NSTXU UPGRADE PROJECT CD-4 Review The NSTXU team Neway Atnafu, Bill Blanchard, Jim Chrzanowski, Mark...

NSTXU UPGRADE PROJECT NSTXU UPGRADE PROJECT CD-4 ReviewCD-4 Review

The NSTXU teamNeway Atnafu, Bill Blanchard, Jim Chrzanowski, Mark Cropper, Larry

Dudek, Charlie Gentile, Stefan Gerhardt, Ron Hatcher, Bob Kaita, George Labik, Steve Langish, Erik Perry, Raki Ramakrishnan, Mark Smith, Paul

Sichta, Tim Stevenson, Ron Strykowsky, Mike Williams, Pete Titus, Kelsey Tresemer, et el.

Princeton Plasma Physics LaboratoryOffice of Science Review

LSB B318September 2nd, 2015

NSTX-UNSTX-U Supported by

Culham Sci CtrYork U

Chubu UFukui U

Hiroshima UHyogo UKyoto U

Kyushu UKyushu Tokai U

NIFSNiigata UU Tokyo

JAEAInst for Nucl Res, Kiev

Ioffe InstTRINITI

Chonbuk Natl UNFRI

KAISTPOSTECH

Seoul Natl UASIPP

CIEMATFOM Inst DIFFER

ENEA, FrascatiCEA, Cadarache

IPP, JülichIPP, Garching

ASCR, Czech Rep

Coll of Wm & MaryColumbia UCompXGeneral AtomicsFIUINLJohns Hopkins ULANLLLNLLodestarMITLehigh UNova PhotonicsOld DominionORNLPPPLPrinceton UPurdue USNLThink Tank, Inc.UC DavisUC IrvineUCLAUCSDU ColoradoU IllinoisU MarylandU RochesterU TennesseeU TulsaU WashingtonU WisconsinX Science LLC

NSTX-UNSTX-U NSTX Upgrade Project – Office of Science Review – September 2nd, 2015 2

Agenda

8:00 DOE Executive Committee session — Kin Chao

8:30 Welcome — Stewart Prager

8:35 Project Overview, Closeout Doc. and Lessons Learned – Ron Strykowsky

9:50 Transition to Operations – Stefan Gerhardt

10:20 Questions and Discussion

10:35 Break

10:45 Tour

11:15 Breakout Sessions

12:15 Lunch for Committee

1:00 Breakout Sessions

2:45 DOE Executive Session

4:00 Closeout (in NSTXU Control Room Annex)

4:30 Adjourn


Contents

• PROJECT OVERVIEW

• MISSION

• KEY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS (KPP’S)

• SCOPE DELIVERABLES OVERVIEW by WBS

• BASELINE DOCUMENTATION

• LESSONS LEARNED

• CHARGE QUESTIONS


Contents

• PROJECT OVERVIEW• MISSION




• LESSONS LEARNED



NSTXU Test Cell

Mockup Bldg

Tunnel from NSTXU

control room to D-Site

Neutral Beam Power

Conversion Bldg

Magnet Power Rectifiers

Motor Generators

NSTXU Control Room

(basement level)

RF Transmission lines

Field Coil Power Conversion Bldg

RF Bldg

Centerstack Fabrication

areaD-Site

C-Site

138kV electric transmission line to PPPL

You are here

Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory-NSTXU


NSTXU Device

• The NSTX device is exploring a novel structure for the magnetic field used to contain the hot ionized gas, called “plasma”, needed to tap this source of fusion energy.

• Mission of the NSTX is to establish the potential of the ST configuration as a means of achieving practical fusion energy.

• Not a steady state machine. Pulse length < 6 sec.

• Design rep rate <40 minute

History:•Original project completed 1999•First beamline added 2000. •Upgrade project CD-0 mission need Feb 2009 •CD-1 Apr 2010•CD-2 Dec 2010•CD-3 Dec 2011


NSTXU – Current Completed Configuration

High Voltage Enclosures (HVE)

High Voltage Enclosures (HVE)

Neutral Beam Duct/TVPS

Neutral Beam Duct/TVPS

Neutral Beam (NB) #1




New CenterstackNew CenterstackExisting RF pipesExisting RF pipes

NB #2 duct in place.NB #2 duct in place.

New PlatformsNew Platforms


Major Machine Components Description

New NB portOuter TF coils

PF Coils


Centerstack Components

9

TF Flex Bus and Support Structure

Centerstack Assembly

Outer TF Coils

Umbrella Structure


Centerstack Components

10

PF 1 A,B, &C coils

TF flex connector

OH Coil (4 layers wound onto TF conductors)

Ceramic break & mounting flange to vacuum vessel

Inner TF conductor (36)

Outer TF lead extensions

Plasma Facing Components (PFC’s)

Casing

TF cooling hose connections


NBL2 Duct w/ new TIV

Torus Vessel Pump System Duct

Port Extension

Bay J-K Cap (Required NSTX Vessel Modification)

NBI Armor addition

Second Neutral Beam


Contents


• MISSION• KEY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS (KPP’S)



• LESSONS LEARNED



Technical Performance Baseline Parameters (defined in section 2.2.1 of the Project Execution Plan (PEP))

Design Parameters•Toroidal field from 0.5 tesla to 1.0 tesla;•Pulse length from ~1.0 second to 5.0 seconds;•Plasma current from 1MA to 2MA;•Neutral beam heating from 5-7MW to 10-14MW

‒ Hardware components designed and tested to these levels‒ Achievement of Design parameters to be phased in over 3 years)

‒ (ref readiness for operations talk)

‒ Hardware components designed and tested to these levels‒ Achievement of Design parameters to be phased in over 3 years)

‒ (ref readiness for operations talk)


NSTX Upgrade Deliverables1) Double field and current

Center Stack (CS) Upgrade. –Design, build and install new CS assembly including;–new toroidal field (TF) hub assembly, –new TF flag assemblies, –new ceramic break, –new inner TF bundle, –new ohmic heating coil, –new plasma facing component (PFC) tiles,–new poloidal field (PF) 1a, b & c coils–Analyze and upgrade components supports–Power, controls, water, services–Coil protection system

This represented a major modification to an existing fusion device

This represented a major modification to an existing fusion device


NSTX Upgrade Deliverables

2) Double neutral beam power & more tangential injection2nd Neutral Beam-line (NBL).

• Decontaminate and prepare a TFTR neutral beam-line (NBL) for installation on NSTX.

• Evaluate and refurbish internal components as necessary (cryogenic panels, beam dumps, bending magnets, beam scrapers, calorimeter, etc.).

• Relocate the NBL and • Provide a second set of beam-line services (e.g.,

power, water, vacuum, cryogenics, etc.).


Contents


• MISSION

• KEY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS (KPP’S)• SCOPE DELIVERABLES OVERVIEW by WBS


• LESSONS LEARNED



CD-4 milestone completion criteria

2.2.2.2 Demonstrated Performance 1.The major milestone marking the transition from a fabrication project to an operating facility is the first plasma milestone (CD-4). First plasma is defined as an ohmically heated discharge > 50 kA at a toroidal magnetic field of > 1 kG. The operations phase will resume upon completion of the first plasma milestone.

2.The installation of the second neutral beam on NSTX shall be considered complete at the stage where each item below has been demonstrated:a)Beamline water, vacuum, cryogenics, and feedstock gas services have been attached to the beamline;b)A Torus Isolation Valve and duct interconnects the NSTX vacuum vessel and the neutral beamline;c)Local Control Centers have been powered on to monitor power supply status, and;d)Project will be verified as complete when a 40,000 electron-volt beam has been produced and injected into the armor for >.050 seconds

Defined in section 2.2.2 of the Project Execution Plan (PEP)


KPP #1 - >50kA plasma

Status: Achieved 8/10/2015. KPP Goal Achieved

OH Discharge >50kA >100kATF Magnetic Field >1kG 5kg

Plasma current (left) and toroidal field data (right) for ~100kA, BT = 0.5T plasma in NSTX-U for CD-4 KPP(note: 0.5T = 5kG).


KPP #1 - >50kA plasma

Camera image (left) and EFIT reconstruction (right) for NSTX-U CD-4 KPP plasma


KPP #2 - >40kV Beam Injection into ArmorStatus: Achieved 5/11/2015.

Five 45KV @ 12 amps shoots into the armor for >50ms.

Photo of control screen showing status of NB2; •TIV open•Calorimeter out•Ready to inject


KPP #2 - >40kV Beam Injection into Armor (continued)

Power and duration of shot100 msec

(5 x 20 msec per grid)45 kV

(1.5 grid division x 200mV/div x 150 kV/volt)


KPP #2 - >40kV Beam Injection into Armor (continued)

Location of beam – as designed

Plan Actual•BL 2

•BL 1

•B

•C

•A

•B

•C


The planned and final key performance parameters

Description of Scope

CD-2 Threshold

KPP

KPP Achieved at CD-4

CD-2 Threshold KPP Met or Exceeded?

1. First Plasma * >50kA plasma at > 1 kG

Completed (8/10/2015)

Exceeded

2a. NBI-Services Installed/Tested

Installed/Tested Met

2b. NBI-Connections to Vessel

Installed/Tested


2c. NBI-Local controls

Installed/Tested


2d. NBI-Beam injection*

>40kV at 0.05 sec

Completed (5/11/2015)

Exceeded


Contents


• MISSION


• SCOPE DELIVERABLES OVERVIEW by WBS• BASELINE DOCUMENTATION

• LESSONS LEARNED



Project Scope WBS BreakdownCONTROL ACCOUNT PLAN SPREADSHEET

JOB NO RLM TITLECONTROL ACCT MGR

1000 CSU Analytical Support Pete Titus 100%1001 CS Plasma Facing Components Kelsey Tresemer 100%1002 Passive Plate Analysis & Upgrade Act Neway Atnafu 100%1200 Vacuum Vessel & Structural Supports Mark Smith 100%1300 Center Stack Upgrade Project Design Support Steve Raftopoulos 100%1301 Outer Toroidal Field Coils (incl 1300 CAD sprt) Steve Raftopoulos 100%1302 Center Stack Assembly Steve Raftopoulos 94%1303 TF Joint Test Stand & Perform Test Steve Raftopoulos 100%1304 Inner TF Bundle (Dsgn/Fab) Steve Raftopoulos 100%1305 OHMIC Heating Coil (OH) DSGN/FAB Steve Raftopoulos 100%1306 Inner Poloidal Field Coils (Shaping) Steve Raftopoulos 100%1307 CS Casing Assembly (DSGN/FAB) Steve Raftopoulos 100%1310 CS Design General (DSGN/FAB) Steve Raftopoulos 100%2300 ECH Analysis Pete Titus 100%2420 2nd NBI Sources Mark Cropper 100%2425 BL Relocation Neway Atnafu 100%2430 2nd NBI Decontamination Tim Stevenson 100%2440 2nd NBI Beamline Mark Cropper 100%2450 2nd NBI Services Mark Cropper 95%2460 2nd NBI Armor Kelsey Tresemer 100%2470 2nd NBI Power Raki Ramakrishnan 100%2475 2nd NBI Controls Mark Cropper 82%2480 2nd NBI/TVPS Duct Bill Blanchard 100%2485 Vacuum Pumping System Bill Blanchard 100%2490 NTC Equipt Relocations Erik Perry 95%

Larry Dudek

Tim Stevenson

• WBS Dictionary per the PEP in Appendix A of the closeout report. (What we promised)

• Scope highlights by WBS starting on slide 22.


Project Scope WBS Breakdown (continued)CONTROL ACCOUNT PLAN SPREADSHEET

JOB NO RLM TITLECONTROL ACCT MGR

3200 Water Cooling System Mods for CSU Neway Atnafu 62%3300 Bakeout System Mods for CSU Raki Ramakrishnan 85%3400 Gas Delivery System Mods for CSU Bill Blanchard 90%4100 Center Stack Diagnostics for CSU Bob Kaita 100%4500 MPTS VV Modification George Labik 100%4501 BAY A/L RWM Coil George Labik 94%5000 CSU Power Systems Raki Ramakrishnan 94%5200 Digital Coil Protection System (DCPS) Tim Stevenson 99%5501 Coil Bus Runs Neway Atnafu 82%6100 Control Sys & Data Acquisition Sys Paul Sichta 71%7100 Project Mgt & Integration CSU & NBI Ron Strykowsky LOE7200 Center Stack Management Larry Dudek LOE7300 NB2 Management Tim Stevenson LOE7400 Health Physics Support Tim Stevenson LOE7710 Upgrade Allocations Ron Strykowsky LOE7900 Integrated System Charlie Gentile 19%8200 Centerstack & Coil Structural Instal Erik Perry 96%8210 Field Supervision & Oversight Erik Perry LOE8250 Remove/Install Centerstack Erik Perry 30%

Total 95% 95%

Larry Dudek

Ron Strykowsky

Larry Dudek

• Technical Performance Achieved – Project Closeout Acknowledgement forms in Appendix B of the closeout report (What we delivered)


Extensive analysis required for magnet supports and vacuum

Vessel

Reinforcement of the TF outer leg support structureReinforcement of the TF outer leg support structure

WBS 1.1 CA 1000 Pete Titus


Analysis & Value Engineering – An Iterative process

TF Inner Leg and Flex Joint Qualification • Concept, Initial Analysis• TF Inner Joint Stress, Contact Pressures • TF Current Diffusion • TF Torsional Shear • TF Stress, Insulation Tension Stress • TF Tooth Interface w/Umbrella Structure

Outer TF Leg Analysis • Torsional OOP Loads • Stress, Insulation Tension Stress • Outer Leg Support

Vessel and Umbrella Structure Original, Early Upgrade Full 360 degree Model from Pro E,

Reinforcements TF Loading on Alum Blocks, hang, Vessel Lid and Bottom Cover Connection,

Central Column to Umbrella Vacuum loading with neutral beam ports

Disruption • OPERA Axisymmetric• Vessel and Passive Plates, Early Upgraded

Loads +DLF• Detailed Vessel and Passive Plates• EMAG Transient Dynamic Analysis• Center Stack Casing with Halo Currents

Other• Center Stack • Plasma Facing Components• Inner PF Supports • Outer PF Supports • Lower Support Pedestal • HHFW Antenna Analyses

96 Plasma Equilibria (Physics) 96 Plasma Equilibria (Physics) Design Point SS (Magnetic loads) Design Point SS (Magnetic loads)

Analysis (ANSYS, Workbench) Analysis (ANSYS, Workbench)

Design (CAD Models) Design (CAD Models)

Field Assembly (Field Experience)Field Assembly (Field Experience)

•Pushing the structural limits of the existing machine required significant analytical modeling in concert with Physics, engineering and field input to optimize the design.•Over 28,000 hours of analysis

•Pushing the structural limits of the existing machine required significant analytical modeling in concert with Physics, engineering and field input to optimize the design.•Over 28,000 hours of analysis

WBS 1.1 CA 1000 Pete Titus

PFC’s

PFC Tiles Installed NSTXU CALC 11-03-00Tiles BrooksNSTXU CALC 11-02-00General Tile(Boales/ Brooks)NSTXU CALC 11-01-00PFC First Wall Heat Balance (Brooks/Zhang)

NSTXU CALC40-01-00 Diagnostics Review(Boales/Zhai)

New PCHERS Passive Plate (not installed)NSTXU CALC 12-01-01 PPand Vessel Disruption (Titus et.al. /Zhai)NSTXU CALC 12-03-00OPERA 2D Disruption (Hatcher/Titus)

CS Casing and Bellows Assy NSTXU CALC 133-05-00 CSCasing Halo(Brooks/Titus) NSTXU CALC 132-11-00 CSCasing Stresses(Titus/ Unassigned)NSTXU-CALC-133-03-00Center Stack Casing Disruption Inductive and Halo Current Loads P.Titus Myatt,BrooksNS TXU-CALC-133-1 0-00Center Stack Casing Bellows Peter Rogoff I.Zatz

29NSTX-U

Monday, December 8, 14

WBS 1.1 CA 1001 Kelsey Tresemer CA 1002 Neway Atnafu

Additional work scope for CHI gap tile design

New Passive Plate supports and sensors


Coil SupportsWBS 1.1 CA 1200 Mark Smith


Upper Lid

Umbrella Lid Reinforcements

Umbrella Replacement Leg and sliding foot

WBS 1.1 CA 1200 Mark Smith


TFOL Connecting Rod Assembly

TFOL Support Link AssemblyTFOL Support Ring

TFOL Clamp Hold Down

NSTXU-CALC-132-11-00- Ring Bolted Joint - (Rogoff, Zatz)NSTXU-CALC-132-04-00 Analysis of TF Outer Leg (Zhang,Titus)

Outer TF Reinforcement



The New Centerstack

• Design, Build and Install New CS Assembly including :– New TF Hub Assembly

– New TF Stub and Flex Assemblies– New Inner TF Bundle

– New Ohmic Heating Coil

– New Inconel Casing & Insulation

– New PFC Tiles

– New Poloidal Field 1a, b & c Coils

– New Ceramic Break

• R&D Activities to support above work– TF electrical joint testing

– OH braze joint testing

– Friction Stir Welding Tests

WBS 1.1 CA 13xx Jim Chrzanowski & Steve Raftopoulos

TF Bundle, OH and Extensions

TF Bundle and Conductors1.1.0 NSTXU-CALC-132-03-00 Torque Egns for Design Point (Woolley/ Titus)NSTXU CALC 132-10-00 TF CooldownFCOOL (Zolfaghari/Kalish)NSTXU CALC 132-05-00 TF Coupled EM-Thermal (Zhang)

NSTXU-CALC-132-08-00 Determination of shear Forces

Between the TF conductors and Insulation and the G-

10 Insulating Crown.A. Zolfaghari T.WillardNSTXU-CALC-132-07-00 Maximum Torsional Shear Stress P.Titus R.Woolley

TF Flex Joints FabricationNSTXU CALC 132-06-00 TF Flex Joint(Willard)

TF Lead ExtensionsTF Lead Finger SupportsNSTXU-CALC-132-14-00 TF StrapAssembly Fingers

OH Coil AssemblyThermal Stresses on OH-TF Coils NSTXU-CALC-133-02-00 NSTXU-CALC-133-06-00 OHCoolant Hole Optimization A. ZolfaghariNSTXU-CALC-133-08-00 OH StressAnalyses A. ZolfaghariNSTXU-CALC-133-09-00 OH Fatigueand Fracture Mechanics P.Titus I.Zatz NSTXU-CALC-133-11-00 OH & PF1Electromagnectic Stability Analysis P. H.M.Fan Titus / Zolfaghari

NSTXU CALC 132-08-00 TFCollar Pin/Shear (Zolfaghari)

OH Preload AssemblyNSTXU CALC 133-04-00 OH PreloadBellevilles(Rogoff/Zatz)

NSTXU CALC 133-07-00 OH Coax(Mardenfeld)

CS CasingNSTXU CALC 133-05-00 CSCasing Halo(Brooks/Titus)

34NSTX-U

Monday, December 8, 14



PF1 Coils

PF1A Upper and Lower

NSTXU-CALC-133-11-00 OH &PF1 Electromagnetic Stability Analysis P.NSTXU-CALC-133-01-01Structural Analysis of the PF1 Coils, leads and Supports

PF1B Upper and Lower

NSTXU-CALC-133-11-00 OH & PF1Electromagnetic Stability Analysis NSTXU-CALC-133-01-01 Structural Analysis of the PF1 Coils, leads and Supports

PF1C Upper and Lower

NSTXU-CALC-133-11-00 OH &PF1 Electromagnetic Stability AnalysisNSTXU-CALC-133-01-01Structural Analysis of the PF1 Coils, leads and Supports, Rev 1NSTXU-CALC-133-15-0 Analysisof the PF1C mandrel/Case CHI Gap thermal response including thermal shield design



Assembly of centerstack Fabrication of

center stack performed by

PPPL with components supplied by

industryAssembling first of 4

quadrants of conductors

Assembly four quadrants of conductors

Winding of OH conductor around TF bundle

Final VPI of OH/TF bundle


Total of 6 risky VPI (Vacuum Pressure Impregnation) performed. All very successful.


OH Aquapour Removal100 mill Aquapour gap

TFCoil

OH Coil

• During VPI, epoxy saturated the Aquapour turning it into waster resistant substance.

• No solution for removing the remaining Aquapour- epoxy mixed material. Decision to leave Aquapour in place.

• Independent peer review conducted to determine mitigation plan.

• Mitigated via DCPS and Operation procedures.



Final sanding and clear coat applied.Final sanding and clear coat applied.

Outer ground plane applied.Outer ground plane applied.

OH/TF center stack bundle WBS 1.1 CA 13xx Jim Chrzanowski & Steve Raftopoulos


PFC tiles being installed on the CS Casing

Plasma Facing Components on CS casing

PFC tiles installed

WBS 1.1 CA 13xx Jim Chrzanowski & Steve Raftopoulos, Kelsey Tresemer


CS casing over the OH/TF bundleWBS 1.1 CA 13xx Jim Chrzanowski & Steve RaftopoulosWBS 1.1 CA 13xx Jim Chrzanowski & Steve Raftopoulos


Second Neutral Beam Scope

NSTX test cell TFTR test cell

A TFTR Neutral Beamline was Decontaminated and relocated to the NSTX Test Cell

WBS 1.2 Tim Stevenson


Decon Goals and Approach

•Goals - tear it down, clean it,

evaluate BL & components prepare

for refurbishment minimize dose

(zero is good.) minimize rad waste

reduce levels as low as reasonably

achievable minimize BL2 impact on

NSTX Operations

•Approach - hands on work boots, PC suits, gloves, hoods rags, swiffer poles, sprayers H2O2, Windex, swiffer pads, DI water

•Repeated comprehensive HP

surveys to control areas and

assess progress extensive support

by ERWM to provide supplies and

manage radwaste

NSTX NBIU- Beamline DecontaminationWBS 1.2 CA 2430 Tim Stevenson


Beamline and Lid Relocation

BL2 Box Lift BL2 Lid Lift

WBS 1.2 CA 2425 Mark Cropper /Tim Stevenson


Second Neutral Beam Relocated

44

• Beam box = 40 tons• Lid = 14 tons

• Began work February 2009• 30,000 hours (>17 person years) for

decontamination, refurbishment, relocation design

WBS 1.2 CA 2425 Mark Cropper/ Tim Stevenson


NBI BL Alignment

• Install supports

• Fabricate shims

• Install spiders

• Install jacking systems

• Setup optical alignment

• Survey height from BL1 and VV

• Install shims

• Survey trajectory from metrology

• Set and reset BL

• Confirm alignment

• Verify alignment

• Set machine targets

• Set wall onument references

• Adjust CL Height to 13’ midplane of machine

• Adjust to tangency radii 110,120,130 cm (Yaw)

• Adjust Pitch Level

• Adjust Roll – Level

• Establish referencesfor platform, 90 inch flange,source rails

• Completed safely on a contaminated BL with stack ventilation

WBS 1.2 CA 2425 Tim Stevenson


BL2 Source relocation completed x 3WBS 1.2 CA 2440 Mark Cropper


N4ABC High Voltage Enclosure (3) relocationWBS 1.2 CA 2425 Tim Stevenson


N4ABC High Voltage Enclosure relocationsWBS 1.2 CA 2425 Tim Stevenson


BL2 Transmission Line relocation x 3

• HVE reassembly and reconnections completed

• HVE telemetry installed, tested, operational

• HVEs filled with SF6

• Transmission Lines rebuilt, installed, plumbed for SF6 overpressure recapture

• Platforms modified and installed

WBS 1.2 CA 2425, 2450 Tim Stevenson/Mark Cropper


NSTX NB Power Cables in TCB, to NTCWBS 1.2 CA 2470/2475 Raki Ramakrishnan/ Mark Cropper

Cryo line installation pathCable and tray path


Deionized Water Piping (source, dump, HVE)WBS 1.2 CA 2450 Mark Cropper

Most work in basement by subcontractor


NBI BL2 Upgrade Power & Controls

NBI NBPS Switchgear and Transformers Reactivation

WBS 1.2 CA 2470/2475 Raki Ramakrishnan/ Mark Cropper


NB Power Transmission Lines refurbishedWBS 1.2 CA 2470/2475 Raki Ramakrishnan/ Mark Cropper


Neutral Beam High Voltage Enclosures & Transmission Lines Installed

WBS 1.2 CA 2425/2470 Tim Stevenson/ Raki Ramakrishnan

HVE’s

Transmission lines


NB Local Control Center upgrade and wiring

• New NI chassis and LabView adds BL operator control purview

• Software upgrades designed and coded

• Additional NI and computing interfaces provide timing and data transfer with NSTX central computing and eliminates CAMAC

WBS 1.2 CA 2470/2475 Raki Ramakrishnan/ Mark Cropper


NBI Port JK Alignment and Installation

JK weldment installation

Bay window cutAligned and

welded into place

WBS 1.2 CA 2480 Tim Stevenson/ Mark Cropper


Neutral Beam & TIV valve

• Neutral Beam connecting duct assembly being lowered into position

Vacuum Vessel Bay J/K rectangular port

Turbo molecular vacuum Pumps

Round bellows and

duct

Rectangular Bellows

WBS 1.2 CA 2480 Mark Cropper/ Bill Blanchard NBI Duct


NBI Duct WBS 1.2 CA 2480 Mark Cropper/Bill Blanchard


NBI Duct and Torus Vacuum Pumping System (TVPS)

•TVPS & TMPs

•Instrumentation and control cabling

•Baratrons Ion gauges

•RGA

•Torus Isolation Valves

•Ceramic Breaks/Bellows

•Magnetic Shielding

•VV Leg modification required

WBS 1.2 CA 2480/2485 Mark Cropper/ Bill Blanchard


NBI Armor assembly and installation

•Backing plates fit up in VV

•Manifolds leak checked

•Carbon tiles baked out in oven

•Stiffener pieces welded

Supports aligned using metrology and welded in place …

WBS 1.2 CA 2460 Kelsey Tresemer

New armor


Auxiliary Systems

• Gas Injection Systems (CA 3400 - Blanchard)

• Provided four center stack fueling lines and modifications of the gas delivery assemblies

• Bakeout System (CA 3300 – Raki)

• Provided a new more powerful power supply, to replace the existing one, to be used for electrical heating of the vessel.

• Coil Cooling water modifications (CA 3200 - Atnafu)

• TF/PF bus and coil cooling water system;• Center stack cooling water system;• Component cooling water system; and the• Ohmic heating cooling water system.

WBS 1.3 CA 3200/3300/3400/ Neway Atnafu/ Raki Ramakrishnan/Bill Blanchard


Magnetic Diagnostics

Replaced Centerstack Diagnostics Rogowski Coils,Mirnov Coils Flux Loops, Langmuir Probes, Thermocouples

WBS 1.4 CA Bob Kaita


MPTS VV modification

• Provided required a new laser input vessel penetration, and plugging of the existing penetration, increasing the nozzle diameter of the L port to accommodate an external laser dump, furnishing a vacuum boundary for the extension tube.

• Two ports added for IR camera

• Background CHERS and future tangential views

• High K scattering

• Fusion tip probe

• FIRE tip or other tangential view

• Rerouted RWM coils bay JK & AL

WBS 1.4 CA 4500 George Labik


Electrical Power System

Upgrade Requirements met TF : 129.8 kA, 1kV, ESW 7.08 sec every 2400 sec

(7.05kA rms) ; OH : 24kA, ESW 1.474 sec every 2400 sec ; 6kV PF1a: Eliminate Ripple reduction reactors

Tasks Summary Redesigned TF Circuit increasing parallel branches

from Four TO Eight branches Provided two +/- 0 to 155A fiber optic DCCT for TF Increased the number of parallel cables feeding TF from

Five TO Eight. Redesigned the Power Cable Termination Structure to

have higher size bus for TF Redesigned OH Power Loop using the old PLT TF coils

as the current limiting reactors. Redesigned the Hardwired Control system for TF & OH

using PLC Redesigned PF1a circuit eliminating the ripple reduction

reactors. Designed and installed a new TF turn to turn fault

detection system.

WBS 1.5 CA 5000 Raki Ramakrishnan


Digital Coil Protection System (DCPS)WBS 1.5 CA 5200 Ron Hatcher/Tim Stevenson

Why Needed


DCPS (continued)WBS 1.5 CA 5200 Ron Hatcher/Tim Stevenson

Accomplished

Computer System Design Hardware Design


WBS 1.5 CA5501 Neway Atnafu Coil Bus Runs

OH Connec,on and PF1B Bus

TF Leads


WBS 1.6 CA6100 Paul Sichta Central I&C and Data Acquisition

• The real-time plasma control system was upgraded to accommodate additional input/output signals, control loops, and a longer control period.

• The networks and analysis pool computers were upgraded to achieve reasonable performance for time-sensitive functions.

• Some test cell racks were relocated; there was a modest effort required to route the control, timing, and communication cabling and qualify the systems.

The ~4x longer pulse length drives the upgrade for data acquisition, networking,

and real-time controls


Field Coord., Assembly and InstallationWBS 1.8 CA 8250/8250/8251 Erik Perry

Scope completed;

•Construction Management Coordination and Supervision

•Removal of equipment for clearance and accessibility

•Moving existing coils,

•Modifying existing supports mounted on the vacuum vessel

•Assembly and installation of the NSTX torus, coils systems and all associated supports

•Installing a new external coil support structure.

•Removal of the existing Center Stack and installation of the NSTX Upgraded Center Stack

•Closing up the vacuum vessel, pumping down, leak checking, bakeout and machine area scrubs to be ready for Integrated System Testing.

•Repairs necessary as the result of the OH arc fault event


Construction Coordination

• Use of a Work Control Center for all work in the test cell. Project in-charge during assembly and testing (Erik Perry). Handoff to Operations (Al vonHalle) for start of ISTP

• Work Control Center reviews all Engineering Work Packages for the field

• Daily Plan-of-the-Day meetings to coordinate activities between crews and fine tune technician assignments

• Twice a week meetings of the Work Control Center reviewed priorities, EWPs and hardware

• All work in the NSTX Test Cell done with Engineering Work Packages (EWPs)

• EWPs included (>275 EWP’s prepared) • Work Control Center reviewed all EWPs for the field

• Reviewed removal/installation procedures• Reviewed Job Hazard Analysis (JHA)• Attended pre-job and post-job briefs• Interfaced between Engineering and the field crews• Assured that the field work was done safely and correctly• Assured the field crews were used efficiently



Field Coord., Assembly and Installation

Center Stack Assembly Installation

WBS 1.8 CA 8250/8250/8251 Erik Perry


TF coil installation, platforms, supports



Neutral Beam Duct



TF outer leg clearances maintained

Maintained ¾ inch clearance to Port Extension for OL deflection per spec

Prior to NBI Duct installation…

WBS 1.8 CA 8250/8250/8251 Erik Perry Field Coord., Assembly and Installation


Contents


• MISSION



• SCHEDULE, COST, & BASELINE DOCUMENTATION

• LESSONS LEARNED



Path To Startup• PPPL Activity Certification Committee (ACC) (June 2013 –December 2014)

• Readiness for Operations Review (Report, action plans and status on web site) – (Dec 2014)

• External review committee with DOE observers• 13 recommendation 6 of which for CD-4.

• ACC recommendation to PPPL ES&H Executive Board for Safety Certificate – (April 2015)

• Safety Certificate Granted by PPPL COO concurrence by DOE – (April 2015)

• Execute ISTP-001 • Machine bakeout and coil energization tests• First plasma attempt failure (April 24)• First Neutral Beam shot into armor (May 11)

• Internal and external investigations (May –July)

• Hardware redesigns and installations (May – June)

• Re-assembly (July-August)

• ACC recommendation to PPPL ES&H Executive Board for Safety Certificate to re-start (August)

• Execute ISTP-001 • Coil energization tests• First plasma attempt successful (August 11)

• NSTXU Project Scope and KPP’s Complete (August)

• Continue Transition into Operations (Stefan Gerhart)


Safety Certificate “Driver’s License” Issued

Posted in the NSTXU Control Room


Acquisition Approach• The technical component design, specifications, fabrication, assembly, installation and test

were performed by the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL).• Material and hardware components provided by industry. Approximately 21% of the total

project cost was for outside industry procurements. Firm fixed price contracts awarded.• External technical and management consultation and reviews provided by 72 individual

external personnel from the following institutions.

• MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center• US Department of Energy• University of Wisconsin• Argonne National Laboratory• Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory• Los Alamos National laboratory• Oak Ridge National Laboratory• Fermi• General Atomic• SLAC• National Institute of Standards and

Technology• United Kingdom Atomic Energy

Authority (UKAEA)

Major ProcurementsSupplier Location ProcurementMartinez & Turek Rialto, CA Centerstack Casing

A&N, Incorporated Williston, FL Bay J Port Cover, Bay I Port Cover and various Vacuum Parts

Major Tool and Machine Indianapolis, IN Inner TF Conductor Machining

Hollis Line Machine Hollis, NH Outer TF Conductor Stiffeners, Organ Pipe Extension Weldment and Ceramic Break Parts

Powers Electric Columbus, NJ Wiring and Cabling

Zenex Precision Paterson NJ TF Flex Buss

Abcot Amnor Hawthorne, NJ Belden/Honeywell Wiring and Cabling

Imperial Machine Columbia, NJ G10 Crown Piece and Vacuum Vessel Main Flange Mounting Studs

MWI, Inc. Rochester, NY Poco Graphite Tiles

Edison Welding Institute Columbus, OH Inner TF Friction Stir Welding

H.C. Starck Euclid, OH TZM Molybdenum Inboard Divertor Tiles and Shield Plates

Everson Tesla Nazareth, PA PF1 Coils and Outer TF Coil Fabrication

Astro Machine Ephrata, PA Copper Lead Spacers, Centerstack Casing Supports, Umbrella Lid and Centerstack Swing Fixture

Carolina Fabricators West Columbia, SC

Coil Support Structures

Luvata Pori Kimberly, WI Inner TF Copper Conductor Extrusions

External Reviewers


Project Baseline - Cost• TPC = $94.3M EAC =

$93.6

Planned cost, actual cost at CD-4, and explanations of contingency usage (more detail in closeout report).

Draw-downs on contingency documented by PPPL’s

Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) and is shown in Appendix F.

136 ECP’s processed

WBS CD-2 Cost

Baseline ($M)

Final Cost ($M)

Delta Explanation

1.1 Torus Systems $13.5 $26.7 $13.2 > Under estimated u tasks & labor cost to Fab/Assy centerstack> Over sight and supervision d> Vendor hardware fabrication cost> Scope enhancements (PF-1c & Passive plates )

1.2 Plasma Heating $21.0 $17.6 $3.3 > Over-estimated beamline relocation, NBI power & controls> Under estimated NBI Armor, NBI VPS/Interface duct> Scope enhancements: S-FLIP port installation $165k

1.3 Auxiliary Systems $0.4 $0.7 $0.3 Under estimated labor and hardware fabr cost

TEC1.4 Plasma Diagnostics $1.6 $2.3 $0.8 > Under estimated MPTS, tFIDA and RWM coil

> Scope enhancements1.5 power Systems $7.9 $10.1 $2.2 > Underestimated DCPS

> Underestimated power systems bus bar fabrication> Scope enhancements

1.6 Central I&C $0.9 $1.1 $0.2 > Underestimate engineering tasks> Scope enhancements

1.7 Project Support & Integr $11.0 $11.3 $0.4 > Project stretch-out increase for project office 1.8 Assembly $7.6 $10.3 $2.7 > Under estimated & unforeseen tasks and technician time

> Repairs due to Arc fault ($361K)TEC Subtotal $63.8 $80.2 $16.4

1.1 Torus Systems $4.8 $4.8 - 1.2 Plasma Heating $3.6 $3.6 - 1.3 Auxiliary Systems $0.0 $0.0 -

OPC 1.4 Plasma Diagnostics $0.2 $0.2 - 1.5 power Systems $1.4 $1.4 - 1.6 Central I&C $0.0 $0.0 - 1.7 Project Support & Integr $3.4 $3.4 - 1.8 Assembly $0.0 $0.0 -

OPC Subtotal $13.5 $13.5 -

Subtotal (TEC + OPC) $77.3 $93.6 $16.4

Total Contingency $17.0 $0.6 $16.4

Total Project Cost $94.3 $94.3 $0.0

Note; Final cost EAC includes ~$100k estimate for August and September


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

18%

19%

20%

22%

25%

26%

29%

31%

37%

42%

46%

49%

54%

57%

59%

63%

67%

68%

76%

80%

82%

85%

89%

93%

95%

97%

99%

Contingency % of ETC

Project Percent Complete (ACWP/EAC)

NSTXU Project Contingency History

Free Balance Contingency (cont/ETC)=% Original Baselined Contingency % =

Project Baseline - Contingency• The amount of contingency established at the beginning of the project was based on a risk

assessment performed as part of the cost estimating process. • Total cost contingency included 3 elements:

• 1) a task-by-task subjective contingency assessment for unknowns and uncertainties; • 2) a weighted assessment of tabulated risk events (Appendix E of closeout report) • 3) schedule contingency applied to accommodate potential project stretch-out (a.k.a.

“standing army” cost).

Contingency usage trend plot as function of project percent complete.

Contingency UsageDocumented ECP's $11.9Cost Variances $4.5Free Balance Remaining $0.6

$17.0

Note; Final cost EAC includes ~$100k estimate for August and September


Project Baseline – Schedule MilestonesProject scope and KPP’s were completed August 10th, 2015 approx 1 1/2 months ahead of schedule.

(1) Acceleration result of NSTX operations being curtailed due to an inner TF coil failure. The start of the outage ahead of CD-3 was approved by DOE (ECP-004) and consisted of hardware removal tasks only.

(2) Original baseline date was June 2014 but its slippage was anticipated therefore the milestone date was rescheduled by one month as documented in ECP-114.

(3) This had been planned to be a stand-alone subcontract. The scope for this work was actually added to the overall Inner TF machining subcontract which was award to Major-Tool and Machine in August 2011.

(4) Initial ISTP completed in April 2015 however during an attempt at a 100% power shot, just prior to a first plasma attempt , an OH coil arc fault occurred which resulted in an extensive internal and external investigation process as well as hardware repairs. Subsequent to hardware repairs being made and reconciliation of a root cause analysis findings the PPPL executive ES&H committee approved ISTP testing to resume. The successful ISTP testing led to a first plasma being achieved on August 10, 2015

Level Milestone

Schedule at CD-2

(per PEP)

Actual

Months ahead/ (behind

)

Level I Receive CD-0 Approval - Feb-09Level I Receive CD-1 Approval - Apr-10

Level II Project Preliminary Design Review - Jun-10

Level II Neutral Beam #2 Decontamination Program Complete - Nov-10

Level I Receive CD-2 Approval Jan-11 Dec-10 1.3

Level II Project Final Design Review Sep-11 Jun-11 3.3

Level I Receive CD-3 Approval Jan-12 Dec-11 1.4

Level II Friction Stir weld Coil Leads TF Conductors Jun-12 (3)

Level II NSTX Complete Operations Jul-12 Sep-11 10.9

Level II Begin Upgrade Outage Aug-12 Sep-11 11.6 (1)

Level II Begin Inner TF Quadrant Fab (Apply Turn Insul #1 Quad) Apr-13 Jun-12 10.5

Level II Award Neutral Beam (NB) Vessel Cap Jun-13 Feb-11 28.5

Level II Complete Assy and Pot Of 4th Inner TF Quadrant Oct-13 Jun-13 4.8

Level II Complete Fabricate & Test Inner TF/OH Coil Assy Jul-14 Jul-14 0.3 (2)

Level II NB Cap Installed Oct-14 Jan-13 21.9

Level II Lift In New Centerstack Jan-15 Oct-14 3.7

Level II Complete ISTP Aug-15 Aug-15 0.5

Level II Resume Operations Sep-15 Aug-15 1.5 (4)

Level I CD-4 Sep-15


NSTX-U Summary ScheduleFY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A SMilestones CD-0 CD-1 CD-2 CD-3 CD-4

Center Stack

CS Plasma Facing Components

Design Award PFC

Tile Material Fabrication

Tile Machining & Diag Instl

TF/OH Center stack fab Inner TF Conductor Extrusions

Machining and FSW

Inner TF Assembly

TF/OH Fabrication

Final CS Assembly & Test

Electrical Power Systems Electrical Power Systems Installation

Machine Assembly Equipment Removals

Structural Mods

Re-Instl Equipt

Remove Existing CS Install New CS

Close Vsl & Pump down

PTP & ISTP

Install Armor

Neutral Beam Relocate Beamline

Design

Vac Vsl Modifications Bay K & L

Decon 2nd NB Beamline Services

Refurbish & Test BL Components Fab & Instl VPS

FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S

CD-4 Early Finish

CD-4

KPP #1 Acheived Scope Complete

KPP #2 Acheived

Project Baseline – Schedule Summary

The critical path of the project was the fabrication of the centerstack


Project Baseline – Funding Profile

• The project was well funded.

• DOE Funding of the project was accelerated to support critical tasks and the early start of the outage .

Table 5.5-1 Funding Profile Approved at CD-2 ($M)

FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total ($M)

OPC $5.1 $5.6 $10.8

TEC $2.7 $9.6 $14.6 $25.3 $27.5 $3.8 $83.5

TOTAL $5.1 $8.3 $9.6 $14.6 $25.3 $27.5 $3.8 $94.3

Table 5.5-2 Actual Funds Received ($M)


OPC $5.2 $5.4 $0.1 $10.8

TEC $3.6 $9.8 $20.4 $22.8 $23.7 $3.3 $83.5

TOTAL $5.2 $8.95 $9.9 $20.4 $22.8 $23.7 $3.3 $94.3

Table 5.5-2 Actual Cost ($M)


OPC $5.1 $5.6 $0.0 $10.8

TEC $2.7 $7.6 $21.9 $23.2 $20.7 $6.7 $82.9

TOTAL $5.1 $8.32 $7.6 $21.9 $23.2 $20.7 $6.7 $93.6

FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

CD-2 Baseline $5.1 $8.3 $9.6 $14.6 $25.3 $27.5 $3.8

BA Provided $5.2 $9.0 $9.9 $20.4 $22.8 $23.7 $3.3

Actual Cost $5.1 $8.3 $7.6 $21.9 $23.2 $20.7 $6.7

FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

CD-2 Baseline $5.1 $13.5 $23.1 $37.7 $63.0 $90.5 $94.3

BA Provided $5.2 $14.2 $24.1 $44.5 $67.3 $91.0 $94.3

Actual Cost $5.1 $13.5 $21.1 $43.0 $66.2 $86.9 $93.6$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

($M)

IncrementalCD-2 Baseline

BA Provided

Actual Cost


Project Baseline – Costing Profile

• Project funds were well utilized with minimal carryover year-to-year

23,430

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

$40,000

$45,000

$50,000

$55,000

$60,000

$65,000

$70,000

$75,000

$80,000

$85,000

$90,000

$95,000

$100,000

$105,000

$0

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

$3,000

$3,500

JAN

FY

09

FE

BF

Y09

MA

RF

Y09

AP

RF

Y09

MA

YF

Y09

JUN

FY

09

JUL

FY

09

AU

GF

Y09

SE

PF

Y09

OC

TF

Y10

NO

VF

Y10

DE

CF

Y10

JAN

FY

10

FE

BF

Y10

MA

RF

Y10

AP

RF

Y10

MA

YF

Y10

JUN

FY

10

JUL

FY

10

AU

GF

Y10

SE

PF

Y10

OC

TF

Y11

NO

VF

Y11

DE

CF

Y11

JAN

FY

11

FE

BF

Y11

MA

RF

Y11

AP

RF

Y11

MA

YF

Y11

JUN

FY

11

JUL

FY

11

AU

GF

Y11

SE

PF

Y11

OC

TF

Y12

NO

VF

Y12

DE

CF

Y12

JAN

FY

12

FE

BF

Y12

MA

RF

Y12

AP

RF

Y12

MA

YF

Y12

JUN

FY

12

JUL

FY

12

AU

GF

Y12

SE

PF

Y12

OC

TF

Y13

NO

VF

Y13

DE

CF

Y13

JAN

FY

13

FE

BF

Y13

MA

RF

Y13

AP

RF

Y13

MA

YF

Y13

JUN

FY

13

JUL

FY

13

AU

GF

Y13

SE

PF

Y13

OC

TF

Y14

NO

VF

Y14

DE

CF

Y14

JAN

FY

14

FE

BF

Y14

MA

RF

Y14

AP

RF

Y14

MA

YF

Y14

JUN

FY

14

JUL

FY

14

AU

GF

Y14

SE

PF

Y14

OC

TF

Y15

NO

VF

Y15

DE

CF

Y15

JAN

FY

15

FE

BF

Y15

MA

RF

Y15

AP

RF

Y15

MA

YF

Y15

JUN

FY

15

JUL

FY

15

AU

GF

Y15

SE

PF

Y15

BA Profile (incl contingency)

Actual Cost

NSTX-U Cost and Budget

($K) ($K)

FY 2009 | FY 2010 | FY 2011 | FY 2012 | FY 2013 | FY 2014 | FY 2015 |

0 31 2 4


Project Baseline – Staffing

• Subcontractors and hourly consists of engineers, designers, and technicians as required to supplement PPPL staff.

• Excluded are fixed price subcontracts for Davis –Bacon work.

• Important contributions were provided by PPPL Procurement, QA/QC, Safety, ESU, and the Engineering front Office whose cost was not directly charged to the project but recovered as part of the PPPL overhead.

0102030405060708090

FY 2009

FY 2010

FY 2011

FY 2012

FY 2013

FY 2014

FY 2015

FTE'

sActual Staffing Profile (FTE's)

Technicians

Subcontractors & HourlyHealth Physics

Designers

Engineers

Administrators and Project Support


Safety Record Excellent

Twisted knee, Shoulder strains (2), Elbow irritation, Injury to ball of foot

Fiscal YearHours

WorkedRecordable

CasesRecordable

Rate

Recordable TARGET DOE

(General Industry)

DART cases

DART Rate

DART TARGET DOE

(General Industry)

FY 2009 31,158 1 6.42 1 6.42

FY 2010 56,154 0 0.00 0 0.00

FY 2011 47,802 0 0.00 0 0.00

FY 2012 126,200 0 0.00 0 0.00

FY 2013 134,855 1 1.48 0 0.00

FY 2014 129,876 2 3.08 1 1.54

FY 2015 (1) 47,560 1 4.21 1 4.21

Total Lab 573,605 5 1.74 3.8 (2)3 1.05 2.2 (3)

FY 2009FY 2010FY 2011FY 2012 NONEFY 2013FY 2014FY 2015

(1)Through 7/31/2015

Cont

ract

ors

PPPL

(3) The "DART TARGET DOE (General Industry)" (see http://www.bls.gov/news.release/osh.t01.htm for 2013, Construction).

(2) The "Recordable TARGET DOE (General Industry)" (see http://www.bls.gov/news.release/osh.t01.htm for 2013, Construction).


Hazards Analysis report

The NSTX-U SAD is the update to the Hazards Analysis Report. The SAD is complete and approved.


Environmental Management System

The Environmental Management System was reviewed and re-certified in February 2015


Contents


• MISSION




• LESSONS LEARNED• CHARGE QUESTIONS


Lessons Learned

Aqua pour event

• “Aquapour”, used during fabrication to maintain a thermal expansion gap between the center stack TF & OH winding.

•Beneficial in winding the CS OH conductor, however, we were not able to remove the aqua pour as planned due to it being impregnated with epoxy.

•Resulted in a critical path schedule delay and will impose additional operational requirements.

•Event was postulated in the risk registry

•Could have exercised additional engineering due diligence to better understand the failure mechanisms

•R&D simulations performed but did not subject the process to the epoxy impregnation step.

•Next Time:

1. Better think through technical, fabrication and assembly risk.

2. Be more mindful of experience and familiarity morphing into overconfidence.

3. Consider incorporating a failure modes and effects analysis as part of our fabrication and assembly planning.

Opportunity #1


Lessons Learned

Better balance in assigning CAM's to scope

•The centerstack design and fabrication was assigned to one CAM who was the laboratory's expert in coil manufacturing.

•The CAM who quickly became overloaded.

•Oversights in procurement inspections, timely reconciliation of cooling wave analysis, more complete field supervision, support of EVMS CAM duties,

•Created a bottleneck in fabrication tooling which required a lot of attention.

•Additional support on engineering the tooling might have save rework.

•Schedule Impacted

•We tended to focus on the near critical path and big ticket procurements or those that are technically challenging. While this helped us to successfully navigate the 6 largest risks on the project (i.e. Vacuum Pressure Impregnation (VPI) of the centerstack) this led to smaller procurements of hardware to receive less attention until it came time for assembly. Some of these components had to be re-worked by PPPL to meet specification which led to internal schedule delays and diversion of critical staff (i.e. welders, machinists).

•Next time: 1.Ensure CAM’s are not overloaded and adequate staff are assigned for oversight and supervision. 2.Ensure PPPL QC has adequate resources to support the receipt inspection process.

Opportunity #2


Lessons Learned

Procurement

•We were reminded to “trust but verify” our new vendors especially before awarding multiple procurements.

•There were some components that required welding of pieces that were pre-beveled (a.k.a. weld prepped).

•We did not require a hold inspection on these components and the vendor proceeded to weld the joints without pre-inspection.

•Once the hardware was received and inspected by PPPL, we discovered that the material welded had not been properly prepared. PPPL had to grind away and re-weld questionable joints.

•Next time:

1.Ensure fabrication inspection hold points,

2.timely receipt inspections, and

3.Better vetting of our vendors.

Opportunity #3

Ref NSTX “Procurement Lessons Learned Causal Analysis Report on web site


Lessons Learned

Loss of Key Personnel

•Loss of our DCPS CAM (due to his sudden death) as well as the temporary loss of the Magnet CAM (due to lengthy illness) resulted in impacts to the project schedule as other stepped up to “fill-in”.

•A secondary impact was an increase in project cost as lesser experience personnel took longer to come up to speed and carry on the work.

•Next time:

1.Cost and schedule risks for loss of key personnel must be more thoroughly analyzed and quantified.

Opportunity #4


Lessons Learned

Design and Installation – (OH Arc Fault Event root cause analysis)

Actions;

1.Improve/clarify field installation policies

2.Clarify design review procedures (ensure proper representation from all system stakeholders and SME’s)

3.Clarify process for identifying SME’s ( subject matter experts)

4.Ensure robust training and adherence to conduct of operation policies and procedures for machine start-ups

Opportunity #5


Lessons Learned

Safety•The attention to worker safety resulted in only 5 minor reportable minor injuries in over 573,000 hours worked.

•While we have a robust safety organization and up front Management buy-in, it came down to people not taking risks or short cuts in the name of schedule or cost.

•The safety culture at PPPL is one of its strongest assets

Successes #1


Lessons Learned

Supervision•Work control center provided real value in establishing daily communication and coordination of field activities.

•Field support needs (QC weld inspections, Safety support for walk downs, Health Physics) were determined in a daily 10 minute meeting.

•This process was established during the TFTR D&D project which was successful in finishing safely on schedule and $3.6M under budget.

Successes #2


Lessons Learned

Technical Risk•The project was not risk adverse on employing new processes or technologies. The project utilized 7 fabrication and assembly techniques that benefited the construction of the new center stack magnet and vessel upgrade; (Ref Appendix K for detailed descriptions)

• Friction stir welding of copper was used to join high strength to high conductivity copper grades in the TF center bundle conductors.

• A new non-ionic soldering process was developed.

• Wire Electric Discharge Machining (EDM) was used in the manufacture of the critical TF High-Current Connector.

• A carefully planned Vacuum Pressure Impregnation (VPI) process with hard metal molds were used to assure the strength and electrical integrity of the center stack.

• Cyanate Ester / Epoxy Resin was chosen because of its maintenance of strength at elevated temperature.

• Electron Beam Welding was used to manufacture the TF Lead Extensions and Passive Plate expansion connectors.

• A water-soluble casting material, “Aquapour”, was used to maintain a thermal expansion gap between the center stack TF and OH winding. This process proved beneficial in winding the CS OH conductor, however, we were not able to remove the aqua pour as planned due to it being impregnated with epoxy. See Opportunity #1

Successes #3


Contents


• MISSION




• LESSONS LEARNED



Charge Questions1. Has the NSTX-U project met all CD-4 requirements, which includes: completing the technical scope and achieving the Key Performance Parameters as defined in the Project Execution Plan? • Both KPP’s Met (Appendix J of closeout report)

• Baseline completion date met (Appendix J of closeout report)

• Scope deliverables documented and verified (Appendix B of closeout report)

• Mission requirements met (via design parameters and ISTP test)

• Transition to operation plan documented (Appendix G of closeout report)

• Readiness for Operations review conducted, CD-4 recommendations enacted (Appendix M and web site documentation)

• Hazards Analysis Report (HAR) updated with revised Safety Assessment Document (SAD) (Ref web site documentation)

• Environmental Management System re-certified (Ref web site documentation)

• Draft closeout report prepared in accordance with DOE standard template

Web Site http://nstx-upgrade.pppl.gov/NSTX%20CD4%20CLOSEOUT%20REVIEW/Review%20Documents/index.html


Charge Questions

2. Is the transition to operations plan adequate to transition the NSTX-U project to research operations?

• Yes. Stefan Gerhardt will discuss next.

• See Appendix G of closeout report


Charge Questions3. Is the draft project closeout report adequate and have the lessons learned from the project been identified and captured in a draft document?

• Draft closeout report completed

• Follows DOE template

• Includes;

TABLE OF CONTENTS1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY2. INTRODUCTION3. ACQUISITION APPROACH4. PROJECT ORGANIZATION 5. PROJECT BASELINE AT COMPLETION5.1 Scope Baseline5.2 Cost Baseline5.3 Schedule Baseline5.4 Work Breakdown Structure5.5 Funding Profile5.6 Staffing Profile5.7 Environmental Requirements/Permits5.8 Safety Record6. CLOSEOUT STATUS7. LESSONS LEARNED8. PHOTOS9.PROJECT DOCUMENT ARCHIVES & LOCATIONS

APPENDICESA.Detailed WBS DictionaryB.Detailed Technical Performance AchievedC.Major External ReviewsD.Summary of project injuriesE.Project Risk RegistryF.Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) logG.Transition to Operations PlanH.Lessons LearnedI.Centerstack Fabrication and AssemblyJ.Objective evidence for KPP’sK.NSTXU Fabrication and Assembly TechniquesL.Aquapour Operational ImpactsM.NSTX Readiness ReviewN.Safety CertificateO.NSTX OH fault corrective action plan


Charge Questions

4. Is the NSTX-U project ready for approval of CD-4, Project Completion?

Scope completed

KPP’s Met

Within Cost

Within Schedule

Operations started

YES


BACKUP


Upper & Lower Al Block External-Internal Reinforcements.NSTXU-CALC-12-06-00Upgrade TF to Umbrella Structure Aluminum Block Connection (Titus), (Smith) NSTXU-CALC-132-04-00, -Analysis of TF Outer Leg, (Zhang), (Titus)

Umbrella Reinforcement

The Umbrella Structure & Outer Leg Supports Have Been Strengthened To Handle 4X Larger Forces of the

Upgrade



Box decon from lift and from source platform using 25 gallon sprayer and DI water

Effluent drain on bottom with pump to drums for solidification and waste handling

Decon Operations SuccessfulWBS 1.2 CA 2430 Tim Stevenson



DCPS FMEA and Reliability Assessment


DCPS FCC residing on PCS-SRV-1

• DCPS core software testing & integration completed



Testing of DCPS code with Autotester

• Local code and AT testing began in FCC in Spring

• Continued in Junction Area this summer

• Then returned to FCC this Fall for remote testing

Well over 1500 test shots performed



BL & Lid, BL2 Component relocation completed

• Calorimeter Ion Dump Magnet & Shield

• LHe Dewar• 90 Inch Flange

Source Platform• Shielding Cryo

Platform• Access Platforms

Pressure Plates

• Decon BL and Lid externally

WBS 1.2 CA 2425 Tim Stevenson


Plan To CD-4

CD-4

First Run Week


NB Injection Controls AreaWBS 1.2 CA 2470/2475 Raki Ramakrishnan/ Mark Cropper


Inspection Maintenance Plan

35NSTX-UMonday, December 8, 14

NSTXU Readiness For Operations Review– December 9-11, 2014

NSTX-U Inspection PlanNo. Item Inspection Procedure Annually After 5,000

shots

After 10,000 shots

1 PF 4-5 Support Bracket to VV Welds Visual inspection for cracks or other signs of fatigue Inspect for Cracks

2 PF 4-5 Support Bracket Studs Visual inspection for cracks or other signs of fatigue Inspect for Cracks Replace studs

with new hardware3 Umbrella feet bolts Inspect bolts for torque, report any loose bolts.

Retorque as required.

Torque, Looseness

4 Vacuum Vessel Dome Rib welds

below the Umbrella Feet

Visual inspection for cracks or other signs of fatigue Inspect for Cracks

5 TF Flex Connectors Resistance Check and Verify Fastener Torques or

Separate and Inspect surfaces

Resistance Check and

Verify Fastener Torques

Separate and

Inspect surfaces6 Passive Plates, biscuit clearances and

arcing

Inspect biscuit clearances and arcing

7 Inspect Clevis Pin Connections for

signs of Fatigue

Inspect Clevis around Pin Connection for cracks Inspect for Cracks

8 OTF Leg Reworked (Mechanical) Flag

Joints

Pass a current through joints and measure voltage

drop. Check the torque on the bolts, or look at the

compression of the Bellevilles at each inspection. Visual

inspection.

Annually and Major

outage

9 OTF Leg Flags Braze Joints UT inspection. Annually or Major outage10 PF, CHI, TF Buss Joints Inspect and / separate - inspect Joint resistance and

verify fastener torques11 TF-VV Clevis Weld: Inspect clevis's

adjacent to VV Support Legs

Visual inspection of welds for cracks and fatigue. Inspect for cracks

12 Socket Head Cap screws connecting

SS TF Bundle end plate to insulating

ring

Inspect for torque and looseness Inspect for torque,

looseness

13 PF 1A, PF 1B, and TF bus Bars max

stress locations per Kodiak calc

(details to be provided by Neway)

Inspect for signs of fatigue Inspect for cracks

NSTXU UPGRADE PROJECT CD-4 Review The NSTXU team Neway Atnafu, Bill Blanchard, Jim Chrzanowski, Mark...

Documents

Transcript of NSTXU UPGRADE PROJECT CD-4 Review The NSTXU team Neway Atnafu, Bill Blanchard, Jim Chrzanowski, Mark...