Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

BESAC Sub-Panel Review of IPNS

and LANSCE/LUJAN

Facility Evaluation

Andrew Taylor

Washington DC11 December 2000

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

Context

“The most important thing these facilities can do is to run reliably, build a user base, and do good science” -- Thom Mason, SNS

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

International Benchmark

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

ISIS Science

ISIS 2000www.isis.rl.ac.uk

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

ISIS Source

• Source 160 kW• Operation 168 days / year • 91% Reliability• 687 mA-hr delivered

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

ISIS Science

F i g u r e 2 . 1 I S I S I n s t r u m e n t D e v e l o p m e n t P r o g r a m m e

1 9 9 8 1 9 9 9 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 1

T O S C A P h a s e I

M A P S

G E M C o m m i s s i o n i n g

P r i s m a G u i d e

T O S C A P h a s e I I

V E S U V I O

O S I R I S I I

H R P D I I

S X D I I

E N G I N X

2 0 0 2 2 0 0 3

I n s t r u m e n t D e v e l o p m e n t

User Community 1200 +

Experiments / year 600 +

Publications / year 400 +

$80 k per paper

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

Sourcex

Reliabilityx

Instrumentationx

Support Facilitiesx

Support Staffx

User Communityx

Cost Effectivenessx

Stewardship

Impact

User Facility Effectiveness

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

Grading Scale

Outstanding

++Competitive

+Needs Improvement

to be Competitive

-Unacceptable

--

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

Source . .

Reliability . .

Instrumentation . .

Support Facilities . .

Support Staff . .

User Community . .

Cost Effectiveness - Operations . . - Science . .

Stewardship/Management . .

Impact . .

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

LANSCE Source: +

Target 2

Target 4

Target 1

ER-2ER-1

1234

5

6

79 1

011B

1213141516

11A

Lujan Center

80 kW -- 100 µA at 20 Hz

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

IPNS Source: -

7 kW -- 14 µA at 20 Hz

U235 target x 2Solid Methane x 3.5

15 kW Thermal / Epithermal 50 kW Cold

Dedicated Facility

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

LANSCE/Lujan Reliability: -

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Linac

Lujan BDS

Target 1

Neutrons

Poor Statis tics

YTD

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

Lujan Reliability

2000 YTD

1999

1996

19951988-1992

0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

S ys te m

2000 YTD

1999

1996

1995

1988-1992

Taking a Systematic approachbutAgeing systems need investment

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

IPNS Reliability: + +

IPNS Accelerator System Performance

0

20

40

60

80

100

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Calendar Year

Rel

iabili

ty in

Per

cent (◊

)

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

16.00

18.00

20.00

Cu

rre

nt

in M

icro

am

ps

(■

)

FY-97 96.1% FY-98 97.6% FY-99 94.4% FY-00 95.6% FY-01 96.5%

1995-2001 (RUN SUMMARIES)November 20, 2000

FY-97 14.19µA FY-98 14.44µA FY-99 14.25µA FY-00 14.52µA FY-01 14.33µA

Outstanding -- for now !

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

Comparison

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

687

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

Lujan Instrumentation: -

20 m0 m

1 square =1 m

HIPD

SCDFDS

NPD

LQD

PHAROS

SPEAR

CNR

Instrument Suite -- 6/7Good in PartsInstruments in User Program - 3

World Ranking

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

Lujan Successes

NPD Advanced Engineering Materials

Diffraction from NiTi under load.

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

Lujan Problems

PHAROS

MAPS

LANSCE should be competitive with ISIS

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

Making MAPS

ofMagnetism

first science from the new ISIS spectrometer

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

New Science at ISIS

Broholm et al

Mook et al

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

USA at ISIS

USA % time at ISIS

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9Requested

Allocated

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

IPNS Instrumentation: -

- Well balanced Instrument Suite

- Useful Research Tools

- Despite severe under investment

World Class Science

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

IPNS - World Class Science

AFM (z) FM (z)

Type-C (y)

FM (xy) Type-A (xy)

Type-C* (y) Type-G (xy-z) Type-G (z)

tilting canting

tiltingpolytypism

_

Magnetic structures in the CMR manganites: the pseudo-2D system La2-2xSr1+2xMn2O7C. D. Ling, J. E. Millburn, J. F. Mitchell, D. N. Argyriou, J. Linton, H. N. Bordallo, Phys. Rev. B 62, xxxx (1 Dec 2000)

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

IPNS Developments

eg QENS x 10 for $700k

Much potential….

Testbed for SNS

Highly cost effective

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

Lujan Support Facilities: -

IPNS Support Facilities: -

•Ranked well by user community

•Needs improvement

•Benefits from MSD infrastructure

•Significant under-investment

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

Lujan Support Staff: +

IPNS Support Staff: +

•Dedicated and committed

•Accelerator understaffed

•3.9 staff / instrument ~ISIS

•Dedicated and committed

•Accelerator understaffed

•2.7 staff / instrument < ISIS

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

Lujan Users: +

Significant potential

Enthusiastic despite setbacks

SDT concept successful in involving UC Campuses

Exploded view of HIPPO

150°

90°

40° 20°

10°

1384 detectors

4.6 m2

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

World Class Instruments

GEM

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

IPNS Users: +

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

Average citations per paper

•Internal Program in MSD - Outstanding Quality

•Strong commitment at all levels in the organisation to the concept of a User Facility

•Enhancement plan to develop the user base

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

LANSCE / Lujan

Cost EffectivenessOperations (marginal): -Operations (average) : - -

Cost EffectivenessScience (marginal): +Science (average) : -

see table

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

IPNS

Cost EffectivenessOperations: + +

Cost EffectivenessScience: +

see table

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

Figures of Merit

LANSCE IPNS ISIS

FIGURE OF MERIT 1997 1998 1999 2000 1997 1998 1999 2000 Benchmark

Total Costs ($M)BES 6.1 5.1 6.1 5.6 10.6 11.9 13.2 13.6Other 40.5 42.3 48.5 55.1 0 0 0 0Total* 46.6 47.4 54.6 60.7 10.6 11.9 13.2 13.6 34Average+ 23.3 23.7 27.3 30.3 NA NA NA NA

User Beam TimeScheduled (days) 150 0 108 39 164 175 179 175 168Delivered (days) 135 0 30 31 157 171 163 167 153Efficiency 90% 0% 28% 79% 96% 98% 91% 95% 91%

Cost Per FacilityDay ($K)

Marginal Cost (BES) 45.2 NA 203 181 68 70 81 81 NAAverage Cost 173 NA 910 977 68 70 81 81 222

Number ofScheduledInstruments

7 NA 6 3 12 12 12 12 18

Cost Per InstrumentDay ($K)

Marginal Cost (BES) 6.5 NA 40.7 60.2 5.6 5.8 6.8 6.8 NAAverage Cost 24.7 NA 182 326 5.6 5.8 6.8 6.8 12

Facility Output:Number ofRefereedPublications

57 60 72 NA 119 113 155 NA 428

Cost Per Paper ($K)Marginal Cost (BES) 107 85 85 NA 89 105 85 NA NAAverage Cost 409 395 379 NA 89 105 85 NA 79

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

LANSCE Stewardship: - -

Performance far below potential

Grossly inadequate Lujan Operation

No correlation between articulated priorities and funding flow

Lack of focus - over a prolonged period of time - and still ongoing

Multiple sponsors - no single champion

No clearly identified action plan at the highest levels in LANL and in DOE

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

IPNS Stewardship: +

•Well integrated team

•Internationally acclaimed

•Committed to running a user facility

•Enthusiastically embracing SNS

Truly Outstanding

but

Let down by lack of support by DOE

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

LANSCE/Lujan Impact: -

Modest impact compared with resources

Overshadowed by IPNS

But

Broad range of Competencies on the Mesa

t = 0 18.33 s19.41 s17.26 s

20.48 s 21.55 s 22.63 s 23.70 s

GENIE PRAD

Lujan has great potential…. …..for both internal + external programs

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

IPNS Impact: +

Reservoir of expertise

Track record of seminal developments second to none

High international stranding of staff in both IPNS and MSD

Outreach to build a community particularly praiseworthy

but

Impact moderated by source strength and lack of investments in instrumentation

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

LANSCE/Lujan Summary

Potential to be a world ranking user facility

Latent user community - both internally and in the UC Campuses

Staff on the Lujan floor and in the SDTs show promise

Evidence of commitment at all levels

but

Lack of integration renders this ineffective

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

IPNS Summary

Outstanding value

Impressively well integrated team keeps an outmoded source operational at the highest levels of efficiency

Can be sustained and enhanced -- with modest investments

Plan for cost effective upgrades identified

Window of opportunity to pass on expertise to a new generation

Committed to success at all levels

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

Source + -

Reliability - ++

Instrumentation - -

Support Facilities - -

Support Staff + +

User Community + +

Cost Effectiveness - Operations - - + +

- Science - +

Stewardship/Management - - +

Impact - +

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

LANSCE/Lujan Evaluation

Source .

Reliability .

Instrumentation .

Support Facilities .

Support Staff .

User Community .

Cost Effectiveness - Operations . - Science .

Stewardship/Management .

Impact .

Facility Evaluation Andrew Taylor

BESAC Subpanel Review of IPNS and LANSCE/Lujan Center

I P N S Evaluation

Source .

Reliability .

Instrumentation .

Support Facilities .

Support Staff .

User Community .

Cost Effectiveness - Operations . - Science .

Stewardship/Management .

Impact .