From: Hutch Neilson
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 12:00 AM
To: Hutch Neilson; Bradley E. Nelson; Jim Lyon; Lawrence E. Dudek; Mike Williams; Michael C. Zarnstorff; Phil Heitzenroeder; Wayne T. Reiersen; Ronald L. Strykowsky; Mike Cole
Subject: Summary of NCSX SIT Meeting of 6/19/06

Attachments: SC Recommendations Log.doc
Summary of NCSX System Integration Team (SIT) Meeting of Monday, June 19, 2006

1.   Safety items

• Need to follow up on recommendations of recent ACC review of FPA stage 1. Tour safety: Hutch.  Lighting and trip hazards: Larry.
• Results of ISM Re-verification Review, June 12-16.  Generally positive outcome, complimentary of NCSX.  Issues for us were identified in the areas of confined space permits (paperwork issues and control of energy sources) and JHAs (PPE requirements spelled out?  Change control?).  Immediate actions (Larry following up):
  
  • Crew meetings this week to review permit use and PPE requirements.
  • NCSX permits (including but not limited to confined space) being reviewed by A. Langella.
  • Is there a weakness in LOTO procedures that allows an energy source to be restored while a confined-space permit is still open?
  • JHA change control still needs to be addressed.
    

2.  Management Items

• Recent Lehman review.
  
  • Please attached review recommendations log. Still some outstanding questions.
  • ECP-045 was approved, with some changes from the plan presented at the review.
    
• May cost performance report had incremental CPI>1 due to a change in budgeting strategy.  Wayne bring cost performance report postings up to date on the Engineering web.
• Discussion and current assessment of proposed new work currently not in the budget (or under-budgeted).
  
  • Third coil winding fixture.  Likely to be needed in a few months to recover or accelerate coil winding schedule. Immediate actions (Larry to follow up):  determine whether any design changes are needed, or can we just duplicate the existing design?  What are the long-lead items?  Can the parts be procured instead of built in house? Hutch and Ron to identify source term for funds (e.g., end-of-year procurement accruals).
  • Additional cold testing beyond C1:  decide after detailed review of C1 test results.  Next window is expected to be ~January, 2007 when NSTX starts its FY-07 run.  Well before the next Lehman review (nominally November) we need to decide what we’re doing.  Those in attendance did not immediately see a compelling case for additional cold testing, given the project’s tight budget.
  • Flux loops on the MC shell:  Would likely be installed on the inside surface of the MC shell near the peaks of low-order eigenmodes. These tend to be in the wing region.  They might span multiple shell sectors, in which case they would logically be installed on 3-coil subassemblies. While there is a programmatic benefit (constraining the more important eddy current eigenmodes in magnetic loops data analysis), there are cost risks to the MIE project. The vacuum vessel flux loops have cost much more than originally budgeted, and continue to run large variances. There is impact on other work packages (WBS 14, 18, 82).  It is assumed that the MC flux loops would have similar engineering requirements.  Does the programmatic benefit justify accepting the cost risk given the project’s tight finances?  Decide soon (after Mike Z returns from travel).
  • Trim coils on the MC shell:  the MC shell is potentially an attractive place to mount trim coils to compensate field errors with m > 2 or 3.  They would have to be installed during FPA, probably before the TF coils go on. They cannot be retro-fit after the machine is built.  However, there is no budget for them.  Recent incremental budget proposals for research prep have not identified this as a priority, so it may be a non-issue. (Mike Z. to comment)
  • Magnetic alignment:  Method proposed by Mike Z. has been documented in an EPS paper. The benefit is that it can reduce the risk of uncorrectable field errors in the finished machine due to assembly errors caused by uncertain knowledge of the current center location.  The risk is the uncertain cost and schedule impacts on the project due to the developmental nature of the method.  There is no time or budget for an R&D program that appears to be needed to develop the technique.  Decide soon (after Mike Z returns from travel).
    

3.    Risks

• C1 cold testing schedule. Testing went well last week, but the temperature difference between the MCWF and winding pack was larger than desired. This may complicate comparison of test data to analysis predictions. Will likely try to further cool the winding form and continue cold testing this week, assuming NSTX returns to operation.  A meeting to review program status is scheduled for Tuesday June 20.
• C2 meggar re-test.  What voltage?  It was recommended that we adhere to the required manufacturing test voltage of 7.5 kV for C2.  Larry follow up with winding team.  Wayne follow-up with dissenters, if any.
• Magnetic loops (WBS 3) cost control issues. Variances are growing despite management direction to limit costs. Wayne follow up with Labik.
• Are we accomplishing what we planned to on FPA?  Larry says yes:  metrology, operation of fixture, flux loop installation trials.  Why did the fixture mounting plate holes not align with the Port 12 flange holes?  Larry follow up and let everyone know.
• MC shear plate tests: are they on schedule to support design needs?  Mike C. follow up.
• Completion of VV design.  Boot fit-up at the MC shell joints is the main outstanding issue, requiring additional design work.  FDR chits still have to be closed out. When will the Title II work be complete?  Mike C. follow up.
• MC winding schedule:  good progress recently in efforts to hire four new technicians.  Good applicants are being interviewed, offers are expected to go out soon.  Allowing for July 4 holiday and training requirements, expect new staff to be fully on board about mid-July. (Larry)
  

4.  Next SIT Meeting: t.b.a.

Summary by:
Hutch Neilson