David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 IceTop Baseline Review Dec. 4, Madison WI.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT ROLE OF KEY PERSONNEL Bernd Madauss International Space University Strasbourg February, 2011
Advertisements

DoD Information Technology Security Certification and Accreditation Process (DITSCAP) Phase III – Validation Thomas Howard Chris Pierce.
TeVPA, July , SLAC 1 Cosmic rays at the knee and above with IceTop and IceCube Serap Tilav for The IceCube Collaboration South Pole 4 Feb 2009.
PALM-3000 Management Update A. Bouchez Team Meeting #9 10/22/2008.
WBS & AO Controls Jason Chin, Don Gavel, Erik Johansson, Mark Reinig Design Meeting (Team meeting #10) Sept 17 th, 2007.
IceCube 1400 m 2400 m AMANDA South Pole IceTop Skiway 80 Strings 4800 PMT Instrumented volume: 1 km3 (1 Gt) IceCube is designed to detect neutrinos of.
MINER A NuMI MINER A DAQ Review 12 September 2005 D. Casper UC Irvine WBS 7.2 & 7.3: Data Acquisition D. Casper (UC Irvine)
DITSCAP Phase 2 - Verification Pramod Jampala Christopher Swenson.
LSU 01/18/2005Project Life Cycle1 The Project Life Cycle Project Management Unit, Lecture 2.
Effective Methods for Software and Systems Integration
Chapter 2: Overview of Essentials ISE 443 / ETM 543 Fall 2013.
October 24, 2000Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C Matthias Kasemann1 US CMS Software and Computing Milestones and Funding Profiles Matthias Kasemann Fermilab.
IceCube System Testing
Software Configuration Management
November 24, 2004 Rolf Nahnhauer1 PROJECT : IceCube Digital Optical Module Production at DESY Zeuthen.
IceTop Tank Calibration Abstract This report outlines the preliminary method developed to calibrate IceTop tanks using through going single muon signals.
NCSX Management Overview Hutch Neilson, NCSX Project Manager NCSX Conceptual Design Review Princeton, NJ May 23, 2002.
1 Digital I&C Systems Configuration Management Presented By: David E Woods Senior Engineer – Electrical/I&C Design Engineering June 21, 2011.
July 29, 2004 IceTop DAQ D. Seckel. IceTop Review DAQ July Delaware D. Seckel Outline II = {tasks for InIce DAQ} IT = {tasks for IceTop DAQ} A.
IceCube DAQ Mtg. 10,28-30 IceCube DAQ: “DOM MB to Event Builder”
High Energy - Engineering Working Group IceCube PY8 Spring Collaboration Meeting Apr 29, 2009 Jim Baccus.
Status of IceTop tank testing Tom Gaisser, Madison, Feb 20, 2003.
NSF Baseline Review February 10-12, 2004 IceTop Tom Gaisser Bartol Research Inst., Univ. of Delaware Jan 28, 2004T. Gaisser, L3 Lead for IceTop1.
AMANDA and IceCube neutrino telescopes at the South Pole Per Olof Hulth Stockholm University.
Refined ECSS Software Process Model Elements SD-TN-AI-0570, Issue 5 APPENDIX D.
Software Quality Assurance
Nov 30, 2003Tom Gaisser The IceTop component of IceCube Perspective from the South Pole.
University of Southern California Center for Systems and Software Engineering Barry Boehm, USC CS 510 Software Planning Guidelines.
Why Neutrino ? High energy photons are absorbed beyond ~ 150Mpc   HE  LE  e - e + HE s are unique to probe HE processes in the vicinity of cosmic.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE 2.3 Infrastructure and Installation Sims, Edwards 1.Does the conceptual design and planned implementation satisfy the performance specifications.
Erik Blaufuss University of Maryland Data Filtering and Software IceCube Collaboration Meeting Monday, March 21, 2005.
The System and Software Development Process Instructor: Dr. Hany H. Ammar Dept. of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering, WVU.
M&O status and program for ATLAS LAr calorimeter R Stroynowski (on vacations)
THE PROJECT LIFE CYCLE PROJECT MANAGEMENT LIFE CYCLE LSU 01/18/2005 PROJECT LIFE CYCLE 1.
March 02, Shahid Hussain for the ICECUBE collaboration University of Delaware, USA.
DPE CSSW Process Model Annex A WP-400 ECSS Case Study.
1 Cosmic Rays in IceCube: Composition-Sensitive Observables Chihwa Song a, Peter Niessen b, Katherine Rawlins c for the IceCube collaboration a University.
Jan 16, 2004Tom Gaisser 1.3 Cost & schedule review The IceTop component of IceCube Area--solid-angle ~ 1/3 km 2 sr (including angular dependence of EAS.
Calibrating the first four IceCube strings Kurt Woschnagg, UCB L3 Detector Characterization IceCube Collaboration Meeting, Bartol, March 2004.
Science Advisory Committee March 30, 2006 Jim Yeck IceCube Project Director IceCube Construction Progress.
IceTop DAQ: 1 David Seckel – 8/27/2003, College Park, MD IceTop DAQ David Seckel University of Delaware.
1 US Cost & Schedule Summary W. R. Edwards US Project Manager CD-2/3a Review January 8, 2008 BNL.
NSF Baseline Review February 10-12, 2004 IceTop Tom Gaisser Bartol Research Inst., Univ. of Delaware Jan 28, 2004T. Gaisser, L3 Lead for IceTop1.
IceCube Calibration Overview Kurt Woschnagg University of California, Berkeley MANTS 2009 Berlin, 25 September identical sensors in ultraclean,
IceTop Collaboration Meeting Uppsala, Oct. 9, 2004Tom Gaisser1 IceTop IceTop station 2004 test tanks Calibration Verification 04/05 DOM operation Summary.
1 Global Design Effort: Controls & LLRF Controls & LLRF Working Group: Tuesday Session (29 May 07) John Carwardine Kay Rehlich.
5 June 2002DOM Main Board Engineering Requirements Review 1 DOM Main Board Software Engineering Requirements Review June 5, 2002 LBNL Chuck McParland.
Nov 30, 2003Tom Gaisser The IceTop component of IceCube Perspective from the South Pole.
IceTop DAQ: 1 David Seckel – 8/27/2003, College Park, MD IceTop Data Handler and Triggers David Seckel University of Delaware.
Physical Description of IceTop 3 Nov IceTop Internal Review Madison, November 3-4, 2010 Physical Description of IceTop Paul Evenson, University.
SwCDR (Peer) Review 1 UCB MAVEN Particles and Fields Flight Software Critical Design Review Peter R. Harvey.
IceCube DAQ Mtg. 10,28-30 IceCube DAQ: Implementation Plan.
IceTop Design: 1 David Seckel – 3/11/2002 Berkeley, CA IceTop Overview David Seckel IceTop Group University of Delaware.
Status of Detector Characterization a.k.a. Calibration & Monitoring Project Year 2 objectives ( → Mar ‘04) 1. Calibration plan (first draft in March.
1 Cosmic Ray Physics with IceTop and IceCube Serap Tilav University of Delaware for The IceCube Collaboration ISVHECRI2010 June 28 - July 2, 2010 Fermilab.
Search for Ultra-High Energy Tau Neutrinos in IceCube Dawn Williams University of Alabama For the IceCube Collaboration The 12 th International Workshop.
Bergische Universität Wuppertal Jan Auffenberg et al. Rome, Arena ARENA 2008 A radio air shower detector to extend IceCube ● Three component air.
IceTop Status: 1 David Seckel – 3/30/2003 Laguna Beach Berkeley, CA Status of IceTop: 3.2 Bartol Res. Univ. Delaware: Tom Gaisser, Xinhua Bai,
IceCube Construction Endgame
completed in austral season South Pole completed in austral season.
IceCube System Testing
T. Gaisser, L3 Lead for IceTop
THE PROCESS OF EMBEDDED SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
Overview of CLAS12 Calibration
Raytheon Parts Management
IceCube Construction and Analysis Report
Mark McKinnon EVLA Project Manager
Mumtaz Ali Rajput +92 – SOFTWARE PROJECTMANAGMENT– WEEK 4 Mumtaz Ali Rajput +92 – 301-
PSS verification and validation
Definition of Project “An organized endeavor aimed at accomplishing a specific non-routine or low-volume task.” Definition of Project Management “The.
Presentation transcript:

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 IceTop Baseline Review Dec. 4, Madison WI

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 Agenda Agenda (5) Scope of review (5) Overview of IceTop (25) –Science –System Design –Tasks, Effort –Budget Engineering Requirements (10) –Status of ERDs –Overview of CI's Critical components (50) –Tank Assembly (15) –Deployment (20) –Cables (5) –DAQ (10) –Simulations WBS & Dictionary (15) –IceTop –IceTop Integration PY2 plan (15) –SOW –October summary Project plan (20) –Milestones –Schedule –Budget –Risks Issues, Concerns (10) Summary & Discussion (15)

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 Scope Review IceTop Baseline –Construction phase: PY3-PY8 –Contingency & Transition: PY9-10 –WBS –Interfaces/Integration Feedback for Director’s review Dec 18/19

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 Overview Branch to Tom Gaisser’s project level overviewproject level overview (note difficulties in coordination)

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 Engineering requirements Preliminary Design Review 7/15 Configuration Items Status of ERDs –Technical progress (follows) –Document progress Status of action items –9/19 Updated9/19 Updated Comment: non-DAQ software not reviewed Configuration Items for PDR 1.IceTop Station 1.Instrumented Tank Assembly 2.Target Medium 3.Lined Tank 4.IceTop DOM 5.DOM Mounting (Pevenson 6.DOM to DOM Interconnect 7.Additional Instrumentation 2.Tank to Tank / Surface Interconnect Cable 3.IceTop DAQ 1.Feature Extraction Algorithm 2.IceTop Data Handler 3.IceTop Trigger 4.IceTop DOM Hub 4.IceTop Deployment Support Equipment 5.IceTop Simulations*

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 “Critical” components Branch to presentation of –Revised design for tank –Presentation of experience at SP this year (from TG) Cables DAQ Simulations

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 Cables Identification –Quads for DOMs: one pair per DOM –Coincidence cables –Power and data cables for tank deployment WBS Responsibility –IceTop Requirements – –Engineering & Production –

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 IceTop DAQ Tightly integrated with broader DAQ effort (1.3.4)integrated IceTop Specific ( ) –IceTop specific Firmware Feature extraction Coincidence Triggering –IDH designIDH design Acquiring DOM performance data important to detailed DAQ design –Current Rev 2 DOM, Rev 0 DOR card –Need Rev 3 DOM Validating IceTop DAQ –Currently 1 tank with AMANDA optical modules (AAOM) –Need 4 DOMs to instrument test station

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 Simulations Basic Simulations –Tank Simulations (single particle response – GEANT-4) –DAQ, HW sim (PMT, digitizer, threshold…) –Validating simulations with test station at UD is critical Mid-level –Tank reponse to air shower –Station response to air shower –IceTop response to air shower Integration with broader project effort (1.4.3) –Single muon surface tag –Muon bundle calibration –Composition

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 Break Questions so far ? Please return in 10 minutes

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 WBS I – IceTop Link to WBS browser… or to saved resultLink to WBS browser…saved result TanksDesign and build tanks; design and test freezing procedures to provide working ice-Cherenkov detectors for the surface array component of IceCube. Exclusion: Provision of water to fill the tanks is excluded because it will be an integral part of deployment (see under Field Season Operations). There is also a need for coordination with drilling (1.2.2) in connection with water supply CablesSpecification of cabling to power and monitor freezing, testing and operation of tanks. Exclusion: Cabling for tank DOMs should be included in the main surface cables ( ). We assume the surface cable will include conductors suitable for monitoring the tanks and for providing power during deployment. A connection from the end of the surface cabel needs to be provided to the DOMs in the tanks Optical modules Integration of optical modules into tanks. Exclusion: Construction of DOMs is excluded because the DOMs for IceTop will be part of DOM production runs ( ). Design of modifications that may be needed for IceTop will be carried out in collaboration with and as part of IceTop specific engineering ( ).

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 WBS II – IceTop IceTop specific engineering Design, maintenance and operation of the surface component of IceCube to the extent that these require special procedures. This element includes: Exclusion: Integration of air shower DAQ, trigger, reconstruction and simulation into corresponding IceCube processes. IceTop is an integral component of the IceCube detector. It takes advantage of the solid surface to provide certain veto and calibration functions for the project and to peform closely related physics with downward events. To a large extent, both hardware and software components of the IceTop surface array are similar, if not identical, to those of the deep detector. Thus we expect there will be IceTop integration/implementation tasks at level 4 or 5 in (Data Acquisition for implementation of hardware modifications in DOM boards); in (Data Acquisition Software for integration of surface air shower triggers and data into the overall DAQ); and in 1.4 (Data Systems) and 1.5 (Detector Commissioningand Verification--except for 1.5.4). For example, simulations deals with air showers which give both muons in the deep detector and events on the surface. Another example is event reconstruction (see ), which for the surface array must include near vertical and near horizontal events in such a way that the information is available to serve as a veto for the deep detector Integration of SPASE Scope definition: Maintenance and operation of the existing SPASE air shower detector to the extent it remains useful as a calibration device for IceCube IceTop management Scope definition: Local project monitoring and reporting to project office.

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 WBS III – IceTop footprint icetop in wbs title icetop in wbs definition

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 Summary of PY2 sow_py02_rev.doc Ice Top Status Oct03.doc 1.Tanks – OK 2.Cables – OK 3.DOMs – OK- 4.Icetop Specific Engineering 1.System Design – mostly OK 2.Simulations – somewhat behind (but hired critical people) 3.DAQ – Software – ok, Firmware – lagging (Moving target) 5.Spase Integration - NA 6.Management – OK Integration tasks – mixed

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 Project Plan Scope: –Construction PY3-PY8 –Contingency PY9 –Transition to operations PY9.5 Milestones - by WBS element ? Schedule – work from milestones and integration Budget – Necessary effort, transition Comments –Rough cut under difficult coordination constraints –Looking for feedback to go forward to Dec18/19

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 Milestones IceTop PY510^6 in-ice muons with ice station tags (veto)...PY510^6 IceTop Triggers (calibration)...PY910^8 IceTop Triggers (science) TanksPY4-8 Proportional Deploment Cables Optical modules IceTop specific engineering System DesignPY3 CDR Simulations PY4Full Intgration of IceTop simulation DAQ PY4IceTop DAQ fully integrated Integration of SPASEPY6 Report on role of SPASE IceTop management PY3CDR, PRR. New elements??

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 Schedule & Budget Schedule & Budget - –Necessary effort. –Includes IceTop related non effort at UD. –Does.not. include IceTop related effort which is ((.not ).AND. (.not. UD)). –Outlines transition, within level effort. YearPY2PY3PY4PY5PY6PY7PY8PY9PY 9.5 Strings xx0 Engineering Construction Utilization Management Total Effort Budget ($M)  ’s –Full support for PY2 personnel ~ 3 FTE (0.18 M) –4.3 additional FTE (0.36 M) –CE and Production costs (.1M) –Travel & non-salary mgmt costs (.1M)

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 Detail Budget Tools Branch to Phil…

David Seckel, IceTop Baseline Review, Madison, Dec. 4, 2003 Summary Scope: preparation for Director’s Review and Hartill III IceTop Project overview ERDs and technical progress WBS PY2 Summary Project Plan PY3-9.5