1 / 21

R. Aleksan RECFA Berlin, October, 6, 2007

ESGARD activities. R. Aleksan RECFA Berlin, October, 6, 2007. ESGARD. Introduction FP7 schedule and Accelerator R&D Preparing IA proposal Conclusion. Summary Accelerator R&D projects co-financed by the EC in FP6.

eyal
Download Presentation

R. Aleksan RECFA Berlin, October, 6, 2007

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. ESGARD activities R. Aleksan RECFA Berlin, October, 6, 2007 ESGARD • Introduction • FP7 schedule and Accelerator R&D • Preparing IA proposal • Conclusion

  2. Summary Accelerator R&D projects co-financed by the EC in FP6 • These projects are well structured, with clear objectives, deliverablesand milestones. They represent a fantastic asset and strength for the HEP European community in order to play a leadership role • In the improvement of present accelerators • In the development of new accelerators

  3. ESGARD actions within FP6 Major Strategic decisions

  4. FP7-Planning of calls and indicative budget

  5. General information Proposals submitted at the 1st round of FP7 calls • Accelerator R&D proposals submitted by our community on May 2nd, 2007 • 2 CNI-preparatory Phase (SLHC and ILC) • 2 DS (EuroNu and EUROCRAB)

  6. Summary of Accelerator R&D projects proposed in FP7 1st call • Accelerator R&D proposals submitted by our community on May 2nd, 2007 • 2 CNI-preparatory Phase (SLHC and ILC) • 2 DS (EuroNu and EUROCRAB)

  7. Summary Since 2002, ESGARD has been working to help promoting and structuring Accelerator R&D in Europe. Many projects are now underway in the field of accelerator research. Using the opportunity of FP6, projects amounting to a total of 121 M€ out of which the EC contribution is 34M€ Already several projects have been approved and are on their way to be financed beginning 2008 (36 M€out of which the EC contribution is 14.2M€) We need now to concentrate on the next call to come on Integrating Activities

  8. ESGARD actions toward the FP7-IA calls Anticipating the IA call, ESGARD issued a call of LoI in spring 2006 Summary of responses following the call for LoI for accelerator R&D project 34+ letters received http://esgard.lal.in2p3.fr/Project/LoIFP7 248 M€ + ?

  9. ESGARD actions (cont’d) ESGARD has set-up working groups to help developing consistent set of research activities, in line with the priorities stated in the Strategy Document adopted by the CERN Council, and that could be imbedded in an (or several) Integrated Activity (IA) project(s) • High-intensity, High-energy Proton Beams (convener: R. Garoby) • Novel Accelerating Systems (convener: E. Jensen) • Superconducting RF Acceleration System (convener: O. Napoly) Milestones (backward in time) • IA opening/closing Call is Nov.2007/Feb.2008 • Final selection & Beginning of Write Up : Fall 2007 • Organize a workshop to present the possible projects • Decision on number of IA and scope : Summer 2007 • 1st Selection + Priority of R&D Items : Spring 2007 • First meeting of the 3 PGps at CERN 30-10-2006 ESGARD is overseeing closely the progress in 2007 during its meetings

  10. A first round of selection was made in July …but the total cost was still too large!

  11. FP7-Planning of calls and indicative budget

  12. Expected size of an Integrating Activity under FP7 • Indicative budget for Integrating Activities: 277 M€ for both bottom up (~160 M€) and targeted approach (~120 M€) • Duration: 4 years max • Number of contractors: 20 (FP6 average) • Experience shows that a project with more than 20 contractors is difficult to manage • Not all partners need to be contractors • EC contribution: • We expect most of the projects to be in the range of 4 to 6 M€ with a limited number of projects reaching 10 to 15 M€ in justified cases (e.g. facilities serving exceptionnaly wide community of users)

  13. I3 analysis FP6 60% of I3s are between 3 and 9 M€ with an average of 5,8 M€40 % are between 11 and 27 M€ with an average of 15,9 M€ CARE

  14. Providing Guidelines In order to help converging on a consistent and outstanding proposal(s), it would be desirable that ESGARD provide guidelines A Meeting with the founding-directors of ESGARD was held on July 23rd . The main questions were the following Guidelines 4 years What is the duration of the proposal(s) ? 1 proposal How many IA should we propose ? What should aim at for the total direct cost of the proposal ? 60 M€ max What should be the total requested EC contribution ? 20 M€ max Note : i.e. the ratio EC cost/ total cost = 1/3 on averageas in CARE This cost is high a risk of being rejected a a final decision needed

  15. Providing Guidelines (cont’d) Target for each Working Groups Propose a set of Core activities with a total cost of 15 M€ max and a set of optional activities with a total cost of 8 M€ max • Although it is unlikely that we can get a very large amount of funding • from the EC, the real added value of making an IA proposal is : • Continuing and fostering the European effort of accelerator R&D • in a coordinated way as recommended in the European Strategy • document • Carrying accelerator R&D as for detectors construction • (i.e. collaborative distributed effort) • Sharing the accelerator R&D infrastructure

  16. Workshop September 10-11, 2007 Main lessons The objective of this workshop was to present an overview of possible activities to be included in the IA proposal, including the partners willing to invest and collaborate within accelerator R&D • The workshop has shown • The relevance, the scientific quality and the interest of projects • The strong interest from the community to continue and enhance • accelerator R&D in Europe • Presentations have also shown that, despite remarkable efforts from • WG coordinators, there was still a need for significant work to ensure • consistency • no duplication • cost reduction at a level acceptable to submit a proposal

  17. Main pending issues Identifying the Coordinator of the IA Converting the activities dealt with in WG into NA/TA/JRA to be included into a single IA giving a consistent structure to the IA Redefinition of R&D : HI-HE p-accelerator [(S)LHC, n-facility] NC tech development for linear colliders [CLIC, ILC] Improving SCRF tech. for e, p accelerators [(S)LHC, ILC] Novel Acc. Tech ? Define the ratio between the mandatory activities NA/TA/JRA • Get the prioritized project list (with optimized costs and partners) • from the High priority accelerator projects of the SD • (S)LHC • linear colliders: CLIC, ILC • n-facility Common treatment of the indirect costs

  18. Including the painful tasks Reduce the overall cost of the IA Identify the partners to be included as full participants and associates, with the objective of keeping the total number in a reasonable range (~20) • Ensure a fair sharing of funding between • The activities (mostly JRA) • The accelerator project • The partners/countries Should depend on the commitment of partners

  19. Providing Guidelines (cont’d) Some additional guidelines are still needed, this will depend on the proposed activities following this workshop What should be the relative weight between the 3 WG activities ? What should be the strategy with respect to the 2 other calls ? What should be the ratio between the mandatory activities NA/TA/JRA ? example : ratio between NA/TA/JRA (in CARE this ratio was 1/0/6.5) One should also make sure that there is a fair share between the HEP high-priority projects, partners interests and commitments An other Special Meeting with the founding-directors of ESGARD will be held on October 15th to review the final set of proposed activities, in particular examining the involvements from the partners, theirfundingcommitments and the balance between activities.

  20. Conclusion ESGARD has started the process for coordinating the Accelerator R&D projects to be proposed within Integrating Activities, the call of which will appear on November 20, 2007 with a closing date of February 20, 2008 ESGARD has set up working groups to propose a consistent set of Networking, Transnational Access and R&D activities ESGARD will continue to oversee the process by provide further guidelines, if needed, to ensure a fair share of the activities and to avoid dispersion or duplication …but ONLY 4 months is left !!!

More Related