tunnel hepap

VLHC Conventional Construction Peter H. GarbinciusHEPAP Subpanel on Long Range PlanningJune 11, 2001: 

VLHC Conventional Construction Peter H. Garbincius HEPAP Subpanel on Long Range Planning June 11, 2001

Agenda: 

Agenda Geologic Considerations & Siting Studies Tunnel, Beam Lines, Enclosures, Facilities and Experimental Areas CNA Cost & Schedule Estimating Exercise Preliminary Model of Schedule Cost Estimate ES&H Issues Specific to VLHC Design and Cost Challenges

These are NOT siting proposals: 

These are NOT siting proposals These are three models to study cost sensitivity of underground construction to various geologic conditions. Fermilab | Southwest-to-Northeast Sandwich Fermilab DesPlaines Fault | disturbance

Lampshades - ring elevations & strata: 

Lampshades - ring elevations & strata

Off-site Service Areas: 

Off-site Service Areas Again, these are NOT siting proposals

Cross section of 12 ft. finished dia. tunnel: 

Cross section of 12 ft. finished dia. tunnel also cost estimated a 16 ft. finished dia. tunnel specify < 50 gpm/mile avg. water inflow rate

Fermilab Footprint and Experimental Halls: 

Fermilab Footprint and Experimental Halls

Injection Ramps & Caverns: 

Injection Ramps & Caverns

Underground EnclosuresA/B sites mid-sites E/V sites: 

Underground Enclosures A/B sites mid-sites E/V sites

Utility Plants (on surface)A-site (Stage 1 only) Stage 2 A-&B-sitesapprox. 10 acres approx. 40 acres: 

Utility Plants (on surface) A-site (Stage 1 only) Stage 2 A-&B-sites approx. 10 acres approx. 40 acres

Schematic of Experimental Area(generic SSC Large Solenoid Detector): 

Schematic of Experimental Area (generic SSC Large Solenoid Detector)

Cost & Schedule Estimating: 

Cost & Schedule Estimating Kenny Co. (1997) - 3 TeV VLHC Booster CNA Consulting Engineers, Minneapolis Hatch-Mott-MacDonald, Toronto 3 tunnel configurations, unit cost & blocks to understand sensitivities and trade-offs Inputs: a. geology & siting - lampshades, contacts b. components - tunnel, shafts, & caverns c. unit costs - conditions, depths, contacts

Slide13: 

vary a. and/or b. => New Cost Estimate estimate does NOT include: Land Acquisition or Easements (State) Spoils Disposal (revenue neutral?)

CNA Geology, Construction, Schedule Model most varied geologic model studied complete tunnel construction in 5 years: 

CNA Geology, Construction, Schedule Model most varied geologic model studied complete tunnel construction in 5 years

Slide15: 

TBM boring finishing & utilities magnet installation Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 VLHC-I Tunnel Construction and Magnet Installation Plan

CNA Underground Construction Cost Estimate Summary, May 20, 2001: 

CNA Underground Construction Cost Estimate Summary, May 20, 2001 Item $ 1 M units North North South 12 ft diameter Inclined Flat Inclined Shafts $ 414 M $ 263 M $ 168 M Caverns (incl. 2 Exp) $ 232 $ 238 $ 243 TBM Tunnels $ 866 $ 1,058 $ 1,166 D&B Tunnels $ 36 $ 36 $ 36 Alignment Risers $ 3 $ 2 $ 2 Portals $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 Misc. (5% non-est) $ 83 $ 85 $ 86 Subtotal $ 1,636 M $ 1,685 M $ 1,703 M EDIA (17.5% external) $ 286 $ 295 $ 298 Total $ 1,922 M $ 1,980 M $ 2,001 M

Underground Construction Cost Est.: 

Underground Construction Cost Est. EDIA: (external) includes A&E and CM contractors & multiple site studies, does NOT include internal Lab EDIA CNA recommends 25-30 % contingency on underground construction, based on level of understanding specific geologic conditions ratio 16’/12’ = 1.24 (on TBM costs only ) = 1.16 (total undergrnd costs)

Other Construction Costs: 

Other Construction Costs Underground Utilities $ 144 M AC power, HVAC, Pumping, Elevators/Stairs Surface Buildings & Utilities $ 310 M Experimental Areas (not estimated) Roads (not estimated) Power from Utility (not estimated) Ground Water Discharge (not estimated)

Special ES&H Issues for VLHC: 

Special ES&H Issues for VLHC Generic ES&H Issues forNew Accelerators -J.D. Cossairt et al., FERMILAB-Conf-01/051-E Diameter of tunnel -12 feet? or larger? access, egress, install, maintain <=> COST Emergency egress every 3 miles (SSC-2.7) Minimum fire & smoke hazard auto fire suppression for special caverns sufficient O2 on vehicles (no refuges)

Special ES&H Issues continued:: 

Special ES&H Issues continued: groundwater issues, aquifers, G-P aquitard much of tunnel below piezometric surface minimize water inflow, construction & ops quality of water discharge, pH & particulate prevent contamination (conv. & radiation) and de-watering of aquifer rad: well-free zone of approx. 100 ft. radius

Special ES&H Issues continued:: 

Special ES&H Issues continued: heat rejection, mainly Stage 2 Cryo plants air-cooling towers or cooling ponds (1 acre per MWatt) optimal aesthetic/community choices spoils/muck disposal (commercial value?) impact on communities, especially during construction, return areas back in an environmentally acceptable condition

Engineering/Design Challenges goal => reduce COST: 

Engineering/Design Challenges goal => reduce COST simplify underground construction initiate R&D on tunneling methodologies optimize strategy for TBM utilization is there enough space for full Stage 2 functionality, e.g. abort? optimize size for experiment caverns engineering & physics optimize roof spans optimize deep equipment installation shafts different beam heights for Stage 1 and 2