SLAC - B (Waveguide Assembly) Final Project Report Eric Coblin Clay Fenstermaker Greg McCandless...
-
Upload
gillian-hensley -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
1
Transcript of SLAC - B (Waveguide Assembly) Final Project Report Eric Coblin Clay Fenstermaker Greg McCandless...
SLAC - B(Waveguide Assembly)
Final Project Report
Eric Coblin
Clay Fenstermaker
Greg McCandless
Eric Schmidt
Coach: Vikash Goyal Liaison: Jeff Rifkin
Agenda
• 217A-Product Definition
• 217B-Product Specification
• Concept Development
• Design Recommendations
• Scorecard
• Implementation Process
• Competitive Analysis
• Questions
217A-Product Definition
–Understand the project•CVCA•Value Graph•Function-Structure Mapping•Product Definition Assessment Checklist
–Quantify the Understanding•QFD•Cost-Worth•Design for Assembly•Design for Variety•Design for Environment
•FMEA
SLAC NLCWaveguide Team
-Physicists-Engineers
-TechniciansNLC ProjectTeam
Department ofEnergy
Congress
Taxpayers
Physicists andOther Users
Supplier ofCopper Tubing
Copper RawMaterial Supplier
Supplier ofConflat Flanges
ConstructionContractors
Supplier ofOther
Installat ionHardware
Supplier ofCleaning Equipment
$ !
$ !
$ !
$ !
$ !
$ !
$ !
$ !
$ !
$ !10101
1010110101
10101
10101
101011010110101
10101
$
!
Hardware/Mat’l
Service
Power
Information
Money
Complaints
Legend
Customer Value Chain Analysis
10101
10101
10101
10101
10101
10101
Waveguide
Accelerate Particles
Guide Waves Hold Vacuum
Run Physics Experiments
Learn about the components of atoms
Transfer Energy
Manufacture Electronics
components
Have Fun?
Run ComputerModel
Efficient ReliableSafe ServiceableEasy to Install
Wall ThicknessVacuumCapacity
Cleanliness(particulate levels) Length Weight
TubingJoints HardwarePumps
SurfaceRoughness/
Conductivity
WHAT
HOW
WHY
Waveguide Value Graph
Function-Structure Map
Function Structure
TransferPower
ProvideGeometry
ProvideVacuum
Environment
Conductivity
Clean of Gas
No Leaks
Clean of Solid
Straight
Concentric
Strong
Smooth
WaveguideAssembly
SupportStructure
Joints
TubesMaterial
Geometry
PHASE I QFDNLC Waveguide
Tube and Joint RoundnessTube and Joint ConcentricityTube StraightnessTube Interior Surface Finish + Tube ConductivityWall Thickness + Joint Vacuum Limit +Tubing Material Outgassing +Tube Weight ++Mean Time to Remove Joint -Mean Time to Remove Tube + ++ +Tube Length - ++ +Mean Time Assemble Joint + ++ + - + ++ +Exterior Surface Oxidation
Preferred dwn dwn dwn dwn up nom dwn dwn dwn dwn dwn nom dwn dwn
Engineering Metrics
Customer Requirements Cus
tom
er W
eigh
ts
Tub
e an
d Jo
int R
ound
ness
Tub
e an
d Jo
int C
once
ntri
city
Tub
e St
raig
htne
ss
Tub
e In
teri
or S
urfa
ce F
inis
h
Tub
e C
ondu
ctiv
ity
Wal
l Thi
ckne
ss
Join
t Vac
uum
Lim
it
Tub
ing
Mat
eria
l Out
gass
ing
Tub
e W
eigh
t
Mea
n T
ime
to R
emov
e Jo
int
Mea
n T
ime
to R
emov
e T
ube
Tub
e L
engt
h
Mea
n T
ime
Ass
embl
e Jo
int
Ext
erio
r Su
rfac
e O
xida
tion
Able to Transfer Power 9 9 9 9 9 9 1 3 3 1Reliability 9 9 9Able to hold Vacuum 9 3 1 9 9 1 3 1Safety 9 9 1 1 3Serviceability 3 3 3 3 9 9 3 9 3Installability 3 3 3 3 9 9 9Cosmetics 1 3 9
Technical Targets
< 0.
01"
<0.0
05"
<.01
0" p
er 2
4"
<32
mic
roin
ches
>AST
M F
68-9
3, 1
0.12
5" +
/- .0
10"
< 10
^-9
Torr
>AST
M F
68-9
3, 1
<300
lbs
< 2
hr.
< 2
hr.
20'<
leng
th<4
0'
< 10
min
utes
< 25
% a
fter
1 y
r
Raw score 81 90 81 108
81 117
198
117
117
45 36 102
63 18
Relative Weight 6% 7% 6% 9% 6% 9% 16
%
9% 9% 4% 3% 8% 5% 1%
PHASE II QFD NLC WaveguidePart Characteristics
Engineering Metrics Ph
ase
I R
elat
ive
Wei
ghts
Tub
e
Con
flat
Fla
nge-
Sta
inle
s S
teel
Con
flat
Fla
nge-
Cu
Rin
g
Bol
ts (
20/f
lang
e)
Nut
s (2
0/fl
ang)
Tube and Joint Roundness 6% 9 3Tube and Joint Concentricity 7% 3 9Tube Straightness 6% 9 3Tube Interior Surface Finish 9% 9Tube Conductivity 6% 9Wall Thickness 9% 9Joint Vacuum Limit 16% 3 9 3 3Tubing Material Diffusion Rate 9% 9Tube Weight 9% 9 3Mean Time to Remove Joint 4% 3 1 9 9Mean Time to Remove Tube 3% 3 1 9 9Tube Length 8% 9 3 3 3 3Mean Time Assemble Joint 5% 3 1 9 9Exterior Surface Oxidation 1% 9 1 1 1
Raw score 6.0
2.4
1.8
1.8
1.8
Relative Weight 44%
17%
13%
13%
13%
QFD Cost - Worth Diagram(based on 5 meter tube sections)
Flange - Stainless Steel
Nuts
Tube
Flange - CopperBolts
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Relative Worth
Re
lati
ve
Co
st
Fish Bone Diagram
Finished Assembly
Dry @ 150 degrees C
Assemble 20 nuts
High Temperature, High Purity Water Rinse
Cyanide Dip & Water Rinse
50% Hydrochloric Acid & Water Rinse
Bright Dip & Water Rinse
Alcohol Dip & Water Rinse
Emulsion & Water Rinse
Braze Conflat Flange (x2)
Cusil Weld Conflat Flange (x2)
Tube Section ~(20-40 ft)
F
Legend
Screw Down/Rotate
Weld
Braze
Insert Down
Insert Side
FixtureFF
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
Blow with Nitrogen
Transport to Site
Insert Copper Ring
Insert bolts (x20)
Fish Bone Diagram
Finished Assembly
Dry @ 150 degrees C
Assemble 20 nuts
High Temperature, High Purity Water Rinse
Cyanide Dip & Water Rinse
50% Hydrochloric Acid & Water Rinse
Bright Dip & Water Rinse
Alcohol Dip & Water Rinse
Emulsion & Water Rinse
Braze Conflat Flange (x2)
Cusil Weld Conflat Flange (x2)
Tube Section ~(20-40 ft)
F
Legend
Screw Down/Rotate
Weld
Braze
Insert Down
Insert Side
FixtureFF
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
Blow with Nitrogen
Transport to Site
Insert Copper Ring
Insert bolts (x20)
Failure Modes & System Name: NLC Waveguide FMEA Number: 1
Effects Analysis Major Function: Transport Microwave Power Page: 7
Prepared By: SLAC-B Team Date: 2/27/00
Function or Requirement
Potential Failure Modes
Potential Causes of Failure
Occ
urre
nce
Local EffectsEnd Effects on Product, User, Other Systems S
ever
ity Detection Method/ Current Controls
Det
ectio
n
RPN
Actions Recommended to Reduce RPN
Responsibility and Target Completion
Date
Conductive Low Conductivity Impure Material 3 Power LossIncreased Power Requirements 3
Monitoring System Outputs 1 9
Poor Material Selection 1 Power Loss
Increased Power Requirements 3
Monitor System Outputs 1 3
Provide Vacuum
Clean of Gases Oxides PresentSystem Opens to Air 3
Pressure too high
System Shutdown 3 Pressure Gauges 1 9
Slow Installation Process 9
Extended time to form vacuum Delay in start-up 3 Pressure Gauges 1 27
Bad Material Selection 1
Vacuum won't form Project Failure 9 Pressure Gauges 1 9
Virtual Leak 3
Extended time to form vacuum Delay in start-up 3 Pressure Gauges 1 9
Clean of SolidDust / Particles Present
Bad Cleaning or Installation Process 3
Di-electric break down System damage 9
Monitoring System Outputs 1 27
Dirty Manufacturing Process 9
Di-electric break down System damage 9
Monitoring System Outputs 1 81
Geometry
Straight Not Straight Mfg. Process 1 Power LossIncreased Power Requirements 3
Supplier quality control 3 9
Joining 3 Power LossIncreased Power Requirements 3 Visual Inspection 9 81
Installation 3 Power LossIncreased Power Requirements 3
Laser levels during installation 1 9
Transit 3 Power LossIncreased Power Requirements 3
Checked during installation 1 9
Support Structure 1 Power LossIncreased Power Requirements 3
Monitor System Outputs 3 9
Concentric Not Concentric Processing 1 Power LossIncreased Power Requirements 3
Supplier Quality Control 3 9
Joining 3 Power LossIncreased Power Requirements 3
Monitor System Outputs 9 81
Transportation 1 Power LossIncreased Power Requirements 3
Monitor System Outputs 9 27
Strong Not Strong Material Choice 1
Increased chance of local deformation
Increased Power Requirements 3 none 9 27
Thickness of Pipe 1
Increased chance of local deformation
Increased Power Requirements 3 none 9 27
Weak Joints 1
Increased chance of local deformation
Increased Power Requirements 3 none 9 27
Smooth I.D. Not Smooth Processing 3 Power LossIncreased Power Requirements 3
Supplier Quality Control 3 27
Joints 3 Power LossIncreased Power Requirements 3
Monitor System Outputs 9 81
Transportation 1 Power LossIncreased Power Requirements 3
Monitor System Outputs 9 27
1.5 Pareto Chart
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Dirty
Manuf
actu
ring
Proc
ess
Conce
ntric
Joini
ng
Slow In
stall
ation
Pro
cess
Tran
spor
tatio
n
Thick
ness
of P
ipe
Proc
essin
g
Expe
nsive
Joint
s
Difficu
lt to
Tran
spor
t
Perm
anen
t Join
ts
Impu
re M
ater
ial
Bad M
ater
ial S
elect
ion
Mfg. P
roce
ss
Tran
sit
Proc
essin
g
Expe
nsive
Mat
erial
s
Exte
rior D
irt
Messy
Loo
king
RPN
Ca
us
e
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
Cu
mm
ula
tiv
e %
RPN
Cum Tot.
217B-Product Specification
–Generate Concepts•Morphological Analysis•Brainstorm•Pugh Analysis
–Evaluate Options•Design of Experiments•Poka Yoke-Mistake proofing•Motorola Six Sigma•Design for Ergonomics•Scorecarding•Cost Modeling (competitive analysis)
Morphological Analysis
Design Recommendations
• Tube Material– Alternatives– Selection
• Tube Geometry/Parameters
• Joint Design
• Tube Segment Length
• Cleaning
Tube Material Alternatives
• Copper– Low Electrical Resistivity (1.7 x10-6Ohm-cm)– Good Outgassing Properties (1 x 10-13 Torr-l/s/cm2)– Can be Cusil-welded to Stainless Steel– Traditional Choice (Class 1 Used for NLCTA)
• Class 1 used; could consider Class 2 because no oven braze)
– Dense & Expensive
• Composite Coated Steel– Steel is cheap (but not stainless)– Coating is expensive & not 100% coverage. Chemical Tank
Pump
FLOW
Copper Wire Inside (+) Steel Tube (-)
Sealed ends
Chemical Tank
Pump
FLOW
Copper Wire Inside (+) Steel Tube (-)
Sealed ends
Tube Material Selected• 6061-T6 Aluminum
– Good Electrical Conductivity (~51% less than Cu)• Can be made up for with larger diameter
– Comparable Outgassing to Cu. (1 x 10-13 Torr-l/s/cm2)– Slightly more strength, less than 1/3 density of Cu
• Aids in Handling
– Approximately ½ cost per lb. than Cu
– Cannot be easily joined to Stainless Steel Flanges, but Stainless Steel Flanges no longer required due to less stringent vacuum requirement. (10-7 Torr)
Tube Geometry/Parameters• Nominal Thickness: 0.125”
– Wrench Drop Test– Pressure Deformation (.0002”)– Electrical Conductivity– Stiffness
• Nominal ID: 5.1” (vs. 4.75” Cu)– Matches power loss of baseline Cu tube.– Improves fluidic conductivity, C
( D3), which offsets increased outgassing surface area, B ( D2), so reduces spacing required between pumps.
Vacuum Pump
P0 PL P0 PL P0
L L L L
LP LP
Vacuum Pump
Vacuum Pump
CSqB
PL
L
p
LP
2112
Patm=101.3 KPa
Pinternal=~0 KPa
Dt
Patm=101.3 KPa
Pinternal=~0 KPa
Dt
Patm=101.3 KPa
Pinternal=~0 KPa
Dt
Tube Geometry/Parameters (cont.)• Other Tolerances: Taguchi! (at NLCTA)
– Also gives opportunity to try Al.
SLAC NLCTA Spec Standard Extrusion Standard DrawnCircularity (Deviation from mean diameter) +/- 0.005" +/- 0.050" +/- 0.016"
Surface Finish 32 microinch RMS 0.003" max 0.005" maxStraightness .010" per 24" .010" per 24" .010" per 24"
Thickness +/- 0.010" +/- 0.0125" +/- 0.006"
Dimensions for 5.1" ID tubing1
Trial Number Vacuum Circularity Surface Finish
1 10-6 Torr 0.005” 32 -inches RMS
2 10-6 Torr .016” 125 -inches RMS
3 10-8 Torr 0.005” 125 -inches RMS
4 10-8 Torr .016” 32 -inches RMS
Taguchi L4 Array
1Standards per the Aluminum Association, Inc.
Joint Design • “Quick Flange” w/o-ring
– Off the shelf– Precisely Locates– Rated to 10-7 Torr vacuum
• Up to 10-9 w/viton & bake-outor perhaps metal o-rings
– One Fastener– Tolerates Radiation
• 1 x 105 rad/10 yr = ~800 yr. life
• Form Flange ends into Al tube– Minimize risk w/proven geometry– Minimize cost w/integration
Tubes: Make vs. Buy• If made on-sight, could enable “infinite” length, but
distance between pumps & handling reasons make this impractical.
• Want to outsource1 when– There is a resource limitation.– The requirements are temporary.– There is a push to adopt the best practices from experts in
the given field.– There is a drive to reduce time to market.– There is a drive to improve financial performance.
• Nearly all apply!
1Per Carol Nast, outsourcing expert in medical devices
Tube Segment Length
• 40 ft. long sections– Max Shippable by standard means– Manufacturable– 96.2 lb. per segment- easy to handle– Strength: 1.5 g bump = ~26% of yield- OK!
R
F2 F2
F1
L
Dt
R
F2 F2
F1
L
Dt
Cleaning• Flow Cleaning Agents through ID rather
than bathe tubes.– Only uses expensive cleaning agents on ID
where needed.– Minimizes Evaporative Losses– Ensures even cleaning
Chemical Tank
Pump
FLOW
Sealed ends
Scorecard• Project Objective: Project Approval• Objective Measures:
– Cost– Performance (Efficiency, Reliability)
• Control Factors:– Tube specifications– Joint type
• Noise Factors:– Variability in manufacturing process– Interaction with other components (radiation, heat)
• Transfer Function:– To be determined by Taguchi DOE & cost models
Implementation Process
12.2 meters
Aluminum Drill hole Extrude Post- Draw Form & MachinePlug Ends
Ship segments Clean Segments
12.2 meters
Fill w/Nitrogen & plug ends, Join segments in tunnel,Transport to tunnel Perform QA
12.2 meters
Aluminum Drill hole Extrude Post- Draw Form & MachinePlug Ends
Ship segments Clean Segments
12.2 meters12.2 meters
Fill w/Nitrogen & plug ends, Join segments in tunnel,Transport to tunnel Perform QA
Implementation Process
• Extrusion
• Drawing
Competitive Analysis• Alternatives designed for same performance
• Main differentiator is Cost
NLCTA
Cu Tube w/ Quickflange
(incorporating endform)
Al Tube w/ Quickflange
(incorporating endforming)
Steel Tube w/ Cu & Quickflange (incorporating endforming)
Material Cost $7,701,987 $7,701,987 $2,860,489 $5,861,055
Tube Mfg. Costs $1,955,307 $1,955,307 $1,955,307 $1,955,307
Joint Component Costs $6,834,467 $2,323,162 $2,323,162 $2,323,162
Joint Assembly Costs $243,936 $7,519 $7,519 $7,519
Plating Costs
$ - $ - $ - $10,372,951
Cleaning Costs $8,784,800 $6,839,098 $6,839,098 $6,840,060
Total Cost: $25,520,497 $18,827,073 $13,985,575 $27,360,054
Cost Differentiators
• Material Choice
• Joint Choice
Material2' X 5" Round
Cost/ cu.in.
Tube I.D.
Waveguide Vol. (cu.in.)
Total Mat'l Cost
Expected Mat'l Cost (at 40% discount)
Copper $456 $0.97 4.75" 13,265,107 $12,836,644 $7,701,987 Aluminum $158 $0.34 5.1" 14,218,554 $4,767,481 $2,860,489 Stainless $347 $0.74 4.75" 13,265,107 $9,768,425 $5,861,055
Quick Flange Costs $129.16Conflat Costs $182.81 38,720 $7,078,403
18,045Total Flange Costs
$2,330,632
# of Joints with 40' Al sections or 5-meter Cu
sections & pumps every 160'
Cost Differentiators
• Plating and Cleaning
Cleaning Chemicals
Cleaning Labor
Cleaning Hardware
Plating Material
Plating Labor
Plating Hardware Total Cost
Copper w/ Conflat $42,736 $7,742,064 $1,000,000 $ - $ - $ - $8,784,800 Copper w/ Quick Flange $32,060 $5,808,000 $1,000,000 $ - $ - $ - $6,840,060 Aluminum $31,098 $5,808,000 $1,000,000 $ - $ - $ - $6,839,098 Steel $32,060 $5,808,000 $1,000,000 $80,151 $9,292,800 $1,000,000 $17,213,011
Summary of Cost Improvements
Cost Breakdown: Baseline NLCTA vs. Proposed Design
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Alum
inum
NLCT
A
Alum
inum
NLCT
A
Alum
inum
NLCT
A
Alum
inum
NLCT
A
Tube Joint Cleaning Total
Cost
($ M
illion
s)
Labor
Hardware/Raw Material
• 45% Savings!
Risks
• True Vacuum Requirements
• Reliability of Aluminum
• Packaging Requirements of Aluminum
• Pump Cost vs. Seal Savings
• Waveguide Assembly and Service
Questions?