AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting, 16 Sep 2004

• AGS Project Office - status of funding, comments on RSVP 2004-5 Timeline, what's expected for the 4-6 Nov AGS review (P. Pile)  

• Progress report on MECO interface issues (magnet and refrigeration) (D. Phillips)  

• AGS/Booster work - progress toward a schedule and updated costs (K. Brown and J. Tuozzolo)  

• Update on AGS/Booster Radiation Barriers (K. Brown)

Useful Links:• RSVP Project Office: http://www.kopio.bnl.gov/RSVP/Estimates/RSVPEstimates.htm• C-AD AGS Project: Office http://server.c-ad.bnl.gov/esfd/RSVP/RSVP_AGS_WBS.htm

Milestone Date Status, Comments

Discussion of Baseline Expectations, Timeline with Experiments

September 13 Set

MECO Magnet Review Sun-Tue, Oct 10-12 Set, MOC established, at Columbia University

AGS Review Thu-Sat, Nov 4-6 Set, reviewers being assembled

Simulations & Backgrounds Review Mon-Wed, Nov 15-17 Set, reviewers being assembled

Internal discussion of resource-loaded schedules (RLS) for all projects

Thu, Dec 9 Includes PO, NSF PM, + experiments. Anticipate one full day. Date TBF.

Initial review of RLS for all projects Thu-Fri, Jan 13-14 Perhaps reviewed by LOC. Dates TBF.

Reviews of smaller sub-projects Weeks of Jan 17 – Feb 21 Series of 1.5-day reviews, covering detectors, smaller sub-systems

Draft versions of PMP, PEP, Conceptual Design Report completed

Mon, Feb 14

Operations Review Week of Mar 7

Project startup pre-review Week of Mar 15 Comprehensive preparatory review of full project, proposal

Project startup review Week of Apr 18 Final project startup review, iteration of above

Finalize documentation for May submission to NSF

Week of Apr 25

Product submitted to NSF/NSB Mon, May 2

RSVP 2004-05 Timeline

RSVP AGS Project Office Funding - Status

• Project Office

SOW – to be prepared, = ~ $210,00 has been agreed to (through NYU)

Project Office FTE Summary

•Physicist = 0.5•Engineer = 0.5

Support Includes:

AGS Project Head = ¼ FTEAGS Deputy Head = ¼ FTEAGS/Booster WBS Manager = ¼ FTEFiscal = ¼ FTEMisc Engineering = ¼ FTEMSTC = $10,000

RSVP AGS Project Funding - Status

MECO SOW (C-AD and Magnet Division) Labor (hr) FTE

P. Wanderer / Physicist (AM) 85 0.05

L. Jia / Engineer (C-A) 113 0.06

K. Brown / Physicist (C-A) 338 0.19

TBD/ Mechanical Designer(s) (C-A) 216 0.12

W. Meng / Liaison Physicist (C-A) 232 0.13

D. Phillips / Liaison Engineer (C-A) 310 0.18

K. Yip / Physicist (C-A) 85 0.05

• MECO

SOW – signed, C-AD/Magnet Division Total = $141,00 (through UCI)

MECO FTE Summary• Physicist = 0.4• Engineer = 0.2• Designer = 0.1

RSVP AGS Project Funding - Status

• K0PI0 (1/2) -- SOW in preparation, C-AD Total = $601,00 (through SUNY-SB)

AGS Modifications - $271K

(1) CFI Support• 3x1/4 FTE Engineering• $10K Travel

(2) 93 MHz Relocation Planning• 0.06 FTE Engineering

(3) Extraction Simulations• 0.2 FTE Physicist

(4) C5 Vacuum and A5 Kicker Upgrade• 0.4 FTE Physicist

(5) Booster Injection Studies (Physicist)• 0.05 FTE Physicist

K0PI0 AGS Mods FTE Summary• Engineering = 0.8• Physicists = 0.7

Other• $10K Travel

RSVP AGS Project Office Funding – Status

K0PI0 Beam Line - $329K

(1) Neutral Beam Conceptual Design - $136K(2) Baseline Support - $72K(3) Primary Beam Design - $46K(4) Shielding Design - $27K(5) Instrumentation Design - $28K(6) Controls R&D - $20K

• K0PI0 Beam Line FTE Summary LE = 0.7 LP = 0.7 Designer = 0.4 Tech = 0.1

• Other Shops = 80 hrs

• K0PI0 (2/2)

Homework

• Jon Kotcher is planning to seek additional FY 2005 funds for the project

• What else do we need to ask for?– I need input from WBS managers ASAP

MECO Magnet Review10-12 October 2004 (Columbia University)

CHARGE:

[1] What are the functional requirements of the MECO magnet system?

(a) present magnet design and status-- conductor/layout/tolerances/margins

(b) sensitivity of experiment to changes in magnet parameters(c) technical risks and sensitivity to design choices/ justification of choices(d) schedule(e) costs

[2] What is the optimum scenario for achieving the required MECO magnet system in the appropriate time frame? Specifically, evaluate all plausible mechanisms for magnet procurement and include all technical, cost, schedule, and integration and management issues.

MECO Magnet Review (cont’)AGENDA:

Sunday 10 October•Executive Session•Overview of MECO and MECO magnet•Presentations re functional requirements of magnet system•Executive Session – first discussion and formulate questions•Questions to MECO

Monday 11 October•Executive Session•Answers to yesterday’s questions•Presentations re procurement mechanisms•Presentations re management, cost and schedule•Executive Session – formulate questions•Questions to MECO

Tuesday 12 October•Executive Session•Answers to yesterday’s questions•Executive Session – formulate conclusions and recommendations•Closeout – Presentation of conclusions and recommendations to MECO

AGS Review4-5 (6th?) November 2004 (BNL)

CHARGE: to be determined

My understanding (so might not be right!):

• The review will cover all aspects of the AGS WBS

• Will emphasize AGS/Booster/Switchyard modifications that are new to the project i.e. we need to make our case at this review

• The review will not look at PMP’s, PEP’s etc, or at detailed schedules.

• Costs will likely be a key issue – concentrate on the present “spreadsheet” approach and collecting backup material for costs.

• The schedule needs to be sufficiently developed to understand how the AGS/Booster/Switchyard work will be incorporated into MECO and K0PI0 beam development

More guidance on will be forthcoming

Next Meeting

• 23 September 2004– No Meeting

• 30 Sept 2004– Agenda to be determined