Mu2e WGM 10/20/2010 R. Ray Mu2e Project manager. Why does the building have to go in the middle of a road? R. Ray - Mu2e WGM2

Mu2e WGM

10/20/2010

R. Ray

Mu2e Project manager

R. Ray - Mu2e WGM 2

Why does the building have to go in the middle of a road?

R. Ray - Mu2e WGM 3

Some sites we have evaluated

R. Ray - Mu2e WGM 4

Constraints

There are several factors that come into play when considering the location of Mu2e:

• Where can we connect to the Debuncher Ring?• Wetlands and Indian Creek.• Beam requirements for the AC Dipole

R. Ray - Mu2e WGM 5

1st Location Evaluated

This was the first location that we seriously evaluated.

• To break out of the Debuncher at this location would require significant demolition to AP10, relocation of the D/A line and relocation/splicing of a large number of cables and busses.

• Beamline must pass under Indian Creek, a state waterway. Wetlands surround the creek.

Significant shielding required between beamline and creek

Creek would have to be diverted during construction

Would surely push us from a CX to an EA

R. Ray - Mu2e WGM 6

Preferred Site – 4/09

R. Ray - Mu2e WGM 7

Preferred Site 4/09

• This became our preferred site when we realized that the only place where we could easily extract beam from the pbar source was just North of AP30.

• An existing beamline from the Booster connects to the pbar source at this location, so a stub allowing connection to the Debuncher already exists.

• AD/PBAR experts who have walked the tunnel tell us that connecting anywhere else is extremely difficult and costly.

The tunnel is packed with equipment, cable trays, etc.

• This put us in an existing parking lot with easy access to utilities and well away from Indian Creek. We were very happy with this location.

R. Ray - Mu2e WGM 8

Beamline Growth

HOWEVER…. The beam requirements for the AC dipole have made it necessary to extend the length of the beamline.

• The AC dipole is required to extinguish beam between pulses that causes background.

• The AC dipole requires an adequate bend strength to extinguish the beam between pulses to the required level.

• To build a magnet with adequate bend strength that we can power at high frequency (up to 5 MHz) pushes us toward a beam with large bx (betatron function in the bend plane), by ~ 0 and long weak magnets for the AC dipole.

We use bx = 250 m and L = 6 m

4 times less stored energy than bx = 50 m and L = 2 m

• The length of the Mu2e beamline has been extended to allow preparation of a beam with large bx.

R. Ray - Mu2e WGM 9

Longer Beamline

• Our first pass at a longer beamline put us here.

Note the proximity to Indian Creek.

• This is very advanced optics. Not a simple transfer line.

• Also not a gold plated line. We don’t cancel the derivative of the dispersion at the target, something we would do if we had more space.

R. Ray - Mu2e WGM 10

Current Location

• We were able to squeeze some space out of the upstream bends. Can’t gain anymore without reducing bx.

• Reducing bx increases the cost and technical risk associated with the AC dipole.

• The current location minimizes the cost and the project risk. Any other location will increase the cost.


Precedent for diversion of Kautz Road

Original Kautz Road

Diversion of Kautz Road to accommodate new Antiproton source


L2 Systems and Managers

1.2 Accelerator

S. WerkemaFNAL

1.3 Conventional ConstructionT. Lackowski

FNAL

1.4 Solenoids

M. LammFNAL

1.5 Muon Channel

S. FeherFNAL

1.6 Tracker

A. MukherjeeFNAL

1.7 Calorimeter

Stefano MiscettiFrascati

1.8 Cosmic Ray

VetoC. Dukes

UVa.

1.9 Trigger and

DAQM. Bowden

FNAL

1.1 Project

ManagementR. RayFNAL

L2 Managers are now all in place. Many L3 managers also in place.


Acquisition Strategy

Passed back and forth a couple of times now. Now with Lisa Rodgers, FSO acquisition expert.

• Based on experience with NOvA, we need to define the key performance parameters in a general enough way to guarantee that we meet them.

I’ve made a first pass

• Some confusion about LEED requirements. We originally thought that for a building like ours we were only required to comply

with the LEED guiding principles. We may now have to get the building LEED certified. Trying to understand this.


Draft KPPs

• Project completion (CD-4) will be accomplished when the scope defined in the WBS dictionary has been completed and the apparatus has been demonstrated to be functioning by achieving Key Performance Parameters (KPP) listed below. After achieving the Key Performance Parameters, the project manager will request acceptance and approval of CD-4. The Key Performance Parameters are those that demonstrate functionality of the system while achievement of beam parameters required for the experimental program will be obtained after routine tuning and operation of the accelerator complex.

Key Performance Parameters for CD-4: • Accelerator complex capable of delivering 8 GeV protons to the Mu2e production target at the rate of 3.6

x 1020 per year. • Accelerator complex capable of achieving a beam extinction, defined as the ratio of protons between

pulses to the number of protons contained in pulses, of 10-9 (not sure about this one).

• Solenoid system has been demonstrated to run at full field strength. • Tracks from cosmic ray muons, triggered by the cosmic ray veto, have been reconstructed in the

detector. • Recording of cosmic ray events in the detector by the data acquisition system.


PEP

Paul has a draft.

Trying to make it consistent with new guidelines from Lehman…


CDR

Continued progress on general sections.


CDR


Accelerator

• Proton pulse width (tail) is wider than the ideal case.• Ideal pulse would have an RMS of 20 ns or less.• The best we can do is ~ 40 ns. We can accommodate this by moving the live

gate a bit and losing a small amount of sensitivity.• We can save a substantial amount of money (~$4M) by relaxing 40 ns to 45 ns.• Difference between 40 and 45 ns is not so great, so we will likely do this once

we are sure we understand all of the issues.


Accelerator

• Production target We are unable to get any mechanical engineering out of AD. Talking to RAL high power target group about conceptual design for production

target. Unfortunately, so is everybody else.o NUMI/MINOS, NOvA, LBNE

Scope of work – Final report dateo Study of off-center beam pulse - Febo Conceptual design of water cooling system – Marcho Conceptual design of Mechanical support – Juneo Conceptual design of remote handing equipment – July

Scheduleo 1st design study report – Feb.o 2d design study report – Mayo Final report including all drawings and simulation files – Feb - July


Accelerator

• Heat Shield Unable to get any mechanical engineering from anywhere in the lab for this job. Design from MECO that can't be manufactured, and a design from a summer

student that cannot hold its shape horizontally in Earth's gravity, with an unknown load path to the floor, and insufficient conductivity from piece to piece in a vacuum to get the energy deposited out. And it's not clear how it could be installed in the magnet.

We are hiring Bartoszek Engineering to do a conceptual design.o Develop a conceptual design of the heat and radiation shield (absorber) for

the Mu2e Production Solenoid including the time averaged power removal (cooling), static structural analysis, design for assembly and installation, interface with target support/replacement system and vacuum vessel, and cost/schedule estimate.


Solenoid Progress

• Working on magnet CDR.• Preparing for vendor visits.• Will probably hire a couple of vendors to do a cost estimate for us for CD-1.

Have to start this process soon!


Conventional Construction

• Good progress on requirements. Mature draft of requirements document

now available.

• Meetings with stakeholders• Wetlands report from Patrick

Engineering.


Staffing

• L2 Managers are doing a good job of identifying L3 managers.• For CD-1 I still need

Deputyo Increasing need. I can’t keep up with everything.

Project EE – Will be in place before pre-CD-1 Reviewo Mu2e, LBNE, CMS all need a Project EE and 3 highly qualified candidates

have been identified.o Discussions held with all of the candidates.

Project Risk Managero 25% of an FTE at this point.


CD-1

Lehman CD-1 Review March 1, 2011

Director’s Review Feb. 1, 2011

CDR complete Jan. 15, 2011

Final cost & schedule and associated documentation.

Jan. 15, 2011

Director’s Design Review Dec. 15, 2010

L2 CDR contributions submitted Dec. 1, 2010

Pre CD-1 Cost and Schedule Review Nov 15, 2010

L2 Design Reviews November, 2010

Time

Delayed from Nov. May delay until January.


Schedule

CD-1 CD-2/3a

CD-3b


Requirements


Action Items

• Project EE – Ron Ray In place soon.

• Complete set of requirements documents – Miller/Bernstein Light at the end of the tunnel, but not there yet.

• Start scheduling L2 design reviews Detailed plan for accelerator reviews in place. Working on others.

• Develop a plan for Directors Design Review and Pre-CD-1 Review First pass discussions. Preparations underway for pre CD-1 Review. Director’s

Design Review delayed until December of January. We are not ready.

Documents

Mu2e WGM 10/20/2010 R. Ray Mu2e Project manager. Why does the building have to go in the middle of a road? R. Ray - Mu2e WGM2