LIGO-G030536-00-D Advanced LIGO: Detector Organization, Responsibilities, Authority and Decision Tree: SUS and COC Dennis Coyne, Carol Wilkinson, David.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Hiro Yamamoto at LCGT f2f ICRR on September 28 th, 2010 LIGO-G v1 LCGT-G v1 LIGO and LCGT collaboration Hiro Yamamoto / LIGO Lab Based.

Advertisements

Update on SOI’s Joint Research Program Research, Analysis and Statistics.

Advanced LIGO UK G K 1 Blade committee notes Justin Greenhalgh with Norna Robertson, Calum Torrie, Mike Plissi, Caroline Cantley LSC, March 2004.

G R LIGO Laboratory1 Advanced LIGO Research and Development David Shoemaker LHO LSC 11 November 2003.

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory1 Adv. LIGO Program Management (PM) Plans, Schedule, Costs, Team Plan, Schedule Costs Team.

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory1 Adv. LIGO Installation (INS) Plans, Schedule, Costs, Team Plan, Schedule Costs Team.

LIGO-G D partial ADVANCED LIGO1 Development Plan R&D including Design through Final Design Review »for all long lead or high risk subsystems »LIGO.

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory1 Adv. LIGO Facilities Modifications (FAC) Plans, Schedule, Costs, Team Plan, Schedule Costs Team.

Proposal for a Constitution for MICE A Plan for Discussion P Dornan G Gregoire Y Nagashima A Sessler.

LIGO- GXXXXXX-XX-X Advanced LIGO Data & Computing Material for the breakout session NSF review of the Advanced LIGO proposal Albert Lazzarini Caltech,

The Project in the Organizational Structure

LSC Meeting August ‘04 1 LIGO ADVANCED SYSTEMS TEST INTERFEROMETER (LASTI) Program Update: LSC Meeting, Hanford Dave Ottaway for the LASTI team August.

LIGO-G M LIGO R&D1 LSC Publication Policy Update LIGO Publication Policy guides collaboration on issues of authorship rights, protocols and guidelines.

LIGO-G M May 31-June 2, 2006 Input Optics (IO) Cost and Schedule Breakout Presentation NSF Review of Advanced LIGO Project David Reitze UF.

LIGO-G M Management of the LIGO Project Gary Sanders California Institute of Technology Presented to the Committee on Programs and Plans of the.

G M LIGO Laboratory1 Responses to Review Questions David Shoemaker, Peter Fritschel NSF Review of Advanced LIGO 12 June 2003.

Page 1 Fall, 2010 Regional Cross Sector Meeting Elements of an Effective Protocol.

Update on Advanced LIGO suspension design and technology development towards the quad noise prototype Caroline A. Cantley for Advanced LIGO Suspension.

ISM 5316 Week 3 Learning Objectives You should be able to: u Define and list issues and steps in Project Integration u List and describe the components.

Georgia Institute of Technology CS 4320 Fall 2003.

Robotics & Engineering Design Projective Management Chin-Sung Lin Eleanor Roosevelt High School.

Advanced LIGO Suspension Status Caroline A. Cantley Advanced LIGO Suspension Team / University of Glasgow for the GEO600 Group LSC Meeting, LLO March 2004.

LIGO-G D ETM STRUCTURAL DESIGN SUMMARY FEA OF PROPOSED ETM STRUCTURE ANSYS Workbench (ANSYS University Advanced) version 9.0 LIGO-G Z.

LIGO-G M Major International Collaboration in Advanced LIGO R&D Gary Sanders NSF Operations Review Hanford February, 2001.

LIGO-G M Management and Operation Plans/Budget Stan Whitcomb NSF Annual Review 8 November 2004 Caltech.

G M MIT LIGO David Shoemaker LIGO PAC 27 June 02.

LIGO-G M Planning and Implementation Strategy for Advanced LIGO Gary Sanders LSC Meeting Hanford, August 14, 2001.

G Advanced LIGO Coating Research Overview of Optics Handling and Cleaning Procedures Helena Armandula LSC – March 2006.

1 Feedback from the executive committee meeting Benno Willke GEO meeting, Glasgow October 2006.

LIGO-G M Summary Remarks: Management of LIGO Gary Sanders California Institute of Technology NRC Committee on Organization and Management of Research.

Advanced LIGO UK G K 1 Some recent work on blade performance Caroline Cantley, Justin Greenhalgh, Mike Plissi, Norna Robertson, Calum Torrie,

LIGO-G D LIGO R&D1 Advanced LIGO R&D Review The PSL Peter King & Rich Abbott October 8, 2002.

Update on Suspension Activities for Advanced LIGO Caroline A. Cantley University of Glasgow for the GEO600 Group LSC Meeting, Livingston, March 2003 (Technical.

LIGO-G D What can we Expect for the “Upper Limit” Run Stan Whitcomb LSC Meeting 13 August 2001 LIGO Hanford Observatory A Personal Reading of.

Copyright 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Chapter 5 The Project in the Organizational Structure.

LIGO-G Z 1 LSC Council Meeting Peter Saulson.

Prototype Quadruple Pendulum Update – Part 1 Norna Robertson and Calum Torrie University of Glasgow for the GEO 600 suspension team LSC Meeting, Hanford,

LIG O HW S LIGO-G Z1 Fused Silica Research for Advanced LIGO Alexander Ageev, Garilynn Billingsley, David Crooks, Gregg Harry, Jim Hough, Steve.

Understanding Cabling Noise in LIGO Chihyu Chen Lafayette College Mentors: Mark Barton Norna Robertson Helpful Researcher:Calum Torrie Co-SURF:Julian Freed-Brown.

LSC Meeting March ‘05 1 LIGO ADVANCED SYSTEMS TEST INTERFEROMETER (LASTI) Program Update: LSC Meeting, LLO Dave Ottaway for the LASTI team March 2006 LIGO-G Z.

Intergroup Conflict By Syed Zulkifal MA(HR)- Bradford University UK.

LIGO- G050xxx -00-D Advanced LIGO SUS Installation into BSC Chambers: Mechanical Fixtures Dennis Coyne (with input from many) G May 4 th 2005.

LIGO-G M LIGO Laboratory1 Adv. LIGO Installation (INS) Plans, Schedule, Costs, Team Plan, Schedule Costs Team.

LIGO-G M Advanced LIGO Cost, Schedule and Management Gary H Sanders NSF Review of Advanced LIGO Caltech, June 11, 2003.

LIGO-G M Overview of LIGO R&D and Planning for Advanced LIGO Detectors Gary Sanders NSF R&D Review Caltech, January 29, 2001.

Advancing Government through Collaboration, Education and Action Institute for Innovation Discussion with Shared Interest Group Vice Chairs October 14,

LIGO-G D LIGO Laboratory1 Advanced LIGO Test Mass Material Selection Status GariLynn Billingsley LSC 20 March 2003.

Americas comments on Linear Collider organization after 2012 P. Grannis, for LCSGA – Aug. 24, 2011 ILCSC GDE.

Office of Science January 28, 2008J.Blazey / SiD Workshop / SLAC1 The View from DOE Moving ForwardMoving Forward HEPAPHEPAP FY08 “in review”FY08 “in review”

G D Workshop on Optical Coating, March 20-21, The Coating Scattering and Absorption Measurements of LIGO I mirrors at Caltech Liyuan Zhang,

LIGO-G D 1 R&D Technical Review LIGO Lab October 8, 2002 Core Optics.

ESS | title of presentation | 2012-xx-xx | name of presenter Roles and Responsibilities sub title.

LIGO-G D Core Optics Components (COC) Polishing Pathfinder Kickoff Advanced LIGO Project GariLynn Billingsley Caltech.

Overview of monolithic suspension work for Advanced LIGO Mariëlle van Veggel, Mark Barton, Tim Bodiya, Alan Cumming, Liam Cunningham, Giles Hammond, Gregg.

LIGO LAB R&D PROGRAM TECHNICAL REVIEW, OCT 02

Planning for Succession

LHC Science Goals & Objectives

Structure and Responsibility

Project Management BBA & MBA

PROJECT ORGANIZATION (Refer to Chapter 3).

Advanced LIGO Quad Prototype Janeen Romie LSC, March 2004

IT 440: SYSTEM INTEGRATION

S4 will be a “big” Collaboration:

The Project in the Organizational Structure

Stan Whitcomb LSC meeting Livingston 21 March 2005

Risk Management Process (Revised)

Management of the Advanced LIGO Seismic Isolation System Development

Advanced R&D Lab Review

The Project in the Organizational Structure

Preliminary Project Execution Plan

Presentation transcript:

LIGO-G D Advanced LIGO: Detector Organization, Responsibilities, Authority and Decision Tree: SUS and COC Dennis Coyne, Carol Wilkinson, David Shoemaker Suspension Caltech, 14 Oct 2003

LIGO-G D LIGO Laboratory 2 Organization Advanced LIGO Detector organization »NSF AdvL Proposal Review Meeting (pg. 12 of G ) »Revisions/clarifications for SUS & COC in this presentation »Input to a pending Adv. LIGO Project Plan

LIGO-G D LIGO Laboratory 3 Organization

LIGO-G D LIGO Laboratory 4 Subsystem “Lead” Personnel

LIGO-G D LIGO Laboratory 5 Subsystem “Lead” Personnel (continued)

LIGO-G D LIGO Laboratory 6 SUS Unique in that the overall scope is shared between the LIGO Laboratory and the UK Team » Significant interfaces » Efficiently share (precious and limited) expertise » Effectively perform technology transfer from the UK to US » Maximize commonality of design and parts » Organizational structure reflects this separation of scope within the SUS program Overall SUS Project » Single SUS Leader (Dennis Coyne, acting) who manages the entire SUS project » Single SUS Cognizant Scientist (Norna Robertson) who oversees the science aspects of the entire SUS project » SUS Cognizant Scientist reports to, and is directed by, the SUS Leader

LIGO-G D LIGO Laboratory 7 SUS (continued) In-Lab (SUS/US) Project »SUS/US Leader is Janeen Romie »Reports to SUS Leader (Dennis Coyne) »Supported by: –SUS/US Cognizant Scientist (Mark Barton) –SUS/US Cognizant Engineer (Calum Torrie) SUS/UK Project: »SUS/UK Overall Project Manager (and formal interface point of contact for US) is Justin Greenhalgh »Reports to SUS Leader (Dennis Coyne) »Supported by: –SUS/UK/UG Project Manager (Caroline Cantley) –SUS/UK/UB Project Manager (Chris Castelli) –UK Science Personnel (Jim Hough, Ken Strain, Mike Cruise)

LIGO-G D LIGO Laboratory 8 SUS Decision Tree Decisions beyond the SUS Scope are referred to the Systems Engineer (Dennis Coyne) Decisions within SUS, but effecting both US and UK projects are made by the SUS Leader (Dennis Coyne) or the SUS Cognizant Scientist (Norna Robertson) » Technical interchange will occur freely at all levels between the US and UK efforts » Decisions of any significance which could impact either group must be handled by agreement between the SUS/US Leader (Janeen Romie) and the SUS/UK Leader ("Project Manager”), Justin Greenhalgh » In the event that there is an impasse between the SUS/US and SUS/UK efforts, then the overall SUS Leader (Dennis Coyne) will make the decision Decisions within the scope of either US or UK Project are made by the appropriate “lead” personnel In the case of impasse, or conflict, the decision is referred to the next highest authority in the organizational chart » For example, if there is a disagreement between the SUS/US Leader and the SUS/UK Leader, the issue is brought to the SUS Leader for resolution » Similarly if there is a disagreement between the SUS Leader and the SUS Cognizant Scientist, then the matter is brought to the Adv. LIGO Project Manager for resolution

LIGO-G D LIGO Laboratory 9 SUS Decision Tree

LIGO-G D LIGO Laboratory 10 SUS Decision Tree (concluded)

LIGO-G D LIGO Laboratory 11 COC Overall COC Project: »COC Leader (GariLynn Billingsley) »Reports to AdvL Project Manager (Carol Wilkinson) »Supported by COC Cognizant Scientist (Bill Kells) COA/Coatings »Due to technical challenges associated with high performance optical coating development, this aspect of the COC Project has it’s own COC/Coatings Leader (Helena Armandula) »The COC/Coatings Leader (Helena Armandula) reports to the COC Leader (GariLynn Billingsley) »The COC/Coatings Leader is supported by the COC/Coatings Cognizant Scientist (Gregg Harry) Since virtually all of the engineering for COC is contracted outside of the LIGO Lab, there are no assigned Cognizant Engineers » The responsibilities generally performed by a cognizant engineer falls to the two Leaders (GariLynn and Helena)

LIGO-G D LIGO Laboratory 12 COC Decision Tree

LIGO-G D LIGO Laboratory 13 COC Decision Tree (concluded)