# Presentation: 768792

## ILC Cost Estimating Activities“Don’t ask me what it costs, yet!”Peter H. Garbincius, Fermilab Chairman, GDE Design & Cost Board FermilabApril 12, 2005http://www-ilcdcb.fnal.gov/Fermilab_Cost Est_12april06.pdf

## Outline

- ILC Baseline Config.
- ILC RDR & schedules
- ILC GDE Organization
- Prior Cost Est. Studies
- Major Cost Drivers
- International Cost Ests.
- Contingency vs. Risk
- Cost Est. Guidelines
- Anticipated new Ests.

- U.S. Estimates/LCFoA
- What Will RDR Quote?
- WBS & Level of Detail
- Elements of Cost Model
- Basis of Estimate & Risk
- Working Model of   Construction Schedule
- Near Term Activities
- Summary

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Baseline Configuration

**500 GeV (250x250)**

**1 TeV (500x500)**

## Positron Source

- Keep Alive Source: This source would have all bunches filled to 10% of nominal intensity.

- Helical Undulator Based Positron Source
-  with Keep Alive System

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## ILC Reference Design Report (RDR)

- Will include a cost estimate for the ILC as described in the
- 	   Baseline Configuration Document (BCD)
- 		_[http://](http://www.linearcollider.org/wiki/doku.php?id=bcd:bcd_home)__[www.linearcollider.org/wiki/doku.php?id](http://www.linearcollider.org/wiki/doku.php?id=bcd:bcd_home)__[=](http://www.linearcollider.org/wiki/doku.php?id=bcd:bcd_home)__[bcd:bcd_home](http://www.linearcollider.org/wiki/doku.php?id=bcd:bcd_home)_
- Due by the end of (calendar) 2006
- Barry would like estimate to within ± 20% 	_*very*_ optimistic for this timescale!

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## RDR Schedule & Milestones

- December, 2005 – Frascati – Kick-off
- 	     preliminary instructions to groups
- March - Bangalore - instructions & status
- 	     monitor status of progress
- 		     first estimates due mid-June
- July – Vancouver – preliminary cost estimate
- 		iterate and optimize cost vs. design
- November – Valencia – “final” RDR cost est.
- end 2006 – publish Reference Design Report

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## ILC GDE Organizationsee Tor’s talk yesterday

- Director – Barry Barish        	**Executive**
- Regional Directors (3)		**Committee**
- Gang of Three **(Walker, Raubenheimer, Yokoya)**
- RDR Management Team (new)
- Cost Engineers (3)
- Change Control Board
- Research &Development Board
- Design & Cost Board

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Design Cost Board Members

- Tetsuo Shidara – KEK (Cost Engineer)
- Atsushi Enomoto – KEK
- Nobuhiro Terunuma – KEK
- Alex Mueller – ORSAY
- Jean-Pierre Delahaye – CERN
- Wilhelm Bialowons – DESY (Cost Engineer)
- Nan Phinney – SLAC
- Ewan Paterson – SLAC (Integration Scientist)
- Robert Kephart – Fermilab
- Peter Garbincius, Chairman – Fermilab (C.E.)

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## ILC GDE OrganizationGroups doing the work!

_**Area Systems Groups**_**:             e- Source, e+ Source,      Damping Rings, RTML,        Main Linac,                         Beam Delivery System**
_**Global Systems Groups**_**: Commissioning, Operations,     ****	****& Reliability,            Controls, Cryogenics, Conventional Construction, Installation, ****Integration (new)**

_**Technical System Groups**_**:**
**	****	****Cryomodules,                  ****	****SC RF Cavities,                ****	****RF Power Systems, ****	****Vacuum Systems,     ****	****Magnet Systems, ****	****Instrumentation,          ****	****Dumps & Collimators**

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Cost Roll-ups

| Technical Systems |  |  |   |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Vacuum systems |  |  |  |
| Magnet systems |  |  |  |
| Cryomodule |  |  |  |
| Cavity Package |  |  |  |
| RF Power |  |  |  |
| Instrumentation |  |  |  |
| Dumps and Collimators |  |  |  |
| Accelerator Physics |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |
| Global Systems |  |  |  |
| Commissioning, Operations & Reliability |  |  |  |
| Control System |  |  |  |
| Cryogenics |  |  |  |
| CF&S |  |  |  |
| Installation |  |  |  |

- _                      __Area  Systems       _

**    ****e-           e+       damping    RTML   main     BDS**
**source   source      rings                    linac**

**Cost Roll-ups**

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Prior Cost Estimating Studies

- for Cold, SC RF technology Linear Collider
- TESLA Technical Design Report (2001)
- KEK Evaluation of TESLA TDR
- US Evaluation of TESLA TDR (2002)
- USLCTOS (2004)
- New & Ongoing Cost Est Studies
- Revised Euro XFEL Cost Estimate (Feb 06)
- TTC Studies:  CM Assembly, Couplers, EP

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## All of these studies are Confidential

**The only numbers made public were the 8 high-level  **
**      ****roll-ups of the ****TESLA TDR**** (not incl. XFEL increments):**
**	****	****Main Linac Modules****	****	****1.131 B ****€**
**	****	****Main Linac RF System****	****	****0.587 ****B ****€**
**	****	****Tunnel & Buildings****	****	****0.547 ****B ****€**
**	****	****Machine Infrastructure****	****	****0.336 ****B ****€**
**	****	****Damping Rings****	****	****	****0.215 ****B ****€**
**	****	****Auxiliary Systems****	****	****	****0.124 ****B ****€**
**	****	****HEP Beam Delivery System****	****0.101 ****B ****€**
**	****	****Injection Systems****	****	****	**_**0.097**_** ****B ****€**
**	****	****	****Total TESLA Estimate****	****3.136 ****B ****€**

**72%**

**concentrate     on  major       cost drivers**

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## A short course in “VALUE”-speak 

- The ITER “VALUE” or “CERN CORE” methodology  is
- becoming used in international projects to equitably divide-up
- contributions among the collaborating parties, especially
- where countries are responsible for “in-kind” contributions,
- rather than providing funding to a central management team.
- 5 equal partners each contribute 20% of the total VALUE,
- independent of what it actually cost each individual party.
- VALUE is the least-common denominator among all parties
- in that it is the ***barest*** cost estimate that ***any*** of their funding
- agencies expect.  It is anticipated that individual parties will
- add those appropriate items to this bare VALUE estimate in
- order to get a meaningful estimate for what that particular
- country would normally internally charge to such a project.

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

- This prevents arguments such as,                                          “I don’t charge for internal labor, so why should your 	labor be considered as part of your contribution?”
- If each of two countries contributes identical magnets,    their VALUE contributions will be identical,                  	even if their internal costs to produce are 			substantially different.
- Countries can contract according to their national interest, e.g. lowest internal cost or develop new industries, etc. 	“finance ministers”, rather than “scientists”

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Format and Scope of European and Japanese Cost Estimates

- Different than for U.S. Cost Estimate
- Follows ITER “Value” & CERN “CORE” 	model for International Projects       	this ITER approach was reviewed by       	Dan Lehman *et al.* in July, 2002
- Does not include:  internal (institutional) labor, contingency, escalation, G&A overheads, R&D, pre-construction, and commissioning activities.

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

- Least common denominator -                     	minimizes construction cost estimate
**not the traditional U.S. definition!**
- RDR will provide information for translation into any country’s cost estimating metric, e.g. Basis of Estimate => contingency estimate, in-house labor, G&A, escalation, R&D, pre-construction, commissioning, etc.

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## No Contingency?

- No!  The European and Japanese methods assume that all the design and estimating has been done up-front, inclusively, so there will be no add-ons due to incomplete engineering or scope changes                (all homework done at this stage) and that the estimates are statistically robust so over-runs in one area will be compensated by under-runs in another.

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Contingency (2)

- At this stage of project definition,                US estimates assume that engineering and cost estimating have NOT been completed to the ultimate level of detail.
- In the US, contingency is added to cover: 	the missing level of detail,               	non-symmetric cost over/under-runs, 	and minor scope changes
- RDR cost estimate will include Risk Analysis

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## RDR Cost Estimating Guidelines

- preliminary - version 5 – 15march06 is       outlined here – full version in back-up at end
- 500 GeV (250x250) + upgrade path for 1 TeV Beam Delivery Sys. Tunnels & Beam Dumps
- construction = authorization → installation   not incl. R&D, commissioning, operations, decommissioning – but need these estimates!
- construction ends for individual item when     	installed, before commissioning begins
- working model assumes a                               		7 year construction phase

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

- based on a call for world-wide tender:                                   	lowest reasonable price for required quality
- three classes of items in cost estimate:
- Site-Specific (separate estimates for each site)      	e.g. tunnel & regional utilities (power grid, roads)
- Conventional – global capability (single world est.)
- 	  e.g. copper and steel magnets
- High Tech – cavities, cryomodules, RF power -     cost drivers – all regions want – 3 estimates
- Cost Engineers must determine algorithm to combine and present these multiple estimates

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

- Learning curve for ILC quantities   *P = P**1**N**a**     **	*need parameters or costs for different N’s
- Estimate & Prices – as of January 1, 2006: 	exchange 1 M€ = $ 1.2 M = 1.4 Oku¥     	raw materials, no taxes, no escalation
- contingency is excluded in “value” estimate  need risk analysis → prob. dist. for cost est.
- one common design and footprint                	need a common set of rules and codes     	if none available, ILC may have to define

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

- All cost estimates must be treated as    	confidential within the GDE                      	   	not to be publicly presented  		      		or posted on public web site
- GDE Executive Committee                      	will determine publication policy            			for all elements of cost estimate

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## We anticipate cost estimates to be available from: 

**TESLA TDR (2001 – high level roll-ups)**
**XFEL cost estimate (Feb 06)**
**	****	****  ****expected to be**** ****accessible for comparisons**
**current TTC studies will be too late for RDR est.**
**KEK (in-house + consultant) – Cryomodule & RF**
**	****	**** ****	****anticipate available in 3-4 months**
**LCFoA Cost Estimate for RF Units      ****	****Cryomodule, Klystron, RF Distribution, etc.   ****	****	****contract still under discussion****,                       late for initial estimate in June 06 => final Nov 06**

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

**JLab-Fermilab-SLAC (Funk-Stanek-Larsen)  ****	****in-house cost estimate study for RF unit. ****→ b****ottom-up based on US experience: **
**	****	****	****JLab, SNS, FNAL, SLAC (& TTF)**
**	****parallel check of LCFoA cost estimate study.**
**Regional 4 site-dependent cost estimates                      ****	****(CERN, DESY, Fermilab, Japan) for  ****	****	****	****Conventional Facilities**

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## What will RDR quote?

**Quote lowest reasonable world-market ****	**** ****	****value estimate for adequate quality**
**Worry about low-balling “VALUE”:**
**	****no matter we say, it will be remembered as ****	****	****	****one, single, FINAL cost number****,**
**	****all notes, caveats, fine print will be ignored**
**How to combine different estimates?**
**	****	****4 sites (4 estimates or range of ests?)**
**	****	****combine Euro, US, Japan component ests**
**	****	****	****lowest, average, divisional model?**

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Current WBS (8march06)

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## WBS Level of Detail Desired

**Would like to have estimates in lowest level ****	****presented to ~ a few x 0.1% of total ILC**
**Graded approach, put effort onto cost drivers**
**System Groups might need lower levels of WBS       ****	****in order to produce their own cost estimate**
**So far, WBS are guideline examples, intend to  ****	****be modified to meet System Group needs ****	****(received WBS for CF&S, Controls, RF Power)**
**Examples below are for Materials & Services   ****	****(not internal labor) from USLCTOS**

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Level of Detail Example (1)cryogenics_WBS_28feb06.xls (other examples in backups)

-  %

**LHC refrig. single units**

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Elements of the Cost Model

- Cost Engineers  & RDR Management Group  must determine how to select a value to be quoted for such items w/ multiple estimates
- Need estimates of most probable cost per WBS element and an indication of the anticipated probability distribution for costs.
- Median (50%), ± σ points of this distribution (or 90% point for upper limit) account for non-symmetric, high cost tail
- 	=> Risk Assignment for the cost estimate

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Elements of the Cost Model (2)

- Risk Assessment for Costs:                    	ideally, a probability distribution              			for expected costs                               	see R. Brinkmann at Snowmass 2005   			for application to Euro XFEL
- Watch out for Correlated Risks:               	labor costs, $ - ¥ - € exchange rates,                                        	price of materials (e.g. steel, copper), 	price of electricity (for RF processing), 			etc.

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Basis of Estimate

- description how cost estimate was obtained 	for each WBS element
- guide used for estimating the assigned            	level of contingency in the US
- similar to that used for assigning the                             	probability distribution for costs
- 			by XFEL for risk analysis
- example below from RSVP experiment at 			Brookhaven National Lab

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

**WBS Element #___________ Element Name _____________________________****	****          Risk**
-       **Design Risk** (check one of 4):  **(from RSVP at BNL, similar for US CMS, NCSX) ****	****          Factor****	****  Weight**
- 	__ Concept only					          15%	        1
- 	__ Conceptual Design Phase: some drawings; many sketches		            8%             1
- 	__ Preliminary Design > 50 % complete; some analysis complete		            4%             1
- 	__ Detailed Design > 50% Done				            0%             1
-       **Technical Risk** (check one of 8 and answer Yes or No to two questions):
- 	__ New design; well beyond current state-of-the art			          15%	  2 or 4
- 	__ New design of new technology; advances state-of-the art		          10%      2 or 4
- 	__ New design; requires some R&D but does not advance the state-of-the-art                   8%      2 or 4
- 	__ New design; different from established designs or existing technology                           6%      2 or 4
- 	__ New design; nothing exotic                                                                                             4%      2 or 4
- 	__ Extensive modifications to an existing design			            3%      2 or 4
- 	__ Minor modifications to an existing design             			            2%      2 or 4
- 	__ Existing design and off-the-shelf hardware			            1%      2 or 4
- 	Yes/No – does this element push the current state-of-art in Design?		                 either = 2
- 	Yes/No – does this element push the current state-of-art in Manufacturing?                            both   = 4
-       **Cost Risk** (check one of 8 and answer Yes or No to two questions):
- 	__ Engineering judgment					          15%       1 or 2
- 	__ Top-down estimate from analogous programs 			           10%      1 or 2
- 	__ In-house estimate for item with minimal experience and minimal in-house capability      8%      1 or 2
- 	__ In-house estimate for item with minimal experience but related to existing capabilities   6%      1 or 2
- 	__ In-house estimate based on previous similar experience                                                4%      1 or 2
- 	__ Vendor quote (***or industrial study***) with some design sketches                                     3%      1 or 2
- 	__ Vendor quote (***or industrial study***) with established drawings                                       2%      1 or 2
- 	__ Off-the-shelf or catalog item				             1%      1 or 2
- 	Yes/No – are the material costs in doubt?			                  either = 1
- 	Yes/No – are the labor costs in doubt? 				                  both   = 2
-       **Schedule Risk** (check one):
- 	__ Delays completion of critical path subsystem item			              8%           1
- 	__ Delays completion of non-critical path subsystem item		              4%           1
- 	__ No schedule impact on any other item                                                                              2%           1
**Prepared by: _______________________  date: _________________**
**Comments:**

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

**	****Basis of Estimate – Contingency Estimate – example**
**	****1.1.2.3  Build Framistat ****	****	**_**Category**_**	****           **_**Risk Factor**_**  **_**Weight**_**	**_**RF*Wgt**_
**	****	****      ****Design Risk: **Conceptual Design Phase: some drawings; many sketches
- 					Design Risk	    8% 	     1	    8%
**	****	****      ****Technical Risk: **New design; nothing exotic
**	****	****	****No – **does this element push the current state-of-art in Design?
**	****	****	****Yes – **does this element push the current state-of-art in Manufacturing?
- 			Technical Design **OR** Manufacture Risk 	    4%             **2**	    8%
**	****	****      ****Cost Risk:  **In-house estimate for item with minimal experience
- 				but related to existing capabilities
**	****	****	****No – **are the material costs in doubt?
**	****	****	****Yes – **are the labor costs in doubt?
- 			Material **OR** Labor Cost Risk		    6%	      **1**             6%
**	****	****     ****Schedule Risk: **Delays completion of non-critical path subsystem item
- 					Schedule Risk	    4%	      1	     _4%_
- 					**Suggested Contingency (sum) ****→**	    **26%**
**	****	****Prepared by: _______________________  date: _________________**
**	****	****Comments:**

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## XFEL:  Standard cost uncertainty categories

| Category | definition | lower/upper range |
| --- | --- | --- |
| C1 | good experience and present price for this component/sub-system are available, no cost scaling for large quantities has been applied | -10% / +10% |
| C2 | experience and present price for similar components/sub-systems are available, no or only minor scaling to large quantities has been applied | -20% / +20% |
| C3 | present price is available, significant (>25%) cost scaling to large quantities has been applied | -10% / +20% |
| C4 | present price is available, price from industrial study is used which results in significant (>25%) cost reduction for production of large quantities | -10% / +20% |
| C5 | present price not available, price from industrial study is used |  -10% / +20% |
| C6 | required technology pushes state-of-the art, significant R&D still required | -10% / +50% |
| P1 | personnel requirements well known due to present experience or with similar systems in previous large scale projects | -10% / +10% |
| P2 | personnel requirements less certain or relatively large fraction of R&D included in this WP | -20% / +20% |

- Furthermore, raw material cost uncertainties (volatility of metal and currency markets) have been added where appropriate (e.g. Niobium sheets & parts)

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## XFEL: Result of maximum risk analysis

- triangular &
- log-normal
- -10%,+20%
- cost p.d.f. for
- each element

**Reinhard:  ask for “risk” funding to cover up to 98****th**** percentile**

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Reinhard Brinkmann - XFEL

- updated XFEL cost estimate now includes:
- 		in-house manpower
- 		overhead for central services & admin.
- 		request for “risk funding”

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Sketch of Civil Construction Activities use only for sizing production capacities for components (my own view – definitely not to scale)

**Maybe 2****nd**** IR at start**

**Length of dump lines?**
**Could be TBM or Drill & Blast**

**Positron Bypass Line?**
**      ****Drill & Blast or TBM?**

**Shafts (many!)**
**TBM tunnels (8 or 10)**

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Outline of PHG Construction Schedule Modelfor generating component cost estimate

**only a working model**
**7 years – after funding authorization => t0  ****	****	****	****through installation of all components**
**need to start installation of components**
**	****	****	****while civil construction continues:**
**	****t0+30 months: e- SRC, e+ Keep-Alive, RTML arcs**
**	****t0+33 months:  DR****	****t0+47 months.:  start ML**
**	****t0+65 months:  last sec ML & BDS**
**	****t0+78 mo.:  t0+6.5 yrs.:  last components delivered**
**	****t0+84 mo.:  t0+7 yrs.:  last component installed**
**start commissioning each sub-systems as soon as its components are installed**

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## U.S.        CryoModule            & Klystron Production     Model

- Bob Kephart’s first guess at rate for 1/3 of total needed
- Ramp-up:  R&D, Industrialization, Production

- t**0**

- t**0**

- t**0**+7yrs

- t**0**+7yrs

- Purchase
- Infrastructure

**CryoModules**

**Klystrons**

**30,000 hr. avg. life**

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Near Term RDR Activities

- Refine Cost Estimating Guidelines
- “Initial Questions for Area System Groups”
- 			needs to morph into “Recipe for Developing Cost Estimates”
- 			step-by-step formula, instructions                 			for needed information
- DCB and RDR Management Team recently     	formed joint schedule and procedures        	for status discussions & milestones,	and started weekly status conferences

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Summary on RDR Cost Estimating

- Organizing (still much to do) and
- Starting (just barely) on cost estimates
- Prelim. discussion at Vancouver in July,
- 		complete estimate at Valencia in Nov
- Try for new cost estimate, esp. cost drivers:
- 	maybe for civil, less likely for Cav, CM, RF
- Planning to quote ITER-like “VALUE”,
- 		likely to be somewhat controversial in US

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## “Still, don’t ask me what it costs!” End of Presentation Backup Slides

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## RDR Cost Estimating Guidelinespreliminary	version 5	15march06-08:00 

- 	The following are preliminary guidelines for developing the RDR cost estimate. Since there are very different approaches to cost estimating in different parts of the world, it will be necessary to separately estimate construction costs, preparation and R&D, commissioning and operations. The center of mass energy is 500 GeV. Essential components for the 1 TeV option, which will be very difficult to add later, are included.
- 	These estimates will be framed in terms of a common “value” of  purchased components and total person hours of in-house labor. In general, the component cost estimate will be on the basis of a world-wide call for tender, i.e. the value of an item is the world market price if it exists. This also applies to the conventional construction and Consultant Engineering. The estimates should be based on the lowest price for the required quality.

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

- 	There are three different classes of items which must be treated somewhat differently:
**Site specific:** The costs for many aspects of conventional facilities will be site specific and there will be separate estimates for each sample site. These are driven by real considerations, e.g. different geology and landscape, availability of electrical power and cooling water, etc. Site dependant costs due to formalities (such as local codes and ordinances) are not included. Common items such as internal power distribution, water and air handling, etc., which are essentially identical across regions although the implementation details differ, can have a single estimate.
**High technology:** Items such as cavities, cryomodules, and rf power sources, where there will be interest in developing expertise in all three regions (Asia, Europe and Americas), should be estimated separately for manufacture by each region. Costs should be provided for the total number of components along with parameters to specify the cost of a partial quantity. These estimates will be combined by some algorithm to be determined later.
**Conventional**: Components which can be produced in all regions need not be estimated separately for manufacture in each region. The cost should be based on the lowest world market price.

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

- In addition to these general comments, we list some specific guidelines:
- The construction period extends from first funds authorization until the last component is installed and tested for each system. Necessary infrastructure must be estimated as part of the construction cost. Preparation and R&D costs should be estimated separately. The preparation phase includes the minimum items and activities needed to gain construction approval. Separate estimates are also needed for commissioning and beam tests and for operations.
- The component cost includes external labor, EDIA, offsite QC and technical tests. In general, the estimate is the lowest world-wide cost for required quality. A single vendor is assumed, or in some cases, two vendors for risk minimization. No costs are assumed for intellectual property rights.
- 3.	In-house labor is estimated in person-hours. Only three classes of manpower are used: engineer/scientist, technical staff, and administrative staff. Additional central staff will be needed for commissioning and operation,.

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

- For large numbers of items, learning curves should be used to scale the cost decrease with quantity. The cost improvement is defined by the following equation:				***P = P*****1*****N*****a**
- 	where ***P*** is the total price of *N* units, ***P*****1** is the first unit price and *a* is the slope of the curve related to learning [1]. The slope ***a*** is for large *N* also the ratio of the last unit price ***P*****N** and the average unit price <***P***>. This will be described in more detail in the costing instructions. The value is calculated parametrically for the assumed 7 year given construction schedule.
- Prices for raw material are world prices as of January 1, 2006,       i.e. for copper, steel and niobium, etc. Prices for electrical power   are those for the region as of January 1, 2006. Quantities should    be stated explicitly so the cost can be scaled later.
- 6.	The value unit needs to be defined. For now, one currency per region with fixed exchange rates should be used. The fixed exchange rates are:		1 M€ = 1.2 M$ = 1.4 Oku¥.No tax is included. No escalation is used. The costs should be estimated as of January 1, 2006.

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

- Contingency is for the moment explicitly excluded. In order to include it at a later stage, the technical groups should do a risk analysis, which will be used by the DCB to generate a probability distribution for the cost estimate. This will be described in more detail in the costing instructions.
- There will be one common design and footprint, except for unavoidable site-specific differences, such as shaft location. Regional options such as utilizing existing machines can be proposed as alternates for cost savings. A common set of rules, codes and laws to satisfy all regions is used as long as the cost impact is not too significant. Where not covered by existing codes, a set of ILC standards must be developed which specify cost effective solutions, e.g. the distance between personnel crossovers for the two tunnels,
- 9.	All cost estimates must be treated as confidential within the GDE (e.g. not to be publicly presented or listed on a publicly accessible web or wiki site).  The Executive Committee shall determine the publication policy for all elements of the cost estimate.

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## These are the general guidelines, still working on specific instructions

**References**
- 	[1] Department of Defense, United States of America, *Joint Industry Government Parametric Estimating Handbook*, Second Edition, Spring 1999.

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Timing Issues

- Positron bunches must be injected into empty buckets 		in the e+ damping rings
- Most flexible option is to re-inject into empty bucket  		 net positron delay by n ring turns
- Present design is off by ~2.5 km                                			 add 1.2 km insert into e+ linac  				- also need flexibility for 2 IRs
- maintains 1-1 correspondence                          			between ejected and injected e+ bunch in DR
- maximizes future flexibility in choice of bunch patterns
- cost increment  (but considered justifiable)

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Schematic of BCDplus proposed timing correction

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Level of Detail Example (2)RF_WBS_phg_1march06.xls

**Total RF**

**Major RF Items**

**Still                    >> few * 0.1%  can they be  reduced?**

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Level of Detail Example (3)cryomodule_WBS_phg_7march06.xls

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## “Cost Estimating Deliverables”from Area System Leaders to DCB

- WBS structure modifications & additions  	which Area Systems need to produce 	cost estimate at required level of detail
- WBS Dictionary (description, boundaries)
- Basis of Estimate (see above template)
- Cost Estimate per unit (with uncertainty)
- number of units required – for cost table
- institutional labor est. – in person-hours

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Logistics of WBS

- Responsibility of Area, Global, and Technical Systems Groups to provide “Cost Estimating Deliverables” to DCB 	(use an easy format for them:            			MS Word, EXCEL, text, etc.)
- Responsibility of DCB to get all that 	information into the WBS format.
- Here’s an example of how we’ll do it:

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## Example of WBS Tool Format & Info

- Notes:  with WBS Dictionary and Basis of Estimate for lowest level

- Web-link to .pdf file of complete WBS Dictionary and Basis of Est. for 1.1 Sources (and offspring)

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006

## RDR: AS, TS(0), GS(0)

- Lots of Great Information to be found here!

- Peter H. Garbincius - Fermilab

- April 12, 2006