DCLL TBM Cost. Applying Module 18 Logic. August 10-12, M. Ulrickson Presented at US TBM Meeting at Idaho National Laboratory

Transcription

1 DCLL TBM Cost Applying Module 18 Logic August 10-12, 2005 M. Ulrickson Presented at US TBM Meeting at Idaho National Laboratory Sandia is a multiprogram laboratory operated by Sandia Corporation, a Lockheed Martin Company, for the United States Department of Energy s National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-AC04-94AL85000.

2 Outline Costs Determined From Divertor EDA TBM Differences US ITER Cost Contingency Methodology My Estimate The WBS Structure for Mod 18 Open Issues Summary MAU 2 5/20/2003

3 Costs Determined From Divertor EDA A complete cost estimate was done for the ITER divertor (EDA) using fabrication techniques resulting from extensive R&D and testing. The cost estimate was done bottoms up by an Industry team and was very detailed. The divertor PFCs were actively cooled (CFC or W on Cu alloy on 316 LN SS) The cost of an actively cooled PFC per unit area is a good way to extrapolate cost. The cost was $300K/m 2 (escalated from 1996) MAU 3 5/20/2003

4 TBM Differences The TBM has a more complex cooling path. The TBM is He gas cooled. The TM has tighter radius bends on the plasma facing surface. There is no experience joining Be to Ferritic Steel Fabrication experience with Ferritic steel is limited My judgment is that the TBM will be X3 more expensive than the typical ITER PFC per unit area. MAU 4 5/20/2003

5 US ITER Cost Contingency Methodology The contingency to be placed on a cost estimate depends on the maturity of the design and R&D and an assessment of the project risks. Three factors are to be considered Technical risk based on the current state and level of design Cost risk based on estimating methodology Schedule risk based on the criticality to the overall project schedule The risk factors were weighted by the level of uncertainty and summed to get the contingency MAU 5 5/20/2003

6 MAU 6 5/20/2003 Technical Risk Existing Design and off the shelf hardware Minor modifications to an existing design Technical Risk Factors Risk Factor Extensive modification 3 New design, not exotic 4 New design slight difference 6 New design some R&D 8 New design advance SOA 10 New design way beyond SOA

7 Cost Risk Factors MAU 7 5/20/2003 Cost Risk Factor Off the shelf or catalog item 1 Vendor quote from draw gs 2 Vendor Quote from sketches 3 In-house estimate (exper.) 4 In-house est. (min-exper., sim. cap.) In-house est. (min. exper., no cap.) Top down (similar prog.) 10 Engineering Judgment

8 Schedule Risk Factors Schedule Risk Factor No schedule impact on any other subsystem 2 Delays completion of noncritical path subsystem 4 Delays completion of critical path subsystem 8 MAU 8 5/20/2003

9 Weighting Factors Area Condition Weight Technical Cost Design or Manufact. issues Design and Manufact. issues Material or labor uncertainties Material and labor uncertainties Schedule All MAU 9 5/20/2003

10 TBM Application Technical = 15(4); Cost = 15 (2); Schedule = 4 (1) Contingency is or 94% If the TBM is essential to meet the ITER mission and it must be installed by start of plasma operations, the schedule contingency doubles. This means that the contingency required is equal to the cost estimate! MAU 10 5/20/2003

11 My Estimate MAU 11 5/20/2003 Component Cost Estimate ($K) PFC 1500 Structure 800 SiC FCI? Auxiliary Systems 9300 He Loop 7500 PbLi loop 1800 T system? R&D (join, Be, mockups) 8200 Total ? For 10 cm frame thickness!

12 The WBS Structure for Mod 18 First Wall Administration R&D Be to Cu Joining Cu to 316 SS joining Prototype Testing Engineering Design (CDR, PDR, FDR) Title III Fabrication/procurement Spares MAU 12 5/20/2003

13 The WBS Structure for Mod 18 Shield Administration R&D Weld Development Casting Development Prototype Testing Engineering Design Title III Fabrication Assembly of FW to Shield Spares MAU 13 5/20/2003

14 Open Issues SiC flow channel inserts are complete unknowns (no R&D yet). The alternate insulator coatings are in early R&D stages and not proven with PbLi Fabrication of such complex Ferritic Steel structures is unknown. (joining, surface roughening for h c, load capacity of joints, etc.) Be to Ferritic joining is unknown (beryllide formation) QA/QC methods are unknown Size of auxiliary systems is uncertain (EM pump, He system) MAU 14 5/20/2003

15 Summary Some estimate of the cost of the DCLL TBM can be made using previous experience with PFCs for ITER. There are several key issues that require immediate R&D if the TBM must be installed on day 1 The recommended cost contingency is % of the estimated cost. The likelihood of occurrence of problems and consequence of an occurrence place the TBM in the high risk category. MAU 15 5/20/2003