1 / 26

Status of the LHCb Experiment LHCb Resource Review Board 22nd October 2003

CERN-RRB-2003-148. Status of the LHCb Experiment LHCb Resource Review Board 22nd October 2003. on behalf of the LHCb collaboration Tatsuya Nakada CERN and EPFL *). *) Institute of High Energy Physics (IPHE), University of Lausanne

ophira
Download Presentation

Status of the LHCb Experiment LHCb Resource Review Board 22nd October 2003

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CERN-RRB-2003-148 Status of the LHCb ExperimentLHCb Resource Review Board22nd October 2003 on behalf of the LHCb collaboration Tatsuya Nakada CERN and EPFL*) *) Institute of High Energy Physics (IPHE), University of Lausanne was transferred to Laboratory of High Energy Physics (LPHE), EPFL

  2. Contents • Detector status • Revised cost and funding of the experiment • Conclusions

  3. 1) Detector status All the detector subsystem TDR’s are now completed Approved TDR’s Last two detector TDR’s just submitted (Computing TDR to be submitted later)

  4. The LHCb detector Reduced number of layers for M1 (4  2) Reduced number of tracking stations behind the magnet (4  3) No tracking chambers in the magnet No B field shielding plate Full Si stationReoptimized RICH-1 design Reduced number of VELO stations (25  21) Changes were made for material reduction andL1 trigger improvement

  5. Beam Pipe Al window Done by the LHC vacuum group EDR 30 Sep 2003

  6. Assembly of the lower half Plates are fixed by tie-rods Magnet Yoke Lower half completed Assembly of the sides in progress

  7. Si sensor test beam set-up Wake-field suppressor and RF foil VELO Prototype Test constructed design Construction of VELO tank support stand

  8. Outer Tracker EDR in June and ready for the production Aligning the template for straw gluing Straw production

  9. RICH2 RICH2 exit window being made

  10. Calorimeter SPD/Preshower production started Ecal modules: 100% constructed Hcal modules: 30% constructed

  11. Frascati Clean Room assembly tables panel on wiring machine soldering table Muon system CERN Frascati First series production chambers

  12. Online Final prototypes being produced Gbit Ethernet board forthe common readout card (TELL1) Timing and Fast Control(trigger and readout supervisor)

  13. Offline A small team, working efficiently and collaborating well with LCG, is producing only “very essential” software:  led to the success of the TDR performance study However with down-scoping, delaying, reprioritizing… LHCC manpower review for the core offline software The committee reviewed their manpower planning and agree with their estimates that the current shortage of core software developers is about six (6) FTEs. As a consequence of this shortfall there are a number of areas that do not receive the attention they deserve. With the additional manpower they would be able to put effort on the development and testing of the conditions database infrastructure, on user support, QA, documentation and the maintenance of the collaboration’s web pages. Collaboration will seek for help from the collaborating institutes, including CERN.

  14. LHCb Milestone Plots

  15. ReoptimizationModified RICH1 and TT designs RICH1: material reduction incorporate B field TT: to be included in Level-1 trigger

  16. RICH1 -Vertical optics with two mirrors -Spherical mirror from composite or Be -Mirror support out of acceptance -Direct coupling to VELO tank-Iron B field shielding box

  17. Trigger Tracker Test beam: long silicon ladders with large strips. 8.3 m2 of Si 180k readout channels ~30 cm ladder

  18. Examples for event efficiencies e total = eacceptance etriggerereconstruction Decay modes TP [%] Now [%] Comments B0p+p- 0.55 0.69 g with BsK+K- - 0.99 U-spin BsDsK 0.51 0.27 g B0DK*0 0.23 0.35 g BsDsp 0.57 0.34 Bs oscillations B0J/y(mm)KS 1.15 1.39 b BsJ/y(mm)f 2.24 1.67 c B0gK*0 0.18 0.16 bs penguin Similar physics performance to that given in TP, but with much more realistic simulation programme.(event generation, detector response, pattern recognition etc.)

  19. Subsystem Cost [MCHF] D from MoU Comment VELO 4.82 MoU included Pile-Up trigger IT 2.47 TT 3.40 OT 6.23 10  3 stations*) RICH 9.57 New RICH1*)&MaPMT analogue Calo 15.06 Muon detect. 6.93 Muon Fe 4.00 L0 Trig 2.26 DAQ&CPU(L1/HTL) 5.71 ECS&TFC 1.58 Computing infra. 0.71 Experiment infra. 4.00 Magnet 6.00 2) Revised cost and funding of the experiment -0.28 +0.72 Now all Si TT*) -3.86 +1.87 -0.30 -0.52 0 +0.06 Pile-Up trigger added 0 0 *) due to reoptimization Increase of RICH1 mechanics from TDR = 492kCHF: due to B field shielding box, Be mirror, superstructure, etc. Total cost = 72.74 MCHF (-2.31 MCHF compared to the MoU cost) Requested funding in MoU = 73.30 MCHF

  20. Funding country MoU Now Comments Brazil 1.7 0 MoU not signed China 0.25 0.1 MoU by Tsinghua University FR(IN2P3) 7.5 7.5 extra engineering effort by Annecy DE(BMBF) 4.8 3.76 MoU to be signed. New MPI request not approved (MPG) 2.2 2.2 some uncertainty IT 10 10.6 extra contribution to Muon NL 6.3 6.3 Poland 0.5 0.5 MoU to be signed Romania 0.3 0.3 Russia 3 2.5 shifted to machine, CERN partially compensates Spain 2 2 Switzerland 7.9 7.9 UK 10.3 10.3 Ukraine 0.2 0.2 CERN 16.35 16.7 inclu. muon Fe and Russian compensation Total 73.3 70.86 Revised Funding situation (in MCHF)

  21. Funding balance and strategy Current funding 70.857 MCHF Current detector cost 72.734 MCHF Balance - 1.877 MCHF (2.6%) The cost-funding matrix must be revised in order to accommodate the changes caused by the reoptimization of the detector and presently available funding.

  22. Two guidelines for the revision: Move CERN and Common Funds first to balance Move national funding among the already committed subsystems What we present now is a model we consider reasonable The LHCb collaboration would like to ask RRB to support the principle of shifting the funding allocations among different subsystemsin agreement with the parties concerned

  23. Cost-Funding Matrix

  24. Country (subsystem) MoU New CERN (ST) 0.00  0.56 CERN (OT) 3.40  0.00 CERN (RICH) 1.00  1.87 adjusting for the overall situation CERN (Muon) 0.20  0.52 CERN (Online) 0.73  2.38 IT (Muon) 4.85  5.45 0.6 extra contribution IT (Trigger) 0.80  0.43 due to cost reduction IT (Online) 0.50  0.87 increased responsibility UK (RICH) 5.70  6.30 UK (Online) 0.60  0.00 DE(ST) 1.69  1.72 DE(OT) 1.92  2.17 DE(Online) 1.02  0.00 DE(CF) 2.00  1.70 CF (Muon) 0.00  0.40 adjusting for no Brazilian funding CF (OT) 0.90  0.63 CF (Online) 3.50  2.43 CF(Calo) 5.31  5.29 CF(reduction) 0.00  0.96 due to reduced funding adjusting for the RICH cost increase adjusting for the BMBF rejection for the MPI funding request A model for redistribution (MCHF)

  25. How to cope with missing fund? ST 211 kCHF due to the funding reduction by BMBF  continue effort to reduce cost and to restore reduced funding RICH 500 kCHF due to the photon detector option  continue effort to reduce cost and to search for extra funding Online 1016 kCHF  CPU’s, 3158 kCHF, will be bought as late as possible (>2005) i.e. we have time to keep trying to get funding from Brazil. If still no funding available, start with a smaller number (2/3) of processors.

  26. 3) Conclusions Reoptimization of the LHCb detector successfully finishedand all the detector TDR’s completed. Magnet, Calorimeters and RICH2 production advancing.VELO, Muon and Outer Tracker production just started/about to start. Cost of the reoptimized detector ~73 MCHF, ~2 MCHFless than that given in MoU, matching with the MoU funding prospect. Due to funding reduction by some countries, in spite of extra contribution from Italy, still under-funding of ~2 MCHF. However, we have a strategy to cope with it. We would like to ask RRB supporting the principle of making the necessary shifts of funding among subsystems.

More Related