Budget Status and FY03 Requests

Elton SmithHall D Collaboration MeetingSep 12-14, 2002

Topics

Schedule for pCDR Budget proposal for FY03 GlueX upgrade budgets

Review of pCDR

Sept. 1 - DRAFT1 pCDR Material Submitted Hall Leaders and selected individuals review draft

text and enhance/edit as appropriate, and the process for merging the draft documents from accelerator and the halls begins

The Physics Divisions Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) produces the “experiment/equipment overlap matrix,” a first look at how well we have "orthogonalized" the hall equipment.

Review of pCDR (cont.)

Nov. 1 - DRAFT2 pCDR Ready for Distribution “Nearly final” draft pCDR sent to PAC members

and others invited for the January science review. Updated “experiment/equipment overlap matrix”

produced by the TAC, will also be given to PAC members and others invited for the January science review

Review pCDR (cont.)

Week of Jan 13: PAC 23 Meets and conducts its normal business relative to ongoing experimental program.

January 19 – 22: Special Workshop (tentatively at the Outer Banks) held the augmented PAC to carry out a review of the science plans and equipment “orthogonalization”.

Outline of Presentations on the Physics of the Upgrade to the augmented PAC Introduction by Cardman – why are we here and what do we hope to

accomplish Review and Summary of the “White Paper Approved” Major Physics

Thrusts developed with the input of PAC18. Speakers will be “appointed.” We solicit your suggestions for names of persons to give each of the following four presentations to the PAC GlueX High-x (summarizing experiments in all halls) GPDs with emphasis on DVCS (summarizing experiments in all halls) Summary of other initiatives (e.g. pion form factor, color transparency,

duality, etc.) “Proposals” for changes in the structure of the executive summary of

the pCDR. These presentations must motivate a research PROGRAM, not just an individual experiment.

Presentation on the “experiment/equipment overlap matrix”

GlueX Budget Proposal for FY03 Cardman suggests that we develop a budget

proposal assuming a timely approval of CD-0

and

Alternate strategy if approvals are delayed

GlueX Budget Proposal for FY03 k$ Notes

Civil Construction 150

Solenoid 473 Work at IUCF

Detector

Tracking CDC 40

Tracking FDC 30

Start Counter 20

Barrel Calorimeter 80

Cerenkov Counter 40

Forward Calorimeter 135

Time-of-Flight Wall 20

Computing 80

DAQ 25

Electronics 200 Includes robotics facility

Photon Tagger 80 Glasgow postdoc hired

Jlab designer 65 Ravi Anumagalla hired

PWA Center 224 New Request

Total 1662

Work Breakdown Structure1.5 Hall D

1.5.1 Solenoid

1.5.1.1 Shipping

1.5.1.2 Hardware

1.5.1.3 Assembly Labor

1.5.1.4 Erection, rigging (labor)

1.5.2 Detectors

1.5.2.1 Tracking

1.5.2.1.1 Forward chambers

1.5.2.1.2 Central chambers

1.5.2.1.3 Start counter

1.5.2.2 Calorimetry

1.5.2.2.1 Barrel calorimeter

1.5.2.2.2 Forward calorimeter

1.5.2.3 Particle ID

1.5.2.3.1 Time-of-flight

1.5.2.3.2 Cerenkov counter

Work Breakdown Structure (cont.)1.5.3 Computing

1.5.3.1 DAQ

1.5.3.2 Online computing

1.5.3.3 Offline (CC Budget)

1.5.3.4 Slow Controls

1.5.4 Electronics

1.5.4.1 FADC

1.5.4.2 TDC

1.5.4.3 Trigger

1.5.4.4 Crates, racks

1.5.4.5 HV

1.5.5 Beamline

1.5.5.1 Tagger

1.5.5.2 Target

1.5.5.3 Beamline components

1.5.5.4 Collimator

1.5.6 Infrastructure

1.5.6.1 Assembly

1.5.6.2 Installation

Work Breakdown Structure (cont.)

1.6 Civil

1.6.3 Hall D

1.6.1.1 Tunnel, Buildings

1.6.1.2 Utilities

1.6.1.3 Crane

1.6.1.4 Access Control

1.6.1.5 Fire Protection

1.6.1.6 Mech, LCW, HVAC

1.6.1.7 Electrical

1.6.1.8 Contracting Overhead

Hall D TechnicalYear -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 System Man-yr

Lead Engineer 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Proj Man 7Lead Designer 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 Tracking 6

Lead technician 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 Install 6Designer 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 Tagger 5

Mechanical technician 0 0 2 3 4 4 4 PID 17Electrical Designer 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 TDC 12

Electrical technician 0 1 2 2 4 4 4 FADC 17Computer Professional

(hardware)0 0 1 2 2 2 2 Online 9

Total 2 5 11 13 16 16 16

Hall D PhysicistsYear -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 System Man-yr

Group Leader 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Proj Man 7

Coordinator (Computing/DAQ)

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Proj Man 7

DAQ 1 1 1 1 DAQ 4

Online 1 1 1 1 1 Online 5

Offline 1 1 1 1 1 Offline 5

Level 3 Farm 1 1 1 1 Online 4

Slow Controls 1 1 1 1 1 Slow Controls

5

Coordinator (Detector/Electr)

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Proj Man 7

Tracking 1 1 1 1 1 Tracking 5

Calorimetry 1 1 1 1 Calor 4

PID 1 1 1 1 1 1 PID 6

Electronics 1 1 1 1 1 trig 5

Beamline/tagger 1 1 1 1 1 1 Beamline 6

Total 3 5 10 13 13 13 13

Jlab budget requirements FY03

k$ Notes

Civil Construction 150 CD0 required

Solenoid ~200 Coordination with IUCF

Detector

Tracking FDC 20 Support to detector group

Computing 40

DAQ/trigger 15 Crate communication

Electronics 15 Support for electronic prototypes

Jlab designer 65 Ravi Anumagalla hired

PWA Center - Lab support for PWA work

Impact of Near-term Constant-effort Budgets

Fiscal years02 03 04 05 06 0701

Constant-effort budget continues thru FY03*

10

CD-0 CD-1 CD-4CD-2 CD-3

Orig. schedule

Constant-effort budget in FY02* & O413.3

08 09

*Assumes increases beyond constant-effort in subsequent years.

VERY Tentative charge to the augmented PAC workshop Comment on the intellectual framework presented for the 12 GeV pCDR. Is this

the best way to present the science case to DOE and the larger nuclear physics community? Are there flaws or omissions in the framework?

Review the new research programs that are under consideration for being highlighted in the executive summary of the pCDR. Do they represent compelling science that must be done to advance our understanding of nuclear physics? At what level should they be included in the executive summary?

Have we omitted any key science initiatives that could be supported by a 12 GeV electron beam?

Is the experimental equipment proposed well matched to the key physics experiments motivating the upgrade? In cases where an experiment or program is proposed for more than one set of equipment, are the differences in capability and physics reach of the equipment essential for getting all the physics, important for getting as much physics as possible, or simply useful in that, for example, an experiment could be done somewhat faster with one hall equipment compared to another? (note the exact wording of this part of the charge will be refined)

Jlab R&D Budgets FY02Jun Nov Feb Notes

Civil Construction 0 50 0

Solenoid 0 300 300 Dismantling and shipping

Detector

Tracking CDC 120 20 0 Spending FY01

Tracking FDC 0 30 0 Detector group

Start Counter 41 40 0 Spending FY01

Barrel Calorimeter 12 60 65

Cerenkov Counter 186 40 0

Forward Calorimeter 55 40 0

Time-of-Flight Wall 20 0 0

Computing 160 80 0 latest request

Electronics 20 148 170 Draft MOU

Photon Tagger 0 45 80 Add 35K for Glasgow postdoc

Assembly 0 0 0

0.5 postdoc LQCD 0 0 0 Memo to Cardman, Gross

Jlab designer 0 0 0 Request for 65k

Total 614 853 615