EUROEUROA High Intensity Neutrino Oscillation Facility in

Europe

• Status of EUROnu

• Costing, safety, etc

• Annual reports

• Milestones and deliverables for WP1

• This meeting

Status of EUROnuStatus of EUROnu

• 21/48th finished!

• Much progress since last meeting:

Only just started then

This meeting will show significant progress

• Using EC metrics

34 documents

52 meetings

7 new associates since we started

• Many issues raised at 1st meeting, by IAP, etc, dealt with

Status of EUROnuStatus of EUROnu

• Scientifically, EUROnu not important!

• Politically it is:

Recognised as part of CERN strategy

Main European activity on 2nd generation facilities

Strong connection to IDS-NF

Point of contact with CERN management

Input to SPC Neutrino Panel

• ECFA/Strategy secretariat (+ ICFA?) review panel

Review IDS and next EUROnu report

Maintains important role

Internationalises further

Costing, Safety, etcCosting, Safety, etc

• Outputs of EUROnu:

Performance

Cost

Safety

(Technical) risk

• Cost

very important!

very limited resources

needs to be done efficiently and coherently as pos.

taken on by Ilias

Costing WorkshopCosting Workshop

• Need a costing panel

• Need a PBS/WBS

allows exploitation of overlaps

same approach, assumptions, etc

• Combined approach to experts

• Use CLIC tool:

some work already done

use well defined (defendable) techniques

even methods of making a choice

• More later

SafetySafety

• To come next

• Workshop planned

• Focus on big, potentially show-stopping issues

• Technical risk:

identify issues requiring further R&D

focus large impact things

hopefully, comes out of other work?

Annual Report #1Annual Report #1

• Not (quite) done with!

Was submitted late

More (trivial) information requested

All now received and submitted

• Many lessons learnt (by me!)

• We must all do better next time

Annual Report #2Annual Report #2

• Includes independent Technical review

• Outcome between

Everything is fine, continue unchanged

Cancel and repay EC funding

• Next report: submitted by end October!

all due milestones and deliverables done

WP reports

Form Cs done & signed

Explanations of costs done

• Work will start in August

• Review during next annual meeting: RAL – Jan/Feb 2011

WP1 DeliverablesWP1 DeliverablesDel. no. [1]

Deliverable name WP no.

Lead beneficiary Estimated indicative person-months

Nature[2] Dissemination level[3]

Delivery date[4](proj.month)

D1 Requirements for proton driver

2 2 12 R PU 6

D2 Report on 1st year activities All 1 47 R PU 12

D3 Review detector performance of baseline scenarios

5 4 36 R PU 12

D4 Review physics of baseline scenarios and optimisation

6 6 24 R PU 12

D5 Review of baseline muon front end and large aperture acceleration

3 3 56 R PU 15

D6 Comparison criteria 1 3 9 R PU 18

D7 Collection device construction

4 15 40 P PU 18

D8 Bunching performance evaluation

4 7 40 R PU 18

D9 Interim report All 1 94 R PU 24

D10 Target and collection design report

2 1 175 R PU 30

D11 Cost and performance evaluation for reference muon front-end

3 7 56 R PU 30

D12 Report on the experimental validation of the collection device for Li-8

4 15 90 P PU 30

D13 Project review documentation

All 1 122 R PU 36

D14 Target & collector integration

2 8 50 R PU 36

D15 Beam characteristics 2 2 31 R PU 36

D16 Optimisation of baseline detectors

5 4 59 R PU 36

D17 Recommendation of the reference Neutrino Factory design

3 5 56 R PU 38

D18 Performance and cost evaluation of the facility

3 2 56 R PU 42

D19 Physics comparison between the facilities

6 6 89 R PU 43

D20 Comparison between facilities

1 1 25 R PU 46

D21 Final report All 1 240 R PU 48

TOTAL 1407

WP1 DeliverablesWP1 Deliverables

• D8 done and being written up

• Criteria not completely defined, e.g. θ13 known?

• But use obvious:

Physics:- δ- θ13 - Δm2

23

Cost and schedule

Safety:- personnel- environmental impact

Risk:- technical- only show-stoppers

WP1 DeliverablesWP1 Deliverables

• Ultimately, would be good to have figure of merit

• Techniques exist to do this

• Easier to do if θ13 known

• Otherwise, use 3 cases:

large, e.g. >10-2

intermediate, e.g. >10-3 & <10-2

small, e.g. <10-3

• Needs results of costing and safety panels

WP1 MilestonesWP1 MilestonesList and schedule of milestones

Milestoneno.

Milestone name WPs no's. Lead beneficiary Delivery date from Annex I

Comments

1.1Review of 1st year milestones, deliverables & costs

All 1 12 Reviewed by Governing Board

2.1 Proton driver report 2 2 12Parameters reviewed by external

expert

4.1 Baseline Beta-Beam scenario 4 3 12 Documentation reviewed

5.1Review detector performance for Neutrino Factory

5 6 12 Report reviewed

6.1 Update physics potential 6,5,2 6 12 Report reviewed

3.1Evaluation of baseline front-end complete

3 3 15 Report reviewed by external expert

4.2 Design of collection device 4 15 15 Drawings qualified by external expert

3.2Evaluation of baseline acceleration systems complete

3 5 18 Report reviewed by external expert

4.3 Lattice frozen for production ring 4 3 18 Optics qualified by external expert

1.2 Initial facility comparison 1 1 20 Reviewed by external expert

4.4 New decay ring optics for 8Li and 8B 4 3 21 Optics qualified by external expert

1.3Review on interim milestones, deliverables & costs

All 1 24 Reviewed by Governing Board

2.2Preliminary design of target and collector

2 7 24 Drawings qualified by external expert

2.3Preliminary target/collector integration report

2 8 24 Drawings qualified by external expert

2.41st estimation of neutrino beam intensity

2 2 24 Report qualified by external expert

3.3Evaluation of performance of alternative cooling and acceleration schemes

31

24 Report reviewed by external expert

3.4Specification of proton-beam handling system complete

3 14 24 Report reviewed by external expert

4.5Interim report on reaction channels, collimation and magnet protection

4 3 24 Report reviewed

5.2Review of systematic errors for all detectors.

5 4 24 Report reviewed

6.2Review of systematic errors in all facilities. Unified treatment.

6,5 11 24 Report reviewed

6.3Scenarios for the B and Li Beta Beams

6,4 6 24Report

reviewed

6.4Physics performance of all facilities with update of fluxes

6,5,4 6 24 Report reviewed

3.5Benchmark costing for muon front-end and acceleration systems

3 7 30 Report reviewed by external expert

1.4Review of 3rd year milestones, deliverables & costs

All 1 36 Reviewed by Governing Board

2.5Final target/collector integration report

2 8 36 Drawings qualified by external expert

4.6 Full simulation of production ring 4 2 36 Simulation results reviewed

5.3Choice of optimal baseline scenarios for all facilities.

5 4 36 Report reviewed

6.5

Theoretical impact of future measurements in physics of flavour and choice of optimal baseline scenarios for all facilities.

6,5

636 Report reviewed

3.6Initial health-and-safety evaluation of proton-beam handling system complete

31

38 Report reviewed by external expert

2.6 Design of target station 2 1 40 Drawings qualified by external expert

3.7 Performance evaluation complete 3 5 40 Report reviewed by external expert

5.4Comparison of detector performance for all facilities

5 4 40 Report reviewed

2.7 Report on neutrino beam intensity 2 2 42 Report qualified by external expert

6.6Comparison of physics performance of all facilities

6,2,3,4,5 6 43 Report reviewed

1.5 Final comparison of facilities 1

146

Reviewed by Governing Board, International Advisory Panel,

Coordination Board and external experts

WP1 MilestonesWP1 Milestones

• Not possible to do yet

• Will use the most recent results from WP6

• Hence, preliminary physics only comparison

This MeetingThis Meeting

• Very important!

• Preparation for technical review……

• ……..but plenty of science as well

• Welcome to the 2nd annual EUROnu meeting!