1 W-band Module Production and Other Fermilab Contributions Proposed Significant Partnership in QUIET-II to the Fermilab PAC in November 2009 Modest Fermilab involvement in QUIET-I Hardware Calibration Tools 3 trips to CIT/JPL to study modules Shifts in Chile Hosted a QUIET Collaboration Meeting at Fermilab in June 09 Access to QUIET-I Data Pier Oddone, Fermilab Director DOE Field Work Proposal In Preparation

2

3 Module bias optimization using Grid Before Wire grid LN 2 receiver After KICP Lab in Chicago

4 Commissioning Detector using Rotating Sparse Wire Grid Polarizer

5 The Science Team Tooling Fabrication: J. Korienek, C. Lindenmeyer, Mechanical Assembly and Cryogenics: D. Butler, B. Gonzales, T. Hawke, W. Newby, J. Wilson System Controls: S. Hansen, J. Montes, J. Zimmerman Electrical Engineering and Testing: D. Kubik CMB Theory: S. Dodelson, A. Stebbins RF Technology: D. McGinnis Detector Fabrication: F. DeJongh, H. Nguyen The Technical and Engineering Team Significant Experience Silicon Tracking Detectors for HEP Fermi-Glast Satellite Veto Shield Dark Energy Survey Camera

6 Our Proposed Involvement in QUIET Phase II Assembly of ~1500 W-band Polarization Analyzer Modules ~ 2 year production run Collaborative effort with Caltech and JPL Precision Placement of 106 components Components as small as 200  m x 200  m Very delicate HEMT components Precision control of silver epoxy die bonding Over 200 wirebonds per module Harsh Cryogenic and Vacuum Environment Technical Challenges

7 Upgrade Machines with powerful Labview and Vision System Software Meeting the Production Goals Utilize 4 Coordinate Measurement Machines to Perform Automated Assembly Strong interests from ATLAS and CMS in using automated assembly tools at Fermilab for the LHC silicon detector upgrades A natural synergy between QUIET and Fermilab/HEP Work to be performed at the Fermilab Sidet Facility

8 Differences between Phase I and Phase II Assembly and Testing Phase I Phase II Module Housing Machining at JPL Module Housing Machining by Vendor using new technique Die Bonding by NxGen New Die Bonding Technique developed at Fermilab Manual Conductor Bonding at JPL Automatic Conductor Bonding at Fermilab - Quality Assurance of Conductor Bonding Mechanical Strength - Quality Assurance of Epoxy Bonding Mechanical Strength Comprehensive Testing of Module Power Draw and RF response - at 20K and Room T Comprehensive Testing of Power Draw at Room T Comprehensive Testing of RF Response at Room T Comprehensive Thermal Cycling of Modules to 20K Sample Testing of Power Draw at 20K Sample Testing of RF Response at 20K Goal: Guarantee quality components and robust procedures in order to reduce need for comprehensive testing.

9 Micro Assembly Tools New Tools for Die Bonding Automated Wirebonding Machines at Sidet Facility Will perform R&D of bonding mechanical strength in vacuum and cryogenic environment: R&D to Guarantee High Assembly Yield Reduces Need for Extensive Cryogenic Production Testing.

10 Quality Assurance is Critical Epoxy Lap Shear Strength Measurements and Thermal Cycling down to 28 Kelvin “Instron” Measurement of Die Bonding Adhesion of Epotek H20F Silver Epoxy Expected breaking point Manufacturer’s data on cold-temp degradation does not exist. Epotek is interested in our thermal-cycling result !

11 Quality Assurance is Critical Al-Au Wirebond Strength Measurements and Thermal Cycling to 28 Kelvin

12

13 Module Assembly and Receiver Integration Schedule Q1 Tooling Development Module Housing and Non-InP Parts Fabrication Assembly and Testing of 1st 500 Modules Assembly and Testing of 2nd 500 Modules Assembly and Testing of 3rd 500 Modules Fabrication and Delivery of InP Parts from CIT/JPL Integration of 1st Receiver and deployment Fermilab CIT/JPL Chicago-Fermilab Integration of 2nd Receiver and deployment Integration of 3rd Receiver and deployment KEK/Princeton Q2Q3Q Q1Q2Q3Q Q1Q2Q3Q Q1Q2Q3Q Responsibility

14 Major Subsystem Costs W-Band Module Production and Testing: Caltech, JPL, Fermilab Component Delivery Date NSF Cost DOE Cost DOE Contingency. Module Housing/Parts K - - Tooling Materials K 28K Tooling Fabrication and Controls Programming K 31K Production Labor to K 59K Testing Labor “ - 594K 148K Total 466K 1074K 266K W-band Receiver Integration: Chicago, Fermilab Component Delivery Date NSF Cost DOE Cost DOE Contingency Materials to K 10K Technician Labor “ - 80K 20K Engineering Labor “ - 94K 24K Total - 225K 54K

15 Summary Project Construction Tasks Delivery of 1500 W-band modules in ~2 year production run Integration and commissioning of 1 Receiver at Fermilab Calibration tools and window engineering analysis Request to Fermilab/DOE: Project Cost = $ 1.75M (includes contingency) Operations Cost = $ 224K Technical and Engineering Labor (no Scientist Labor) Production tooling material costs Contribution to Chile site operations cost Funds for Travel to Chile for Shifts and Installation All overheads have been included

16 Hogan’s Backup Slides

17

18