (wall blocks & first roof layer) June 2019 Bunker Pillars & Beams (June-Oct 2019) • Final delivery to ESS site (final roof layer) July 2020 Bunker walls & first roof layer (Aug-Nov 2019) Instrument & TBL installation (Nov 2019 – May 2020 ) First neutron instruments planning for “In-Bunker” installation within this 6 month period. Installations assumes normal working hours and summer/Christmas holidays Bunker roof outer layer (June-Aug 2020) Beam on Target Oct 2020 Utilities/Infrastr. & ICS installation & test (Sep-Oct 2020) 13

High level Bunker manufacturing and Installation Schedule 2018 Q 1 Q 2 Sofie O. 2019 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 2020 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Procur. Colab. setup Production Frame Roof elements and subassemblies Wall elements and subassemblies Temporary shielding Predrilling Installation Frame and base plates LOGISTICS Walls Roof Utilities PSS 14

Predicted dose rate emitted from ‘as designed’ bunker roof 0. 1 Bunker Inner Zone Dose map adapted from Reference: ESS-0114728 (Ansell & Di Julio 15 Sept 2017) 0. 03 Intermediate Zone 15

The Bunker Overview Outlook Mechanical Design – fully completed; while maintaining VE effort. We are presenting the mechanical design in models only; detailing (drawings) will be performed by the supplier (manufacturer). Physics – Change in the bunker material composition meant a fresh (updated) battery of analyses needed to be done. Continuous VE efforts also introduce additional and longer workload. The outlook is good provided we conclude all VE effort by the time the ‘metal is cut’. Documentation – Following ramp up in resources addressing this body of work, we are completing the documentation bundle. Purchasing/schedule – The purchasing strategy is set, the Integrated schedule has been updated. It is clear that there is a high risk of delays due to high degree of interdependencies between different projects working on the same (building) area. 16

The Bunker Overview Q/A End of presentation Q/A • • 17