R. Garoby 3/03/2006PAF progress1 PAF Progress 3/03/2006 M. Benedikt, R. Garoby, F. Ruggiero, R. Ostojic, W. Scandale, E. Shaposhnikova, J. Wenninger 

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Focusing an Evaluation Ben Silliman, Youth Development Specialist NC 4-H Youth Development.

Advertisements

January 6. January 7 January 8 January 9 January 10.

Management’s preliminary comments to the ERC Report.

CERN First Considerations to implement nuSTORM on the CERN site “North Area Neutrino Hub” E.Wildner, CERN Wednesday, March 27, 2013Elena Wildner,

SCIENTIFIC ACTIVITIES AND BUDGET ESTIMATES FOR 2007 AND PROVISIONAL PROJECTIONS FOR THE YEARS AND LONG-TERM PERSPECTIVES White Paper Robert Aymar.

D.S. proposal 18/12/2003 R. Garoby 1 PROTON DRIVER ACTIVITY Present work program: IPHI-SPL collaboration HIPPI Joint Research Activity [CARE] Proton driver.

Systems Analysis and Design 9th Edition

25/10/2007M. Dracos1 EURO The European Design Study for a high intensity neutrino oscillation facility (Rob Edgecock, Mats Lindroos, Marcos Dracos)

CERN F. Ruggiero & W. Scandale CARE Steering Committee, Paris, 11/04/2006 High Energy High Intensity Hadron Beams CARE-HHH Network: coordinators: F. Ruggiero.

A Possible Strategy Towards a Future Lepton Collider Tor Raubenheimer SLUO Annual Meeting September 17, 2009.

Analyzing the Business Case

Slide: 1 27 th CEOS Plenary |Montréal | November 2013 Agenda Item: 15 Chu ISHIDA(JAXA) on behalf of Rick Lawford, GEO Water CoP leader GEO Water.

Implementing the Second Pillar of the Aarhus Convention: Problems Identified in the National Implementation Reports Magda Tóth Nagy, Senior Expert Geneva,

TEMPUS IV- THIRD CALL FOR PROPOSALS Recommendation on how to make a good proposal TEMPUS INFORMATION DAYS Podgorica, MONTENEGRO 18 th December 2009.

Global Design Effort 1 Conventional Facilities and Siting Overview A. Enomoto, J-L. Baldy, V. Kuchler GDE.

EARTO – working group on quality issues – 2 nd session Anneli Karttunen, Quality Manager VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland This presentation.

First SPL Collaboration Meeting Organization of the Collaboration - Preliminary ideas - R. Garoby 12/12/2008.

CERN Accelerators Topology Configuration and Change Management Engineering Department Thomas Birtwistle, Samy Chemli – EN/MEF/DC.

Accelerator Consolidation Workshop TE/EPC consolidation plan 2 Jean-Paul Burnet ACC consolidation day, 12/09/2013.

Phase 1: Preliminary Investigation or Feasibility study

TS, Length of YETS EYETS LIU & CONS Project

Systems Analysis and Design 8 th Edition Chapter 2 Analyzing the Business Case.

The HiLumi LHC Design Study is included in the High Luminosity LHC project and is partly funded by the European Commission within the Framework Programme.

The time line Autumn 2011CERN Council initiated an update exercise to the European Strategy for Particle Physics which was approved by a special Council.

The European Strategy Group (ESG) The remit of the ESG is to establish a proposal for an Update of the medium and long- term European Strategy for Particle.

HL-LHC/LIU Joint workshop Goal: Progressing towards an agreed set of 450 GeV beam parameters for High Luminosity operation in LHC after LS2 & LS3. Slides.

Status Report – Injection Working Group Working group to find strategy for more efficient start-up of injectors and associated facilities after long stops.

R.G. 7/09/20101 Options for neutrinos. R.G. 7/09/20102 Conventional beam from the SPS (1/3) Neutrinos using the SPS Nominal CNGS 732 km baseline from.

0 1 Alternative Options in the Injectors – Preliminary Summary H. Damerau LIU-TM#8 18 October 2013 Many thanks for discussions and input to T. Argyropoulos,

Plan. 12/05/ Who are we? PM (Project Management and Resource Planning) – APT – IMPACT – PPTEU2 – Plan LS1 – 2012 –…–… Plan V2 – From LS1 to LS2.

STATUS OF THE LHC INJECTORS UPGRADE (“LIU”) PROJECT R. Garoby for the LIU Project Team March 6, 2012CERN.

Philip Burrows SiD meeting, Chicago 15/11/081 Progress on the LoI Philip Burrows John Adams Institute Oxford University Thanks to: Hiro Aihara, Mark Oreglia.

Activities and news Last meeting: 2015 CERN budget allocations as expected, now distributed on accounts Annual report done, and MTP (Medium Term Plan)

Medium Term Plan, with a Long Term Projection to 2010 L. Maiani. CERN Finance Committee June 19, 2002.

Workshop Objectives & Highlights from Daresbury Meeting Erk Jensen, CERN.

COMPASS Meeting 2/07/2004 R. Garoby1 RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE HIP WORKING GROUP* *

Management’s preliminary comments to the ERC Report FINANCE COMMITTEE June 19, 2002.

30 April 2014FCC-ee Physics Coordination meeting1 WELCOME to the 1st coordination meeting «Experiments at the FCC-ee» Within the FCC-ee DESIGN STUDY.

1 V. Kashikhin for ILC ALCPG 2007, FNAL Meeting October 23, 2007 Ring to Main Linac Magnets.

CERN, 15/03/05EURISOL - Beta Beam Task1 EURISOL and the Beta-Beam Task Status and Planning Michael Benedikt Mats Lindroos AB-Department, CERN.

NFP/Eionet meeting, October 2014, EEA PAN NFP/Eionet coordination European Environment Agency (EEA) Key points and actions Bratislava, Slovakia,

LHC-CC Validity Requirements & Tests LHC Crab Cavity Mini Workshop at CERN; 21. August Remarks on using the LHC as a test bed for R&D equipment.

4/27/06 1 US LHC ACCELERATOR RESEARCH PROGRAM brookhaven - fermilab – berkeley - slac US LARP Inner Triplet Cryogenics and Heat Transfer LARP Collaboration.

Status of the SPL study R. Garoby – 25/11/2010 Fifth SPL Collaboration Meeting November 2010 / CERN.

LHC Injectors Upgrade Project 1/12/2010 R. Garoby.

AB/CO Review, Interlock team, 20 th September Interlock team – the AB/CO point of view M.Zerlauth, R.Harrison Powering Interlocks A common task.

CLIC - CDR Status (Volume 2) Hermann Schmickler, ILCW2010.

ILC 2007 Global Design Effort 1 Planning Damping Rings Activities in the Engineering Design Phase Andy Wolski Cockcroft Institute/University of Liverpool.

Final Report – Injector Re- Commissioning Working Group (IRWG) Working group to find strategy for more efficient start-up of injectors and associated facilities.

EU accelerator contributions to the IDS … R. Garoby ISS meeting RAL 28/04/2006.

Linac4 Project Meeting 1/2011 3/3/2011 M. Vretenar Update on schedule and structure 1.

Introduction R. Garoby LIU 2014April 11,  LIU summary  LIU Highlights in 2013  Outcome of the «Review of LHC and Injectors Upgrade Plans» (Oct.2013)

ELIXIR SAB Feedback December 2014.

Systems Analysis & Design 7 th Edition Chapter 2.

Orsay, 03/Feb/05EURISOL - Beta Beam TaskM. Benedikt 1 The Beta-Beam Task Status and Planning 02/2005 to 01/2006 Michael Benedikt AB-Department, CERN.

LHC Injectors Upgrade Project 11/11/2010 R. Garoby.

contribution to the round table discussion

The European Strategy for Particle Physics

Alternative/complementary Possibilities

Drafting Coordinator Report

BE/RF-IS Contribution to LIU C. Rossi and M. Paoluzzi

What Should We Do?.

nuSTORM and the Physics Beyond Colliders workshop

The DBD: Outline and Scope

Introduction to Projects

Olivier Napoly, coordinator CEA/Irfu

Loyola’s Performance Management Process For Employees

LEIR Presented by M. CHANEL PSDAYS: EVIAN 2001.

Generation of Higher Brightness Beams for LHC

Presentation transcript:

R. Garoby 3/03/2006PAF progress1 PAF Progress 3/03/2006 M. Benedikt, R. Garoby, F. Ruggiero, R. Ostojic, W. Scandale, E. Shaposhnikova, J. Wenninger  Procedure for the on-going analysis  Progress and observations  Summary of observations  Planning  Need for an additional contribution to the Strategy Group ?

R.G. – 3/03/2006 PAF progress 2 Procedure for the on-going analysis (1/3) Outcome of the last meeting with R. Aymar & J. Engelen on 10/01/2006: - Instructions for preparing a contribution to the Open Symposium (Orsay, January 30 – February 1) => report published (“Preliminary accelerator plans for maximizing the integrated LHC luminosity”) - Requests for cost estimates and prioritization of the proposed actions => on-going analysis – goal & procedure presented today (3/03/2006)

R.G. – 3/03/2006 PAF progress 3 Procedure for the on-going analysis (2/3) Goals: - get estimates and planning from equipment groups - assemble results in synthetic format (typical presentation below)

R.G. – 3/03/2006 PAF progress 4 Procedure for the on-going analysis (3/3) Distribution of the tasks

R.G. – 3/03/2006 PAF progress 5 Progress and observations (1/2) - Consolidation: to be based on the consolidation programme managed by S. Baird (specific comment: a reasonable scheme of repair for the SPS magnet is proposed.Will be done during shutdown 2006/2007 by re-arranging priorities.) - Improvements: a number of actions are clear and have started being quantified (PS multi-turn ejection, impedance reduction of SPS kickers, PS longitudinal damper), part is unclear (depends on results of machine studies). - Linac4 & PSB: well advanced technical design. Solid base for a first cost estimate assuming no external contribution. Quantification started. - LHC IR: complex because of absence of experimental experience (!) / multiplicity of possibilities / diverging opinions of experts. Multiple interviews with many experts & group leaders to request views on procedure, planning and estimates of resources.

R.G. – 3/03/2006 PAF progress 6 Progress and observations (2/2) - PS successor: list of basic parameters for PS2 (normal conducting) is established using some “educated guesses”. Contacts with equipment groups have started. Parameters for PS+ (superconducting) in preparation. - SPS successor: parameters for SPS+ in preparation. - Future facility: based on “roadmap” established by neutrino community (ISS: , Design Study: , Technical Design: , Construction: 2014-…). Difficulties: need to prepare for submission of a DS proposal to the EU during 2006 (degree of CERN involvement ?) + too limited data to ask for estimates of cost of facility.

R.G. – 3/03/2006 PAF progress 7 Summary of observations Technical investigations are not finished  precise parameters are not yet clear + Short time scale forces to simplify the questions  specific options are selected « arbitrarily » + Parallel investigations limit the debate  limited accuracy Is it in line with the expectations of the Direction ?

R.G. – 3/03/2006 PAF progress 8 Planning Refinement of the distribution of tasks: February 6 Presentation to the Direction – request for feedback: end February  First sets of results + preliminary list of priorities: March 13 ‘ Draft: April 17  Report: May 22 Is it in line with the expectations of the Direction ?