Introduction

1. Introduction PHENIX TAC Follow-up Meeting W.A. Zajc

2. Outline • Results of Aug-98 TAC • PHENIX response to same • Purpose of this mini-TAC • PHENIX Status W.A. Zajc

3. Aug-98 TAC • Focussed specifically on • the overall plan to complete PHENIX • the installation and commissioning schedules • related cost issues • Findings • Substantial progress since the May 1997 review (all sub-systems) • Mechanical construction of baseline detector components is proceeding well. • Rate of progress on the Front End Electronics systems continues to improve, although, as noted in the June mini-review, “progress must continue to accelerate in order for completion in time for the Engineering Run and Day-One physics.” • Schedules remain tight • The collaboration’s management has done a good job of maintaining an integrated plan for installation and commissioning which provides some flexibility for schedule changes and for optimizing the physics capability at “Day-One”. W.A. Zajc

4. Aug-98 TAC (Cont’d) • Findings (Continued) • Despite good progress, the aggressive scheduling goals given a year ago have, in most cases, not been met. • Major concern is with the continuing increase in the cost of PHENIX • Required deferral of $3.6M of readout and DAQ • TAC estimated probable shortfall in excess of $5M • Recommendations: • PHENIX and RHIC project management, BNL management, and DOE should develop a plan that • Deals with the probable shortfall. • Addresses probable shortfalls in AEE funds for Muon Arm construction. In • PHENIX project management is strongly encouraged to look at the possibility of permanently descoping subsystems of the detector. W.A. Zajc

5. Task Forces • Convened to address a specific problem • Members: • A representative selection of interested parties • Avoidance of affected line managers • Process: • Intensive study of status, schedule, finances • Report to management on same plus explicit recommendations for action • Duration of ~ 1 month • Conclusions considered (in turn) by • Project Management • Executive Council • Detector Council • Collaboration (Town Meeting) • Project Management • End Result: A complete analysis of available options by all elements of the collaboration W.A. Zajc

6. Baseline Task Force • Charge-- produce a plan which: • Allows us to finish the Year-1 detector on the funds available in FY99; • Defines a scope that can be completed within 3 years of the end of the Baseline construction project. • Preserves the broad, unique physics program attainable in Year-1 and long-term. • Chair: Hans-Ake Gustafsson • Members: Y. Akiba, B. Cole, T. Hemmick, J. Mitchell and R. Seto. • Outcome: • A plan which • Reduces mortgage substantially by combination of deferrals and descoping • Preserves most of initial physics capability (Details in H-A. Gustafsson’s presentation) • A recommendation that similar task force examine Muon systems. W.A. Zajc

7. Muon Task Force • Charge: 1. Review present scope and technical/cost/schedule status of the muon system. 2. Make recommendations on a Plan-to-Complete for the system that a. Can be completed within the remaining AEE and RIKEN funds; b. Can provide muon measurements at some point in the first year of RHIC operations and spin physics data during the second year of RHIC operations. c. Describes any deferrals and/or descoping necessary to obtain Items 2a and 2b. d. Allows those deferred items to be built and installed within 3 years from the end of construction. • Chair: Soren Sorensen • Members: T. Awes, C.Y. Chi, A. Drees, M. Leitch, E. O'Brien, S. Pate, N. Saito • Outcome: • A complete review of PHENIX muons • Physics • Status • Schedule • Finances • Detailed discussion of two schemes for mortgage reduction W.A. Zajc

8. This Follow-Up • Purpose: • To evaluate the overall PHENIX plan to complete the construction and commissioning of the detector • Assess our plan to deal with the funding deficits projected for PHENIX in a way that does not incur an unrealistically large mortgage against future funding • Specifically: • Is the plan technically feasible, and consistent with the RHIC End-Game and startup schedules? Are the estimated costs-to-complete realistic? • What are the compromises in physics capability? • Is the plan to recover deferred costs acceptable? W.A. Zajc

9. Experiment Status • Tremendous progress since last year. • Infrastructure: ~TAC97 ~TAC98(-5 months) W.A. Zajc

10. Experiment Status • Tremendous progress continues in the hall: • All EmCal, RHIC mounted on West Arm • Surveying indicates positioned to < 1 mm of design location • Choreography underway now W.A. Zajc

11. Experiment Status • Tremendous progress since last TAC: muID Installation complete 15-Sep-98 W.A. Zajc

12. Magnet • Central Arm: • Mapping in progress • Primary goal: Evaluate performance of the field reconstruction software before the production mapping starts at the end of November. • Question: Green’s functions (MIT) vs. finite element (Efremov) • Great opportunity for (dedicated) student contributions • MMS: • Tested at full field • Began fixture assembly • MMN: • Fixture installed W.A. Zajc

13. Status (Cont’d) • MVD • QA • First 14 Si Pads • MCM output cables • 24 Evaluation MCM’s (LockMart) • Clean room prepared at BNL • Working PC MCM • DC • Started production-line testing and insertion of wire modules into the first Drift Chamber. • Orders placed for some production-level items • Received first production modules for the DC FEM. • TOF • 9 of 10 panels complete (at BNL) • BB • Detector at BNL • Prototype board done • L1 • Testing complete on GL1-1, Clock and Accept, 6Rx boards • GL1-2 Board, fabricated, assembled and under test • GL1-3 board ready for fab W.A. Zajc

14. PC • Have a PC1 and a PC3 prototype • Position dependence of gains measured, certified as acceptable • Encouraging efficiency studies with full FEM readout • PC1 efficiency studies with cosmics: W.A. Zajc

15. TEC • Details: • 11 chambers mechanically complete • Work started on #19 • First 64 channel FEM board • Stuffed • Test pulses read out in VME • Good progress on grounding studies • Summary: • Sector 3: frame assembly started • Sector 2: winding • Sector 1: Cosmics! W.A. Zajc

16. EmCal • PbSc: • All four sectors mounted on West Arm: • All six have completed internal cabling • Laser testing in progress • PbGl: • Completed enclosures on Sector 1 • Prepared test system for LED/PMT’s W.A. Zajc

17. Muons • muTR • Encouraging bids on Station 3 honeycomb, FR-4 • Continued tests with wire-laying boom on mock panels • First final south frames from BARC arrived, found satisfactory • All drawings for the south arm detectors are complete and procurement ready. • Simplifications in FEE • Grounding and LV distribution • Timing distribution • Muon ID • Gas system specs written • completed basic testing of • all installed small MuID panels • 21 out of 40 large panels in situ with very good results. W.A. Zajc

18. DAQ • DCM’s • All FE1, FE2 cards stuffed, tested • Two full DCM’s fabbed, tested before full production • EvB • Version 1 of all component classes (SEB, EvB controller, ATP) written • 2 x 2 EvB working in hardware Collect the Data! Collect the Data! Collect the Data! W.A. Zajc

19. Offline “MDC 1 happened”: • Transferred 500 GB of simulated data into the new HPSS storage hierarchy. • Demonstrated sustained transfer rates of nearly 9 MB/sec. • Successfully used RCF-developed reconstruction control software to stage simulated data to nodes of the reconstruction farm and run PHENIX reconstruction software. The aggregate CPU power of the nodes used by PHENIX during MDC1 was equivalent to about 25,000 VAX-11/780's. • Developed several significant improvements in the RCF control software (job auto-submission, web-based monitoring tools) and fed these back to the RCF staff. • Upon completion, each reconstruction job updated an Objectivity production control database (using the RCF developed port of Objectivity to Linux). • At the start of each reconstruction job, geometry parameters for the drift chamber were read from an Objectivity-based calibration database (again, using the RCF port of Objectivity to Linux). • GEANT simulations of muon arm data were successfully converted into the PHENIX raw data format (this has since been done for the central arms too). The reconstruction of muon arm events used this realistic "raw" data as its starting point. • Used ORNL-developed tape access optimizing batch system to retrieve reconstructed data files from HPSS in an efficient way. This improved our effective bandwidth for reading DSTs by a factor of five. W.A. Zajc

20. Computing • MDC: • Proof-of-principle in reconstructing from PRDF • Some physics studies underway from MDC DST’s • Extensive “experience” with • Network problems • Disk back-ups • Disk space management • Very useful in development of analyses within Physics Working Groups W.A. Zajc

21. PHENIX Physics • PHENIX provides unique insights into heavy ion collisions at RHIC Roughly equal sensitivity to phenomena at all time scales • Initial conditions (hard scattering) • Medium effects (vector mesons) • Thermalization (photons) • Final state (hadrons) • The same apparatus allows world-class measurements on the spin structure of the proton • We have endeavored to preserve as much of these capabilities as possible • Initially (available in Day-1) • Potentially (upon recovery of deferrals) • Descoping has however, affected our ability to • Control systematics • Preserve aperture and rate • Trigger(!) • A small shortfall has resulted in a large loss • Details in G.R. Young’s talk W.A. Zajc

22. Baseline Priority • Essential for allocation of resources • Stated on 15-Sep-98 by PHENIX Management: • The recently accepted recommendations of the Gustafsson task force leave unchanged the PHENIX priority for the first year of running. Specifically, the highest priority for Year-1 remains the completion of the East Arm and its use for the Au-Au program outlined by the Day-1 Task Force last year.” • Note: Application of this (necessary) prioritization will put early pair physics at substantial risk W.A. Zajc

23. Site Activity • A tremendous convergence of workat various sites • around BNL • outside the lab W.A. Zajc

24. Progress Summary 10-Jan-98 24-Sep-98 20-Oct-98 09-Nov-98 Summary: Accelerating progress that is indicative of overall experimental effort W.A. Zajc

25. Collaboration View • The Task Forces (and subsequent discussion) have played an essential role in building consensus • The proposed descopings • Baseline Task Force • Loss of TEC in West Arm • Loss of PC2 in East Arm • Loss of EmCal Trigger • Muon Task Force • Loss of anode readout have been viewed as “acceptable” risks. • There is recognition that the SE&I costs are necessary to build an infrastructure that is • Safe • Durable • Flexible But • There is serious concern in the collaboration that these costs jeopardize (at least) the successful implementation of the Baseline Task Force’s recommended plan. W.A. Zajc

26. Summary Collaboration commitment? • Institutional resources used to provide 7% solutions • Yesterday: • 35+ vehicles at PHENIX Experimental Hall • 5+ tables in cafeteria (in spite of BSA-mandated descopings/deferrals in service) • 3+ examples of second-generation PHENIX-ians. W.A. Zajc

27. Summary • Purpose: • To evaluate the overall PHENIX plan to complete the construction and commissioning of the detector • We have a plan that projects our current status into an essential physics program for Year-1 (and beyond) at RHIC. • Assess our plan to deal with the funding deficits projected for PHENIX in a way that does not incur an unrealistically large mortgage against future funding • $1.4M on baseline • $1.6M on muons W.A. Zajc

28. Summary (cont’d) • Specifically: • Is the plan technically feasible, and consistent with the RHIC End-Game and startup schedules? • Yes • Are the estimated costs-to-complete realistic? • (Yes) • What are the compromises in physics capability? • Central arm pair physics at risk in Year-1 (West Arm robustness, schedule) • J/y physics at risk in Year-2 (!) (MMS schedule) • Central arm tracking efficiency (PC2 in East Arm) • Triggers for • Spin • High luminosity heavy ion operations • Is the plan to recover deferred costs acceptable? • (Yes) • Help here is most appreciated! W.A. Zajc

29. Forms of Help • Baseline: PC2 restoration in East Arm • ~ $320K • Restores East Arm to complete CDR version (I.e., the best implementation of PHENIX central arms detectors we can build). • AEE • Muons • $1000K profile relief • Insures J/y physics in Year-2 • High pT triggers and rare processes • $1300K in Gelbke plan • Leverages PHENIX bandwidth capabilities • Restores (otherwise descoped) EmCal trigger • BNL • Assistance in performing (and supporting) essential SE&I activities in PHENIX Experimental Hall W.A. Zajc