U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL Introduction Howard Gordon.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
US CMS DOE/NSF Review: May 8-10, US CMS Cost & Schedule Mark Reichanadter US CMS Project Engineer DOE/NSF Review 8 May 2001.
Advertisements

ALICE © | RRB | 17 April 2013 | Catherine Decosse 24 th meeting of the ALICE Resources Review Board CERN-RRB
DOE/NSF U.S. CMS Operations Program Review Closeout Report Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory March 10, 2015 Anadi Canepa, TRIUMF Anna Goussiou, University.
Fermilab E906 Schedule Paul E. Reimer 20 June 2008.
Cost, Schedule & Funding Closeout Jan Joint DOE/NSF CD2/3a Review 1 DOE/NSF Review of the Dark Energy Survey (DES) Project SC 6/7 Cost, Schedule.
February 2002 Scope and Contingency; Transition to the Research Phase William J. Willis Columbia University.
1 Operating, Maintaining, and Upgrading the LHC Detectors Sally Seidel University of New Mexico National Science Foundation February 21, 2003.
NuMI Offaxis Costs and Whither Next Stanley Wojcicki Stanford University Cambridge Offaxis workshop January 12, 2004.
Accelerator Complex Controls Renovation, LHC Excluded Purpose and Scope M.Vanden Eynden on behalf of the AB/CO Group.
October 24, 2000Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C Matthias Kasemann1 US CMS Software and Computing Milestones and Funding Profiles Matthias Kasemann Fermilab.
12 Dec 2005 J. Schukraft1 ALICE USA ALICE position towards US participation EU participation in emcal Requirements Formal steps & schedule.
U.S. ATLAS Executive Meeting Upgrade R&D August 3, 2005Toronto, Canada A. Seiden UC Santa Cruz.
S L H C – P P Management Tools Kick-off Meeting April 8 th, 2008 Mar CAPEANS CERN This project has received funding from the European.
M. Gilchriese ATLAS Upgrade Introduction January 2008.
ATLAS Endcap Muon System WBS 3.5 Frank Taylor MIT M&O Request FY06 Toronto August 3, 2005 V1.1.
1 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES NSLS-II Project Baseline Jim Yeck NSLS-II Deputy Project Director NSLS-II PAC Meeting November 20, 2007.
DOE/NSF Review of the U.S. ATLAS Construction Project June 3-4, 2002 WBS 1.1 Silicon Subsystem Abe Seiden UC Santa Cruz.
Slide 1 6-Nov-98PHOBOS Review: Cost & Schedule Cost & Schedule S. Steadman, MIT PHOBOS Cost & Schedule Review Technical Advisory Committee BNL November.
Draft Collaboration Model for HLLHC-DS HLLHC-DS Meeting 20th July 2010.
Barrel Endcap The RPC System Baseline Six stations in the Barrel Four station in the Endcap up to  = 2.1 Baseline Six stations in the Barrel Four station.
January LEReC Review 12 – 13 January 2015 Low Energy RHIC electron Cooling Kerry Mirabella Cost, Schedule, Personnel.
John Peoples for the DES Collaboration BIRP Review August 12, 2004 Tucson1 DES Management  Survey Organization  Survey Deliverables  Proposed funding.
Concluding Summary WBS1.1.2 SCT Subsystem A. Seiden BNL March 2001.
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999 U.S. ATLAS Progress 1. Pictures of equipment constructed in the six detector subsystems in U.S. ATLAS. 2. Current issues:  Rate.
CERN, Main challenges for the ATLAS upgrade project in the coming year.
International Accelerator Facility for Beams of Ions and Antiprotons at Darmstadt CBM Collaboration meeting Status Interim MoU J. Eschke, GSI.
Lab Coordination Meeting 9/25/13Introduction – G. Sabbi 1 Magnet Development Plan Update Overview GianLuca Sabbi LARP Lab Coordination Meeting September.
U.S. Deliverables Cost and Schedule Summary M. G. D. Gilchriese U.S. ATLAS Review Revised Version November 29, 2000.
M&O status and program for ATLAS LAr calorimeter R Stroynowski (on vacations)
G. Martellotti1CSN1 14 / 10 / 2002 LHCb Category A M&O status for 2002 and estimate for 2003 Report on Common Fund and CORE expenses for RRB Ott.
Draft Budget for M&O 2007 A. Petrilli, RRB-23, October 24, 2006 CERN-RRB Cf. CERN-RRB
Lab Coordination Meeting 3/21/13LHC IR Quadrupole Plan – G. Sabbi 1 LARP Magnet Systems Plan GianLuca Sabbi Lab Coordination Meeting March 21, 2013.
ATLAS Heavy Ions Executive Summary: Challenged by DOE in 9/2005 to:  Firm up our plans (needs matched to concrete resources).  Get personnel commitments.
U.S. Deliverables Cost and Schedule Summary M. G. D. Gilchriese Revised Version December 18, 2000.
Status of ATLAS Resources Presentation to RRB Markus Nordberg ATLAS Resources Coordination CERN-RRB
January LEReC Review 12 – 13 January 2015 Low Energy RHIC electron Cooling Kerry Mirabella Cost, Schedule, Personnel.
LIGO-G M Organization and Budget Gary Sanders NSF Operations Review Caltech, February 26, 2001.
Main priorities for the next years. Where do we stand Muon system in good shape (in my opinion) – Sub-systems hardware quite robust (see later for main.
J. Strait Fermilab 16 October 2006 Consideration on LHC upgrade from A US perspective.
IBL - Opening G. Darbo - INFN / Genova AW, 25 February 2009 o IBL Introduction & Project Organization ATLAS Upgrade Week CERN, 25 February 2009 Session:
Mark McKinnon NSF Mid-Project Review May 11-12, Baseline Project Definition Mark McKinnon Project Manager.
DoE Review June 6, 2000 Cost Estimate  New Cost Estimate u Manpower Costs (Op. SWF) u Equipment Costs (Eq. M&S) u Contingency  Conclusions Mike Tuts.
LHC CMS Upgrade Project CD-1 Alternative Selection and Cost Range Steve Webster Federal Project Director August 26, 2013 CD-1 Executive Session.
1 Global Design Effort: Controls & LLRF Controls & LLRF Working Group: Tuesday Session (29 May 07) John Carwardine Kay Rehlich.
AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 24 Mar 2005 AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting 24 Mar 2005 Useful Links: RSVP Project : C-AD.
MICE Funding Update (U.S.) Michael S. Zisman Deputy Spokesmouse Center for Beam Physics Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory CMPB Meeting August 1, 2007.
Status of ATLAS Resources Presentation to RRB Markus Nordberg ATLAS Resources Coordination CERN-RRB
ATLAS Pixel Detector September 2002 N. Hartman LBNL 1 Pixel Support Tube: Cost and Production Schedule September 2002.
U.S. ATLAS Executive Meeting Silicon M&OWBS 3.1 August 3, 2005Toronto, Canada A. Seiden UC Santa Cruz.
RRB scrutiny Report: Muons. Internal scrutiny group for RRB report Internal scrutiny group composition – J. Shank, G. Mikenberg, F. Taylor, H. Kroha,
Executive Committee, Toronto August 3, 2005 TRT Barrel WBS 1.2/3.2 Harold Ogren Indiana University.
MUON Project Overview Action Items from September meeting New Action Items Update to the List of Worries Update of plans for the next 6 months.
Status of Contributions, Draft Budget Request for 2005 and Outlook for the Longer Term Future Martyn Davenport 8 TH October 2004 CAST FRC-D
DPS/ CMS RRB-T Core Software for CMS David Stickland for CMS Oct 01, RRB l The Core-Software and Computing was not part of the detector MoU l.
W. Smith, U. Wisconsin, Upgrade MB, Sept. 9, 2011 Proposal Reviews - 1 Upgrade Peer Review Report Wesley H. Smith U. Wisconsin CMS Upgrade Peer Review.
Technical Board Summary Alan Bross MICE CM17 CERN February 25, 2007.
NSW Electronics Preliminary Design Review Feb 2015 Introduction and Review Scope Feb 2015 NSW ELTX PDR S. Zimmermann 1 Stephanie Zimmermann.
Executive Committee Howard Gordon August 3, 2005.
Status of ATLAS Resources Presentation to RRB Markus Nordberg ATLAS Resources Coordination CERN-RRB
Chapter 3 Project Management Parts of this presentation is extracted from Ian Sommerville’s slides located at
LARP Crab Cavities Cryomodule Integration Meeting Final Notes A.Ratti LBNL.
Large Synoptic Survey Telescope
Completion and Pre-Exploitation Costs for the Initial ATLAS Detector
MICE Project in the US: Completion of Efforts
Francesco Forti University and INFN, Pisa
Status of ATLAS Resources
Preparations for a Lehman Review
CMS Goal of the experiment
Mark McKinnon EVLA Project Manager
Preliminary Project Execution Plan
Presentation transcript:

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL Introduction Howard Gordon

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL Agenda  9:00 – Status of U.S. ATLAS Construction Project and Research Program – Bill Willis  9:30 - Brief discussion of goals of the meeting and financial situation. Howard Gordon  9: Silicon - Abe Seiden  11:20 - Break  11: Liquid Argon - Ryszard Stroynowski  1:00 - Lunch  1: TileCal - Larry Price  3: Muon Spectrometer - Frank Taylor  4:00 - Break (15 minutes)  5: Trigger/DAQ - with plans for baselining - Bob Blair  6:00 - Executive Session  7:00 - Dinner   Friday, March 22   9: TRT - Harold Ogren  10:30 - Technical Coordination – Howard Gordon  11:00 - Discussion of issues - Bill Willis  LHC Schedule  U.S. Share  Upgrades  12:30 Lunch  1:30 Executive Session  3:30 Closeout

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL Outline  Generally we are planning for the Construction  Completion  Operation  LHC Schedule: expect first collisions Spring 2007  At this time, we still plan to complete the Construction Project by Sept. 30, 2005  M&O starts in FY02  We are scheduled to have two reviews:  Technical, Cost and Schedule Performance and Status for DOE/NSF Review June 3-4, 2002  M&O Presentations for DOE/NSF Review April 9-11, 2002  We need your help setting priorities for the FY03-04 funding constraints and scrubbing the numbers for the M&O Review.  Shall we break up into subsystems?  Estimate to Complete 2002  BCPs - Management Contingency  Installation now part of the Project  Upgrades defined better and not part of the Research Program  Scrutiny of ATLAS M&O (A&B) and C&I (A&B)  DOE Guidance received for the Research Program  NSF Guidance requested

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL DRAFT Agenda April 9-11, Fermilab

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL ETC02 U.S. ATLAS Project – WBS Level 2 Summary

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL ETC02 U.S. ATLAS Project  Estimates based on FY 02 Dollars.  Additional BCP’s (after ETC- 02) are not included in the backup material.  ATLAS “Need Date” for U.S. ATLAS deliverables taken from the current ATLAS baseline.  Overall Contingency is being Reviewed.

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL U.S. ATLAS ETC 02 Level 4 Milestones Comparison

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL Management Contingency

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL Recent BCPs  #53 – Tile Calorimeter Pre-Assembly and Support Structure - $542.1k  Arose from ETC02 – increase in scope  Discussion with ATLAS – manpower not cost effective  Still under discussion with ATLAS management  #54 – Liquid Argon Calorimeter Cooling Plate Production - $ k  Critical and approved

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL Contingency Analysis

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL ATLAS Cavern Progress

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL

Version 5.0 of the schedule will be released soon after the new LHC schedule is official – summer 2002

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL ATLAS Plan for completion This is a staging plan by priority. ATLAS needs to borrow ~30 MCHF by the end of 2003 to make the experiment work!

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL Definitions  U.S. ATLAS Research Program includes  Maintenance and Operations (M&O) which includes:  Pre-operations and Commissioning –A limited amount of resources were available in the Detector Construction Project in trying to maximize deliverables – so some “Commissioning and Integration” will be included here  Operations: Beams-on time  Maintenance: Beams-off time  Upgrade R&D  Upgrade R&D is envisaged for the luminosity upgrade of the LHC cm -1 s -1 –New more radiation hardened electronics: LAr Front End Boards (FEB), LAr ROD upgrade, Silicon Strips, Pixels, etc.  Some upgrades add physics capability to the initial detector: 3 rd layer of pixels, EE MDT chambers, Cryostat scintillators  A focused NSF proposal is being prepared to include the EE MDT chambers ~80 including their electronics, alignment and all Chamber Service Modules (CSMs). Also the electronics for the CSC plane not in the baseline.

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL Upgrades  A DOE proposal could be made for:  The third layer of the pixels – however, we are only 20% of the international ATLAS pixel effort. If we ask for money without our Europeans doing this – it does not make sense. The third layer is part of the “deferrals.” Therefore we expect to do R&D for now.  32 CSC chambers – however, we should probably wait for the first collider run?  Cryostat scintillators - $265k – an MIE by itself?  Liquid Argon ROD upgrade ~$1M  TRT components ~1M  Worry that such items would be seen as breaking the cap  We have decided to NOT submit a DOE proposal at this time.  These items are already in the Management Contingency

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL ATLAS Planning  CERN asked each experiment to estimate M&O  ATLAS had a Working Group and produced a document which divided costs into different categories:  Category A – Common Funds Shared by the whole experiment or System  Category B – Institute (or county)  Category C – Host Lab responsibility (minimized – even excluding electric power)  In August/September a small group representing the RRB (Resource Review Board – funding agencies) “scrutinized” the M&O estimates and found and separated some costs which were called “C&I” Commissioning and Integration. The scrutinizing continues for M&O Category B, and C&I.  There is a DRAFT MOU for M&O which is being finalized for next year. Kirk and Willis will be expected to sign!  There still needs to be planning for all manpower required  Under a reorganized Technical Coordination, ATLAS has an installation schedule which all systems are trying to follow

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL Our Strategy for U.S. ATLAS  The U.S. M&O program will focus on the U.S. deliverables – we plan to support our deliverables through the C&I and M&O stages.  For ATLAS there will be requests for contributions in 2002 to "Supplementary Costs" (52 MCHF)- overruns and for M&O (22.4 MCHF ) and C&I (Commissioning and Integration) (21.1 MCHF). Our position is the following: u On the cost overruns - we are capped at $ and are trying to maximize our deliverables by adding any items that we can from the Management Contingency list. We estimate that we could have MCHF available yet for ATLAS. This will be assigned to obtain the greatest benefit for the experiment for detector elements, integration, common projects and other costs. We have set up a mechanism, the U.S. Management Contingency Steering Group, to determine how to use these funds for the best in ATLAS. Costs. u On the M&O and C&I Category A&B- we plan to contribute our share - however in FY2002-FY2004 we expect to have limited funds. Our own estimate for the U.S. share of these costs asymptotically reaches ~$11M by We note this is a large factor above the ATLAS estimate of our share due to the different accounting practices. We will certainly provide our proportionate share of these costs.

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL U.S. ATLAS M&O FTEs

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL M&O and Upgrade R&D + Computing

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL Total U.S. ATLAS Program

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL Issues and Tensions  Construction money – fixed  “Installation” is newly defined and included  Now defined to be the cost of inserting the U.S. deliverable into ATLAS  Try to maximize deliverables  Installation costs in MC need to be understood  M&O Budget guidance expected soon from the NSF  Funding our obligations for ATLAS compete with money for our M&O needs  $300k for FY02 will be available in April –30% M&O invoice 140kCHF~$85k –~$110k ABCD Spares –~$100k Tilecal Mechanical Commissioning  Will there be enough to cover the needs for pre-operations and commissioning of the U.S. deliverables? Probably not in FY03!  ATLAS will be interested and involved in our plans!

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL Issues (continued)  Management of the Research Program  Transition from Construction Project to Research Program  Tension between money for M&O and computing

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL U.S. ATLAS Computing  Facts:  DOE has given us $2.25M when $2.50 was expected for FY02  NSF has a proposal which asks for $1.762M for FY02  We have a labor dominated budget (NO hardware for FY02!)  4.5 FTEs at LBNL – Framework  3.0 FTEs at ANL – Data Management  4.5 FTEs at BNL – Tier 1  3.0 FTEs at BNL – Software – mainly Data Management  We need ~$1.7 M to fund these for the rest of the fiscal year. The shortage (~$700k) represents 6 people for ½ year!  We have stretched out the schedule based on the 2007 start by basically delaying plans for 2003->2004 etc. Same staff in 2003 as in 2002 with a modest hardware investment.  Questions:  How much and when will we get money from the NSF?

U.S. ATLAS Project Manager’s Review with the Project Advisory Panel March 21-22, BNL U.S. ATLAS Research Operation Management