1 / 8

F Procedure for the on-going analysis F Progress and observations F Summary of observations

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

viho
Download Presentation

F Procedure for the on-going analysis F Progress and observations F Summary of observations

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. PAF Progress3/03/2006M. Benedikt, R. Garoby, F. Ruggiero, R. Ostojic, W. Scandale, E. Shaposhnikova, J. Wenninger F Procedure for the on-going analysis F Progress and observations F Summary of observations F Planning F Need for an additional contribution to the Strategy Group ? 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) 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) PAF progress

  4. Procedure for the on-going analysis (3/3) Distribution of the tasks 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. 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 n facility: based on “roadmap” established by neutrino community (ISS: 2005-2006, Design Study: 2007-2010, Technical Design: 2011-2013, 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. 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 Þlimited accuracy Is it in line with the expectations of the Direction ? PAF progress

  8. Planning üRefinement of the distribution of tasks: February 6 üPresentation to the Direction – request for feedback: end February First sets of results + preliminary list of priorities: March 13 ‘Draft: April 17 O Report: May 22 Is it in line with the expectations of the Direction ? PAF progress

More Related