Upload
jasmin-bradford
View
216
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
U.S. ATLAS Progress
1. Pictures of equipment constructed in the six detector subsystems in U.S. ATLAS.
2. Current issues: Rate of Progress in Subsystems Corrective actions on R.O.P. Interfaces with ATLAS Project aspect of computing
Bill Willis:
goes with picture of atlas with u.s. deliverables labeled, can we redo this one?
Bill Willis:
goes with picture of atlas with u.s. deliverables labeled, can we redo this one?
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
1. Silicon Tracking
Space frame for the pixel detectors. Silicon strip module with ABCD electronics chips.
Bill Willis:
TWO pictures inset, with text beneath? The reason I suggest this is that these pix are not meaningful to this audience anyway
Bill Willis:
TWO pictures inset, with text beneath? The reason I suggest this is that these pix are not meaningful to this audience anyway
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
2. TRT Straw Tubes
Straw factory at Hampton and completed module 0 for the Barrel TRT in the space frame
Bill Willis:
here we have one nice big picture,
of chamber or straws, and tiny corner on electronics, w/or wout picture
Bill Willis:
here we have one nice big picture,
of chamber or straws, and tiny corner on electronics, w/or wout picture
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
3. Liquid Argon EM Calorimeter
U.S. technical people inspecting the aluminum rings and welds at the vendor which is manufacturing the Barrel Cryostat.
Bill Willis:
here we have two big pix, so two sheets, cryo and feedthroughs, gives room for small comments on other stuff
Bill Willis:
here we have two big pix, so two sheets, cryo and feedthroughs, gives room for small comments on other stuff
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
Liquid Argon Signal Feedthroughs
U.S. developed high density pin carriers for the signal feedthroughs.
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
4. Scintillator Tile Hadron Calorimeter
Submodule stacking at ANL. Work on front-end electronics ready for Production Readiness Review
Bill Willis:
one big picture of module in some stage, small comments on electronics
Bill Willis:
one big picture of module in some stage, small comments on electronics
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
5. Muon Tracking Detector
Complete Prototype of a Monitored Drift Tube Chamber and tooling in Boston
Bill Willis:
picture of our prototype chamber
Bill Willis:
picture of our prototype chamber
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
6. Trigger and Data Acquision
12U VME card
This assembles Region of Interest (RoI) fragments from several (<12) level 1 sources and distributes
them to supervisor CPU's which in turn assign events to LVL2 farm computers for the trigger decisions. This board runs at the required 100kHz.
Bill Willis:
here there could be a big block diagram and a small photo of the recent version of the Supervisor
Bill Willis:
here there could be a big block diagram and a small photo of the recent version of the Supervisor
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
Our schedule issues
THE THEME OF THIS SUMMARY IS THE U.S. ATLAS SCHEDULE, AND INTEGRATION WITH ATLAS
WE HAVE KEPT U.S. DELIVERABLES ON TRACK IF NEAR THE “TRUE” ATLAS CRITICAL PATH
BUT THERE IS A WIDE-SPREAD TENDENCY TOWARD A
RATE-OF-PROGRESS GAP FOR THE “LESS CRITICAL” ITEMS
THESE HAVE BEEN MANAGED FOR MINIMUM COST, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT BASE PROGRAM RESOURCES, AND FLOAT, BUT WE MUST NOW ACCELERATE ALL SYSTEMS, BY CONTINGENCY, OR CHANGE SCHEDULES, IF “NOT U.S. DRIVEN”
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
US ATLAS Project Monthly Status ReportBudget Authority/Cost/Obligations
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
Month - Year
Do
llars
in M
illio
ns
BA 15.460 26.660 26.660 26.660 33.133 33.133 33.133 39.133 39.133 39.133 39.133 39.133 39.133 54.633 54.633 54.633 60.633 60.633 60.633 66.573 66.573 66.573 66.573 66.573 66.573
Planned Cost 15.460 22.014 22.831 23.458 24.519 25.159 26.040 27.262 27.925 29.035 31.097 32.460 33.581 41.756 43.156 44.238 45.804 46.576 47.641 48.435 49.255 50.435 52.295 53.011 53.704
Cost 9.796 11.098 11.627 11.627 12.560 14.548 14.821 15.481
Cost + Obligations 12.370 13.061 13.248 14.048 15.398 16.309 16.969 17.831
S-98 O-98 N-98 D-98 J -99 F-99 M-99 A-99 M-99 J -99 J -99 A-99 S-99 O-99 N-99 D-99 J -00 F-00 M-00 A-00 M-00 J -00 J -00 A-00 S-00
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
Schedule/Performance/Actual
(1,000.0)
4,000.0
9,000.0
14,000.0
19,000.0
24,000.0
Month -Year
Dol
lars
x10
00
BCWS 9,810.1 10,751.0 11,082.7 12,311.7 12,971.5 13,541.2 14,176.8 13,953.0 13,953.0 15,052.8 15,617.0 16,685.0 17,524.5 18,332.9
BCWP 8,862.4 9,596.8 10,245.4 11,343.2 11,691.2 12,217.2 12,852.8 11,937.1 11,937.1 12,787.2 13,380.7 14,175.3 14,954.8 15,581.9
ACWP 8,282.7 9,320.1 9,585.7 10,322.0 11,335.1 11,842.5 12,478.1 11,098.4 11,098.4 11,626.7 12,598.3 14,547.7 14,791.0 15,481.4
M-98 A-98 M-98 J -98 J -98 A-98 S-98 O-98 N-98 D-98 J -99 F-99 M-99 A-99 M-99 J -99 J -99 A-99 S-99
NSF R&D removed
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
U.S.ATLASSchedule and Cost Variance
(3,000.0)
(2,500.0)
(2,000.0)
(1,500.0)
(1,000.0)
(500.0)
-
500.0
1,000.0
1,500.0
Month - Year
Var
ianc
e (K
$s)
SV (947.7) (1,154.2) (837.3) (968.5) (1,280.3) (1,324.0) (1,324.0) (2,015.9) (2,015.9) (2,265.6) (2,236.3) (2,509.7) (2,569.7) (2,751.0)
CV 579.7 276.7 659.7 1,021.2 356.1 374.7 374.7 838.7 838.7 1,160.5 782.4 (372.4) 163.8 100.5
M-98 A-98 M-98 J -98 J -98 A-98 S-98 O-98 N-98 D-98 J -99 F-99 M-99 A-99 M-99 J -99 J -99 A-99 S-99
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
Cost and Schedule Variances
Project Status Report Section 10
Cumulative To Date (k$) At Completion (k$) Complete (%)Budgeted Cost Actual Cost Variance Latest
Work Work Of Work Budgeted RevisedWBS Element Scheduled Performed Performed Schedule Cost AY $s Estimate Variance
1.1 Silicon 3,085.9 2,321.8 2,216.8 (764.1) 105.0 10,670.7 10,670.7 -
1.2 TRT 1,433.6 1,198.5 1,210.5 (235.1) (12.0) 8,069.5 8,069.5
1.3 Liquid Argon 7,005.3 5,855.1 5,802.1 (1,150.2) 53.0 35,271.8 35,271.8 -
1.4 TileCal 2,117.3 1,902.4 1,883.4 (214.9) 19.0 7,046.5 7,046.5 -
1.5 Muon 2,582.2 2,251.3 2,448.0 (330.9) (196.7) 19,666.2 19,666.2 -
1.6 Trigger/DAQ 834.9 779.1 646.9 (55.8) 132.2 2,609.7 2,609.7 -
1.7 Common Projects 1 193.0 193.0 193.0 - - 9,179.1 9,179.1 -
1.8 Education 1 - - - - - 204.1 204.1 -
1.9 Project Management 1 1,080.7 1,080.7 1,080.7 - - 7,338.9 7,338.9 -
Sub Total 18,332.9 15,581.9 15,481.4 (2,751.0) 100.5 100,056.5 100,056.5 -
Management Reserve - - -
Contingency 2 26,202.0 26,202.0 -
Management Contingency 17,715.6 17,715.6 -
Items Outside of Approved Baseline 19,775.9 19,775.9 -
Escalation - - -
U.S. ATLAS Total 18,332.9 15,581.9 15,481.4 (2,751.0) 100.5 163,750.0 163,750.0 -
Notes: 1 LOE2 Reduced contingency by $67.4k to fit within funding constraint of $163,750k (BCP Required)
U.S. ATLASCost Schedule Status Report
Reporting Period Ending:04/30/99
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
Lehman Review Assessment
Scan lehman will be put here
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
Corrective Action, WBS 1.
WBS 1, Silicon Strip and Pixel Detectors
The Strip readout is seriously delayed due to
ASIC design flaws discovered a year ago, but it is a joint effort with Europe, where the U.S. has assumed a larger role since the problem emerged, in order to accelerate the ATLAS deliverables overall, ie the U.S. is advancing the schedule, not delaying it. We want to do more:
We will pay incentive fees to get in “hot fab” lines for two submissions, gaining twice six weeks for $36K
We will add some temporary engineering ($20K) and some test hardware ($24K)
We then expect to make ATLAS Milestone end ‘99
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
Corrective Action, WBS 1.2
We want to keep the start of production Milestone of the Straw Tube modules, in September. The U.S. group believes that this can be done, despite the late (June) date of the meeting following up the Dec. 1998 PRR, where the last necessary decisions are being made. We have encouraged them to get temporary help to keep this schedule and get production ok.
The U.S. has assumed a larger role in the readout electronics than foreseen, leading to a net improvement in the ATLAS schedule but a delay in the U.S. deliverables.
Temporary help for the design engineering will be added, and optional improvements will be dropped or postponed. This will increase float.
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
Corrective Action, WBS 1.3
One item in the Liquid Argon Calorimeter, the readout electrodes WBS 1.3.4.1, now appears to define the critical path of ATLAS, having suffered a delay in procurement by CERN. This was not a responsibility of the U.S. though we are committed to supply a part of the cost, fixed at $2M (29%of the nominal total).
Recently we offered to help improve the schedule for this item by seeking another qualified vendor to produce 29% of the electrodes, with the U.S. to pay the actual cost, including following the procurement.
ATLAS has declined to take up this offer, deciding that their new approach with the selected vendor will succeed in supplying all the pieces needed on an accelerated production schedule, at a favorable cost.
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
Corrective Action in WBS 1.3, contd.
Most U.S. deliverables in WBS 1.3 are linked to the electrode delivery in schedule and some are also at risk for design changes if the design of the electrodes were changed to ease their fabrication.
We choose not to put into production the latter, leading to an apparent schedule delay that is misleading, since it is our deliberate choice.
We intend to change the schedule for these items, to reflect the links to the current ATLAS schedule.
We have added engineering in WBS 1.3.10, the Forward Calorimeter, to get the system to the point we need before authorizing production.
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
Corrective Action, WBS 1.4
The Tile Calorimeter is the first detector to be installed in ATLAS, so it must be ready on schedule, though there is presently some float in the schedule.
Production of the calorimeter modules has begun at two sites, and no schedule problem is foreseen.
We will monitor the production closely, and add production manpower if needed.
The electronics for which the U.S. is responsible does not seem to offer a schedule challenge, but the digitizer component made in Europe might suffer a delay, and in this case we may offer to help.
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
Corrective Action, WBS 1.5
Muons: the U.S. is responsible for most of the tracking chambers in the endcaps, MDT and CSC.
This is the last detector installed in ATLAS. A big production of chambers built to 5 microns. Drift Tube production in three sites, OK. One site qualified by engineering prototype. Needed: qualified tooling at all three sites,
Configuration Control (that ATLAS cannot provide) and Quality Assurance.
U.S. Muons asked to get temporary people to execute these tasks quickly, using Contingency.
Drift Tube Electronics in good shape, U.S. has been providing test electronics for many sites.
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
Muon Actions, continued
Cathode Strip Chambers a U.S. responsibility. Chambers ready for production More BNL base support for electronics assumed than
now available The ATLAS group at UC Irvine was pursuing one (DSP)
of two options for the Silicon Detector strip and pixel Read Out Drivers;
Recently, WBS 1 chose the (Wisconsin/LBNL FPGA) solution as adequate, releasing a part of UCI effort. (Some added effort needed to replace them.)
They have joined the CSC Muons in WBS 1.5, filling a hole. (They will also use their DSP expertise to coordinate with the LA ROD, with possible cost savings.)
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
WBS 1.6 Schedule
The Trigger/DAQ Subsystem has met its R & D Milestones, involving substantial work.
This system is not yet baselined, and is working on a level of effort basis.
We cannot identify any schedule issues at this stage.
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
Cost Implications of Corrective Actions
We are substantial under the budget on the costing of our large procurements so far, probably by more than the charge to Contingency implied by the Corrective Actions described here.
Our Cost to Complete study will give firm estimate of the Contingency balance. It is estimated now to be 52%.
U.S. ATLAS 21 July 1999
U.S. ATLAS COMPUTING
In March and April I received letters from DOS and NSF asking that the U.S. ATLAS Project take on the responsibility for Computing.
The Resources will be provided outside the Project Budget
We intend to maintain the same level of Project Control for the computing as for the rest of the Project
We have named John Huth as Associate Project Manager for Physics and Computing