1 / 12

MC-DFS and NF-RDR

MC-DFS and NF-RDR. High-level Objectives and Deliverables Michael S. Zisman Center for Beam Physics Accelerator & Fusion Research Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory NFMCC Meeting- LBNL January 28, 2009. ELEMENTS OF THE PLAN (1). Plan has two main components

luana
Download Presentation

MC-DFS and NF-RDR

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. MC-DFS and NF-RDR High-level Objectives and Deliverables Michael S. Zisman Center for Beam Physics Accelerator & Fusion Research Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory NFMCC Meeting- LBNL January 28, 2009

  2. ELEMENTS OF THE PLAN (1) • Plan has two main components • Design (incl. simulations and costing) • Component development and tests NFMCC Meeting 5-year Plan:Zisman 28 January 2009 2

  3. ELEMENTS OF THE PLAN (2) • Main elements of MC and NF design activity • for the MC DFS • Physics and Detector Study (Demarteau and Eichten) • Accelerator Design and Simulation Study (Ankenbrandt and Fernow) • Cost Estimation Study (Zisman) • for the NF RDR (Bross) (under IDS-NF auspices) • overall system design and staging scenarios • siting issues • participation in cost estimation activity NFMCC Meeting 5-year Plan:Zisman 28 January 2009 3

  4. ELEMENTS OF THE PLAN (3) MC DFS intended to be a “high-end” feasibility study component engineering and costing not fully detailed component level, not bottom-up want to understand cost in units of, say, LHC or ILC costs defines R&D program (extends beyond this plan) NF RDR IDS-NF management will set standards for work we contribute to engineering and costing (select areas) will participate in, and in some cases lead, accelerator design of various subsystems NFMCC Meeting 5-year Plan:Zisman 28 January 2009 4

  5. KEY QUESTIONS • To prove feasibility of MC we need to show • complete facility design showing acceptable transmission and beam properties • detector design capable of operating productively in expected background conditions • physics reach meeting or exceeding other technical approaches • realistic and affordable cost • NF feasibility has already been shown but costs need refining NFMCC Meeting 5-year Plan:Zisman 28 January 2009 5

  6. PHYSICS AND DETECTOR STUDY • Objectives • establish physics case for MC • establish physics reach as f(E, L) • develop realistic detector simulation tool • including all known background sources • develop and simulate baseline detector design • LHC upgrade detector will serve as model NFMCC Meeting 5-year Plan:Zisman 28 January 2009 6

  7. MC DESIGN AND SIMULATIONS • Objectives • develop end-to-end simulation of multi-TeV MC • based on demonstrated or “almost” demonstrated technologies • identify and document required R&D tasks • demonstrate (via end-to-end simulations) a baseline design that meets performance requirements NFMCC Meeting 5-year Plan:Zisman 28 January 2009 7

  8. MC COST ESTIMATION • Objectives • develop WBS for facility • describe components in sufficient detail to develop cost estimate • develop cost estimate system-by-system, including transition areas • prepare contingency assessment (component level where possible) NFMCC Meeting 5-year Plan:Zisman 28 January 2009 8

  9. NF RDR PLAN • Objectives (from IDS-NF) • deliver RDR for accelerator and detector • develop cost estimate at 50-75% uncertainty level • identify possible staging scenarios • consider possible sites for accelerator + detector • educated guess: we’ll pick Fermilab as site to study Substantial overlap with MC design effort; more detailed for costing purposes NFMCC Meeting 5-year Plan:Zisman 28 January 2009 9

  10. TIME LINE • Desire plan that gives results by end of 2013 • implies only 5 (4?) years to complete • very aggressive schedule • even in the absence of funding limitations! • we believe we should aspire to deliver information in this time frame • “publish or perish” (?) • this is one the most challenging parts of the present plan NFMCC Meeting 5-year Plan:Zisman 28 January 2009 10

  11. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT • Design and simulation effort will come from Labs, universities, and SBIR companies • present effort is dominated by Labs • expect much of new effort, especially post-docs, to come from universities • good way to “introduce” more accelerator physics into academic setting • SBIR participation will come in selected areas, e.g., • 6D cooling • Li lenses NFMCC Meeting 5-year Plan:Zisman 28 January 2009 11

  12. SUMMARY • Design and simulation effort will permit us to develop a scenario for both MC and NF • Requires substantial ramp-up in staff and funding to accomplish objectives in the proposed 2013 time frame • We believe this time frame is significant for worldwide HEP planning NFMCC Meeting 5-year Plan:Zisman 28 January 2009 12

More Related