MICE Status (with a UK slant) Paul Drumm, MICE Collaboration UK-NF June 2003

Proposal Status International Peer Review of Proposal –Jan 2003 Interrogation & homework –May 2003 Blondel, Drumm & Long –Report out ? –Strong Endorsement …. –…equates to Scientific Approval –…some advice to RAL

Management Issues RAL Management interface to MICE Local Technical Team Leaders Understand Costs –Independent Review –effort requirements e.g. during installation –capital costs –common fund discussion Constitution under discussion

Proposal Status & UK Funding PPARC/PPRP review of UK Proposal –May 2003 – accepted science case there is an understanding of the importance of MICE both internationally and of the importance & strength of the UK contributions Strenuous discussions are taking place…

UK Funding for the remainder of 2003/4 –there is a minimal programme of work to avoid loss of rôle (intellectual leadership) and to avoid further delays to the MICE programme pparc/pprp & cclrc have to find funds to enable this years work to take place Referees – (Willke, Froudivaux, Brook) –to scrutinise work plans for 2003/4 –expect an answer before end of June (PPRP next week?)

2004/…. OST budget line to be bid for in collaboration with PPARC & CCLRC in 2004/….  Gateway Total UK Cost estimate is £21.7M indications are that £7.5M is available through OST £10M may be a realistic target for OST/PPARC other sources of funding need to be accessed

scenarios… £7.5M –not enough for beam line £10.0M –gets beam line – ~no UK involvement in MICE £12.5M –involvement suffers £15.0M –can achieve all goals if £21.7M Risks associated with Solenoid taken by PSI Cryogenic infrastructure shared with MICE RF contribution taken in kind This is preferred option of JPB

Gateway Process Gateway 0 – Strategic Assessment: Assessment of business need; Assessment of risk; initiation of an independent review team; review of the objectives and planned delivery; review of management structure and resource plans; Gateway 1 – Business Justification: Assessment of the business case for MICE; review of risk management plans; review delivery plans; Gateway 2 – Procurement Strategy: confirm procurement strategy; full funding availability; appropriate resources are in place; delivery plans, financial and management controls are in place and are realistic; Gateway 3 – Investment Decisions: confirm that the procurement strategy has been followed; review and agree procurement decisions; review risk management & change control procedures; ….4 & 5 GW 1 Papers with Wood & Halliday to take MICE to RCUK GW 1 Review in July Success implies approval for MICE

Gateway Process Gateway 0 – Strategic Assessment: Assessment of business need; Assessment of risk; initiation of an independent review team; review of the objectives and planned delivery; review of management structure and resource plans; Gateway 1 – Business Justification: Assessment of the business case for MICE; review of risk management plans; review delivery plans; Gateway 2 – Procurement Strategy: confirm procurement strategy; full funding availability; appropriate resources are in place; delivery plans, financial and management controls are in place and are realistic; Gateway 3 – Investment Decisions: confirm that the procurement strategy has been followed; review and agree procurement decisions; review risk management & change control procedures; ….4 & 5 GW 2 Funding plans must be shown to be secure.

& Elsewhere US submitted its MICE proposal in 2002 –no decision as yet –MuCool contribution for R&D Italians made request (and obtained) funds for TPG work (? for solenoid) elsewhere require formal approval from CCLRC

Despite the lack of funds…. so far much progress has been achieved…. –absorber, coils & safety –beam line –RF power system –tracker choice

…absorber & coils integration –Moved away from original scheme in favour of a solution which decouples the coil & absorber bringing them together for final assembly - no sparks! –first review under discussion where- states (FNAL?) who- WG members + non - MICE panel when- probably (my guess) start of 2004

…Beam Line –limited options at RAL (3 quads & 2 dipoles) –beam line layout drawn up matching – potential solution seeking resources –front end fixed (in synchrotron room) shortly proceed to clear hall (small step forward) smaller hole to be cut in 2004

RF Power System –Scheme Draw up in outline –Single 1MW drive per cavity flexible advantage of phase & amplitude control cost effective (despite 8 systems) possible to upgrade to deliver 4MW to one cavity –Demonstrated 1.6 MW from “old” ISIS tubes –inventory of what can be reused RAL/CERN/? –Difference Schemes are similar in cost

RAL Scheme >1MW 100 kW 5kW 10mW TH 116 ex RAL Tubes ex SPS SS Driver Low Level Control & RF Source Roy Church Cavity

RAL RF Tube Tests I A ~110 A Field Stock of ~ 12 retired tubes trial tube operated comfortably at 1.25 MW (~300  s pulse at 50/32 Hz) (peaks at ~1.6 MW) 260  s

Tracker Choice Referees appointed – Grégoire & Summers Criteria published –list of measurements & performance figures –to be agreed by proponents Time Scale defined –October collaboration meeting

Conclusion Strong Statement from IPRP (Astbury) Funding Discussion in progress –signs are promising Many Technical Issues still to be addressed – good progress MICE is a strong collaboration & with our best endeavours MICE will succeed!