1 / 11

BNL Overview

BNL Overview. DOE Annual HEP Program Review Brookhaven National Laboratory April 17-19, 2006 Sam Aronson. BNL Overview. The state of the Lab: The CFN is in construction NSLS II preparing for CD1 RHIC II preparing for CD0 The state of HENP:

zared
Download Presentation

BNL Overview

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. BNL Overview DOE Annual HEP Program Review Brookhaven National Laboratory April 17-19, 2006 Sam Aronson

  2. BNL Overview • The state of the Lab: • The CFN is in construction • NSLS II preparing for CD1 • RHIC II preparing for CD0 • The state of HENP: • NP – its health is a key to a healthy HEP program! • RHIC is operating • EBIS is in construction • e-cooling R&D is under way • Detector upgrades are under way • HEP • You’re here to assess that…

  3. Glossary • AARD – Advanced Accelerator R&D Group • ATF – Accelerator Test Facility • CFN – Center for Functional Nanomaterials • DETF – Dark Energy Task Force (HEPAP) • EBIS – Electron Beam Ion Source • FFAG – Fixed-focus Alternating Gradient • LSST – Large Synoptic Survey Telescope • NSLS II – National Synchrotron Light Source 3rd generation facility • NuSAG – Neutrino Science Assessment Group • QCDOC – Quantum Chromodynamics on a Chip • RHIC II – Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider luminosity upgrade project • RSVP – Rare Symmetry Violating Processes Project • SMD – Superconducting Magnet Division • VLBnO – Very Long Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Experiment • WFO – work for others

  4. The state of HEP • Reorganized experimental groups post-RSVP • Collider physics • US-ATLAS, D0 • ILC Detector R&D (with Instrumentation Div.) • Fixed target & non-accelerator based physics • Neutrinos: MINOS, reactor q13, very long baseline • Cosmology, astrophysics: LSST • Strong theory & accelerator groups • High Energy Theory • Advanced Accelerator R&D (key to Muon Collaboration) • Accelerator Test Facility (HEP, BES) • Superconducting Magnet Division (NP, HEP, WFO) • Broad R&D programs • Accelerators: AARD, ATF, SMD • Detectors: ILC, LHC upgrade, astronomical (Physics, Instrumentation)

  5. HEP Overview ~$28M/yr in Budget Authority • Physics: staff ~220, • HEP staff ~ 90, 60% ATLAS, 40% everything else • ATLAS, D0, Theory, MINOS, q13, VLBnO, LSST, ATF, AARD, ILC • Superconducting Magnet Division: staff ~ 50 • Accelerator and Magnet R&D: LARP, ILC • Instrumentation Division: staff ~ 50 (mostly Lab-funded) • ATLAS, ILC, LSST • Collider-Accelerator: staff ~ 370 (mostly NP-funded) • Neutrino R&D (with FNAL), AGS (if g-2)

  6. ATLAS Staffing Research Program funding Travel funding Computing Infrastructure SMD Core competencies Survivability options ALD Review in June Theory Staffing LSST DETF  P5 New research group Neutrinos Decision on Daya Bay Join VLBnO study w/ FNAL (g-2)m P5 Funding AARD HEPAP Subpanel R&D review ATF Staffing Current/near-term issues to focus on

  7. Broader issues to focus on • Alignment with national goals • Health of current efforts • Viability of path forward • SMD is an important health & viability case • Right-sizing the BNL HEP effort • Balancing scientific vs. technical personnel • Balancing core effort vs. project effort

  8. Final thoughts (until tomorrow) • Lots of material yet to be presented • Some of the important themes, especially in the experimental program are new since the last review • Keep in mind the broad issues • BNL (as well as DOE) can benefit from your opinion on whether this program makes sense as a package (as well as from detailed technical assessments)

  9. Summary • The BNL HEP program is in excellent shape < 1 year after RSVP crashed and burned • Reorganized, downsized • New path forward (ATLAS + neutrinos + e) • Commitments to ongoing efforts maintained (ATLAS, MINOS, D0, m-Collaboration, etc.) • Emerging efforts nurtured while the national program is being mapped out (ILC, Daya Bay, LSST) • All the components are scientifically very well-motivated • Issues • Magnet Division scope and role • Breadth of the program vs. staff size • Given the state of the national program (i.e., in flux) we think it is appropriate to be positioned as we are (i.e., pushing our funding envelope)

  10. Outlook • Near term (what could our HEP program look like at the next annual review?) • Assuming encouragements from AAR&D, DETF, P5, ILC • Bigger ATLAS Research Program team; core effort ~ same size • Neutrino effort slightly increased with R&D-supported (and/or LDRD-supported) staff for a serious Daya Bay effort • ATF increased by 1 scientist (initially lab-supported?) • Theory, AARD, LSST at ~current size • Project planning in C-AD for AGS upgrade for E969 (g-2) • Stabilization of SMD based on ILC R&D funding • This will eventually lead to some growth with project funds or program funds above constant effort • Based on the above assumption (go-aheads on all fronts)

  11. Outlook • Longer term (2 years down the road, same assumptions) • Increase of LSST effort by 1-2 FTE • Growth in ILC R&D • g-2 construction • Longer term (> 2 years) • US HEP itself is hard to predict on that time scale, without knowing what development track ILC is on • Assume ATLAS is a going research enterprise, ILC is a going R&D enterprise • Neutrinos? AAR&D? LSST? g-2? • If the current portfolio goes ahead as it is now, can expect some further growth in ILC effort, everything else ~flat

More Related