ATLAS Pixel Detector Pixel Support Tube Interfaces LBNL Internal PST Review E. Anderssen, LBNL.
The Molecular Foundry at LBNL
13
The Molecular Foundry at LBNL User Program: Statistics, Experiences, and Opportunities DAVID BUNZOW USER PROGRAM MANAGER The Molecular Foundry at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is funded by the U.S. Department of Energy through its Office of Science and Basic Energy Services August 15, 2011
description
The Molecular Foundry at LBNL. User Program: Statistics, Experiences, and Opportunities. David Bunzow User Program Manager. August 15, 2011. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of The Molecular Foundry at LBNL
The Molecular Foundry at LBNLUser Program: Statistics, Experiences, and Opportunities
DAVID BUNZOWUSER PROGRAM MANAGER
The Molecular Foundry at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is funded by the U.S. Department of Energy through its Office of Science and
Basic Energy Services
August 15, 2011
MISSION STATEMENT Delight our Users with exceptional, accurate and timely
services that address their multiple LBNL administrative and scientific needs.UPO PERSONNEL
DAVID A. BUNZOWTMF USER PROGRAM MANAGER
DONALD J. LEEDATABASE
ADMINISTRATION
LORRI M. STCLAIRE
PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION
USER PROGRAM: MISSION & PERSONNEL
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
TMF USER PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Proposals are submitted by potential User teams from throughout US and ROW to Molecular Foundry via our customized database Users describe what they want to accomplish scientifically, type of proposal (Standard, Instrument Only, Sample Only) Users request access to Lead/Support facilities equipment and staff capabilities as well as affiliated labs and other LNBL user facilities Proposal variations (proprietary, directors discretion and rapid access) are possible Proposals are evaluated internally for capability and effort, then externally for scientific merit by panels of subject matter experts Very best proposals within current/projected capacity are awarded up to one year of access time to accomplish their work Work results must be published in open journals (non-proprietary) Follow-on proposals are encouraged with good previous resultsNon-locals and industrial proposals strongly encouraged to apply!
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20110
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
64
84
106
215
280
319
270
64
84
106
209
262
310
156
4563
73
132 132
176
59
17 1928
59
10697
39
SubmittedEvaluatedAcceptedRejected
Fiscal Year
# o
f Use
r Pr
opos
als
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
TOTAL NUMBER OF PROPOSALS
ALS NCEM NERSC Affiliates Total Labs0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
4
10
4
8
26
3
56
7
21
6
8
65
25
12
7 7
5
31
5 5
11
2
23
8
10 109
37
3 3 3
0
9
2005200620072008200920102011
LBNL User Facilities
# o
f Acc
epte
d U
ser
Prop
osal
s
41 41 48 47 36 172
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
UTILIZATION OF OTHER LBNL USER FACILITIES
FISCAL YEAR
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20110
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
11 10 12
23 26
4334
1811 15
41
6372
44
32
57
73
138
165
183
143
2
15 1120 20 23
34
6 2 6 12 13 22 516
813
29 31
48
1721
48 52
88 84
105
34
10 814 10 13
7
Industrial
Government
Academic
Foreign Origin
Ind. Accepted
Gov. Accepted
Aca. Accepted
For. Accepted
Fiscal Year
# o
f Sub
mit
ted
Prop
osal
s
# o
f Acc
epte
d Pr
opos
als
163 93 111 222 274 321 255
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
USER PROPOSALS BY ORIGIN
UC-B LBNL Industrial All Others0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
616
11
31
167 10
51
34
14 12
4645
3323
109
66
54
26
116
76
61
43
130
48
63
34
121
2005200620072008200920102011
PI Institution
# o
f Acc
epte
d Pr
opos
als
291 248 159 604
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
PI INSTITUTIONS
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20110
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
3
26
63
159
243 261 254
36
74
98 128
187164 171
39
100
161
287
430 425 425
Badged UsersOther UsersTotal
Fiscal Year
# o
f Use
rs
TOTAL NUMBER OF USERS
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
SUBMITTED PROJECTS BY LEAD FACILITY
LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY
21.7%
21.3%
8.4%18.2%
16.0%
14.5%
I + M
Nanofab
Theory
Inorganic
Biological
Organic
Type # %
Standard 1118 5.3%
Instrument 113 8.7%
Sample 69 86.0%
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20110
10
20
30
40
50
60
3
9
2123
28
4340
18
2
8
37
29
34 34
52
19StaffUsers
Calendar Year
Foun
dry
Publ
icat
ions
58 52 62 77 92 37
PEER-REVIEWED FOUNDRY PUBLICATIONS
(BASED ON CALENDAR YEAR)
LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY
5 17
USER PROJECTS BY LEAD FACILITY
LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20110
10
20
30
40
50
60
70 I + M
Nanofab
Theory
Inorganic
Biological
Organic
Fiscal Year
# o
f Sub
mit
ted
Prop
osal
s
Facility Total
I + M 282
Nanofab 277
Theory 109
Inorganic 236
Biological 208
Organic 188
PROJECTS BREAKDOWN BY FACILITY
LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY
Facilities 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total
I + M 18 35 41 116 150 160 139 659
Lead 4 11 20 42 56 51 48 232
Support 14 24 21 74 94 109 91 427
Nanofab 27 27 39 67 81 90 77 408
Lead 23 20 26 44 53 57 38 261
Support 4 7 13 23 28 33 39 147
Theory 7 14 19 23 36 36 34 169
Lead 3 6 11 14 27 23 22 106
Support 4 8 8 9 9 13 12 63
Inorganic 20 30 15 47 70 82 74 338
Lead 18 18 8 29 43 54 43 213
Support 2 12 7 18 27 28 31 125
Biological 7 20 18 32 54 52 45 228
Lead 5 17 14 25 31 41 28 161
Support 2 3 4 7 23 11 17 67
Organic 17 19 16 42 49 62 56 261
Lead 11 11 10 25 27 31 30 145
Support 6 8 6 17 22 31 26 116
DISTRIBUTION OF USER PROJECTS
1
6
903 6
5
9
2
2
136
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
22
1
3
1
5 5
6
6
21
18
11
12
7
4
33
7
State #
CT 5
DC 1
DE 5
MA 25
MD 3
NJ 8
RI 1
United States of America 1175
Country #
Australia 10
Austria 3
Belgium 2
Canada 3
China 4
Denmark 2
Finland 1
France 8
Germany 17
India 2
Ireland 2
Israel 2
Italy 22
Japan 2
Netherlands 3
Pakistan 1
Singapore 6
South Korea 3
Spain 7
Sweden 5
Switzerland 1
Taiwan 1
United Kingdom 16LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY
