1 / 11

OUTLINE Status Preliminary conclusions of the CNGS Review Board (30 June 2004) -- Discussion --

Present situation – seen by CERN. OUTLINE Status Preliminary conclusions of the CNGS Review Board (30 June 2004) -- Discussion -- 3. CERN Proposal. 1. Status – as seen from CERN. 25 Nov. 2003: Memo by S. Rangod to CNGS project management “alarm bell number one”

taji
Download Presentation

OUTLINE Status Preliminary conclusions of the CNGS Review Board (30 June 2004) -- Discussion --

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. Present situation – seen by CERN OUTLINE Status Preliminary conclusions of the CNGS Review Board (30 June 2004) -- Discussion -- 3. CERN Proposal

  2. 1. Status – as seen from CERN • 25 Nov. 2003: Memo by S. Rangod to CNGS project management • “alarm bell number one” • 12 Dec. 2003: phone call + e-mail K.E. to B. D’Almagne, expressing • worries on progress of the horns at LAL and in particular on the • lack of engineering resources • 2 Feb. 2004: B. D’Almagne visits CERN, explains the manpower • evolution at LAL • 7 April 2004: first horn delivered to CERN • (65k double pulses at 150 kA) • visits to CERN by members of LAL team, discussions with S. Rangod

  3. 1. Status – as seen from CERN • 10 May 2004: Internal note by S. Rangod to CNGS project management “alarm bell number two” • 18 May 2004: Letter by J.E. Campagne informing of lack of money, requesting the C.S.P. meeting • 22 June 2004: List of 16 compulsory and 4 desirable modifications to be made on the horn (by S. Rangod) • N.B. Not sure whether all problems have been identified – must wait for horn disassembly

  4. 1. Status – as seen from CERN • 24 June 2004: visit to LAL by S. Rangod and K. Elsener agreement on the principle that from now on proposals by S. Rangod must be followed; request from LAL for specifications and drawings • -> tremendous amount of work for CERN staff • 12 July 2004: cost estimate for the compulsary modifications on horns:  60 kCHF per horn (by S. Rangod,) • -> a lot of money (in addition to what is already missing...)

  5. 1. Status – as seen from CERN today: - have no news concerning the reflector inner conductor -> new delivery schedule ? - have continued worries about the engineering manpower working on the horn project at LAL (worries first expressed to B. D’Almagne on 12 Dec. 2003) - have a tremendous lack of documentation and of up-to-date drawings: -> “what is inside” (the horn) ?

  6. 2. Preliminary conclusions – Review Board 2004 CNGS Review draft reportHorn / target hall systems [J. Hylen, Fermilab] Finding: The main problem is that the LAL group is too small to deal with the remaining horn system items in a timely fashion, and the new team is still on the learning curve as far as understanding the target hall environment goes. Recommendation: The committee has no easy solution to this, and can only recommend that management urgently address this issue as a top priority.

  7. 2. Preliminary conclusions – Review Board [J. Hylen, Fermilab] Note that several systems have to be further developed: The stripline fast connection The stripline to the transformer The radioactive water system The remote water connection The horn foot support system The “Stefane” list of horn modifications The hot handling procedures Air flow cooling issues

  8. 2. Preliminary conclusions – Review Board [J. Hylen, Fermilab] Comments: A second horn power supply needs to be commissioned so that horn testing can continue as the main supply is moved to the “target hall” LAL should be provided with the thermal environs, and the specifications to them should reflect the ultimate intensity rather than the nominal intensity. “DONE” mis-understanding ?

  9. 2. Preliminary conclusions – Review Board [J. Hylen, Fermilab] Further iteration of the hot handling equipment/procedures and radiation dose calculations are urgently needed Stefane will retire soon; must provide continuity (others to work with him) and also make sure document control for horn systems is rigorously enforced. Agree with the CERN list of horn system modifications we were provided, ...

  10. 2. Preliminary conclusions – Review Board • Summary: • More manpower needed at LAL • More manpower needed at CERN • (outside the scope of review: more money needed for LAL horn project )

  11. -- DISCUSSION --

More Related