Project Overview Ron Ray Mu2e Project Manager Fermilab Sept. 26, 2008 Preliminary Director’s Review of mu2e Fermilab

Project Overview

Ron RayMu2e Project Manager

Fermilab

Sept. 26, 2008 Preliminary Director’s Review of mu2e

Fermilab

Sept. 26, 2008 R. Ray - Director's Review of mu2e 2

Outline

• Introduction• Project scope• Project Organization• ES&H• Risks• Cost and schedule• Next Steps• Summary


Introduction

• This is primarily a technical review and we welcome your comments, suggestions and insights.

• We are not the MECO Collaboration. We stand on the shoulders of MECO and many of our collaborators come from MECO, but many of us were not on MECO.

• We are currently in an assimilation phase where we are trying to take ownership of the vast amount of technical information that MECO produced over many years.

• We are more mature technically than most experiments at this stage, but the Collaboration is still in its infancy and the Project is embryonic.



Scope of mu2e Project

• Build a detector to measure to e conversion 3 superconducting solenoids (cryo, vacuum,

power…)• Production• Transport• Detector

Straw tube tracker Crystal calorimeter Cosmic ray veto Electronics, DAQ Auxiliary measurement devices

• Extinction monitor, muon stopping rate monitor, b field monitor, slow control and monitor of cryo, etc


Scope (cont.)

• New detector hall• New beamline from pbar to detector hall that

provides slow extracted beam with the appropriate beam structure

• Extinction channel• Simulations to support design

• ES&H is important. We will do this safely.• QA/QC is important.

• Build it all within baselined cost.• Build it on baselined schedule.


Controlling backgrounds drives the design of mu2e

Prompt background

Cosmic ray background

Muon decay in orbit (DIO) Signal is 105 MeV e-

originating in thin stopping target

SINDRUM II


Detector Hall and Civil Construction

FESS has done a significant amount of workpreparing a preliminary design and cost estimate.

Beamline travels under creek in attempt to minimize wetlands issues.

Includes plan for routing services to building (electrical, cryo, water, …).

Includes shielding on top of beamline and building. Building depth is driving the cost.

We have to better understand our requirements and be prepared to make tradeoffs as part of the value engineering process.


Proton Beam

• Use protons from booster while MI is ramping. No impact on neutrino program. 6 booster batches, each ~4x1012

protons, are delivered to the accumulator every 1.33 s.

~ 3.6x1020 pot/yr. Requires 15 Hz booster operation.

• Use the Debuncher and accumulator rings to bunch the beam.

• Require proton extinction of 10-9 between bunches Pulsed beam and extinction reduce prompt backgrounds.

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.


Superconducting Solenoids

Critical path. Most complex and expensive deliverable.

• Production solenoid containsproton target, heat shield, high gradient field to capture pions and muons.

• Transport solenoid contains two curved sections and a large gradient straight section. Magnetic channel that transports muons to stopping target.

• Detector Solenoid houses stopping target and detector elements and requires high field uniformity in detector region.


Tracker

• The Tracker must provide precise momentum measurements to separate signal events from DIOs in a 1 T field.

• The end point energy for DIO electrons coincides with the conversion signal, the end point spectrum falls as E5, thus the level of DIO background is sensitive to the resolution function.

• The resolution is dominated by multiple scattering, thus material must be kept to a minimum

• Tracker must operate with high efficiency in a high rate environment

• Robust pattern recognition required to eliminate tails from mis-reconstructed events.


Electromagnetic Calorimeter

• Calorimeter serves several purposes Used to form trigger

Starts data acquisition.

Provides reference time for tracker drift tubes Provides independent energy measurement Particle ID

• Must operate in high rate environment• Photodetector must operate in 1 T magnetic

field.


Cosmic Ray Shield

• Cosmic rays have been close to the limiting factor in previous experiments. Pulsed beam, active and passive shielding are used to reduce this background.

• Large area detector requires cost effective technology.

• Total rejection of 10-4 required for combination of active and passive shielding.

• Cosmic ray background can be measured off-spill.


Simulations

We need a reliable simulations package to validate designs, evaluate tradeoffs and optimize costs.• We have the MECO MC and can run it, make plots,

etc., but we don’t fully understand what is in it, the beamline is different, it is written in Fortran, etc.

• We want to convert the MECO MC to a mu2e MC using object oriented code that we fully understand and document.

• Talking to CD about help in this effort.


Project Organization

DOE

Fermilab Directorate

Accelerator DivisionComputing Division

Particle Physics DivisionTechnical Division

Business ServicesES&HFESS

Mu2e Project

L2 Managers

Mu2e Technical Board

Mu2e Risk Management Board

PAC

Mu2e PMG

Mu2e Spokespersons

Legend

ReportingResourcesAdvisory


Mu2e Project Office

• Project Manager• Deputy PM• Project Mechanical Engineer• Project Electrical Engineer• Scheduler• Financial Officer• ES&H oversight• QA oversight• Configuration Control• Expediter• Admin• …

Project Manager R. Ray


ES&H Issues

This list is surely not exhaustive:

• Fire, ionizing radiation, RF radiation, oxygen deficiency and electrical hazards are all relevant safety concerns for mu2e.

• Environmental issues include disturbance of wetlands and groundwater activation.

• These are the standard issues that we are used to dealing with at Fermilab. Most are covered by categorical exclusion.

• We will prepare a Preliminary Safety Assessment Document (PSAD) for CD1.


Risks

• The greatest cost and schedule risk is the solenoid system. Considerable resources will have to be devoted to

design, costing, procurement, QA/QC and integration to mitigate risk.

• Technical risk associated with extinction. We must have the beamline done early so that

extinction can be tested and leave us with time to react.

• Technical risk associated with heat shield designed for safe heat/energy loads in the production solenoid. Must be designed for the maximum potential beam flux


Risks (cont.)

• Detector performance. Can only be studied with extensive prototypes,

system tests, cosmic rays and beam tests. Can’t reconstruct DIO electrons until solenoid system is installed and commissioned.

• Slow extracted beam Boomerang scheme has yet to be worked out in

detail. Many uncertainties.


Cost Estimate

• Cost estimates at this early stage are rarely good to better than a factor of 2. History bears this out.

• Because of the extensive work on MECO we are better off than the typical project at this stage in many areas, but not all.


Cost Estimate Strategy for the Proposal

• Use numbers from MECO where possible Add 4 years of escalation at 3.5% per year Use Wojciki Review Committee recommendation

• "The RSVP Project Office advocates an overall project contingency of 45% based on the community's experience-base with large complex detector projects. The committee agrees that at least 45% is appropriate for the project at this stage."

Many parts of the MECO detector were understood to a level that would justify a smaller contingency than 45%, but we think this approach is adequate and appropriate for a proposal.


Cost Estimate Strategy (cont.)

• FESS did cost estimate on detector hall and beamline civil work. Use their contingency.

• AD did cost estimate on beamline. Use their contingency.

• Use Project management costs from NOvA. Use their contingency.


Cost Estimate

MECO M&SMECO Labor

MECO Base Cost

New Base Cost FY09$ Contingency Contingency Total

Extinction $1,139,518 $659,416 $1,798,934 $2,064,318 50% $1,032,159 $3,096,477Production Target and Shield $2,619,198 $237,241 $2,856,439 $3,277,829 50% $1,638,915 $4,916,744Muon Beamline $1,305,757 $1,377,291 $2,683,048 $3,078,859 50% $1,539,430 $4,618,289Straw Tracker $2,409,138 $1,080,319 $3,489,457 $4,004,232 50% $2,002,116 $6,006,348Calorimeter $3,687,911 $1,277,973 $4,965,884 $5,698,466 50% $2,849,233 $8,547,699Cosmic ray veto $1,060,371 $334,065 $1,394,436 $1,600,147 50% $800,074 $2,400,221Trigger and DAQ $954,862 $619,982 $1,574,844 $1,807,170 50% $903,585 $2,710,755Integration and Installation $136,262 $1,372,149 $1,508,411 $1,730,936 50% $865,468 $2,596,404Project Office $0 $0 $0 $7,000,000 30% $2,100,000 $9,100,000Solenoids $37,972,549 $13,196,509 $51,169,058 $58,717,671 50% $29,358,835 $88,076,506Beamline $15,000,000 50% $7,500,000 $22,500,000Civil Construction $28,000,000 30% $8,400,000 $36,400,000Total $51,285,566 $20,154,945 $71,440,511 $131,979,630 45% $58,989,815 $190,969,444


Cost - Longer Term Strategy

• We will develop a resource loaded cost and schedule from the bottom up. L2, L3 managers will develop a cost and schedule

that they must own and be responsible for. They will use the MECO WBS as a guide, where relevant, but if they prefer to do things a different way and can convince us that their plan makes sense, we will go in a different direction.

• We will use OpenPlan, COBRA, WelcomeRisk, etc. as our basic set of scheduling, budget and reporting tools.


Next Steps (cont.)

• CD-0: largely a Federal exercise with input from the Lab and Project

• CD-1 CDR Acquisition Strategy (DOE document) Preliminary Hazard Analysis Preliminary Project Execution Plan (DOE document) Preliminary Project Management Plan (steal from

NOvA) Preliminary cost, schedule, scope for design phase and

cost, schedule and scope ranges for remainder of Project.

Documents

Project Overview Ron Ray Mu2e Project Manager Fermilab Sept. 26, 2008 Preliminary Director’s Review of mu2e Fermilab