Meeting summary for HPS Exec Meeting of 6/29/12:

Present: Stepan, Maurik, Tim, Takashi, Matt, John

Please send corrections/additions to the whole EC.

1. Stepan recounted discussions with Rolf and Volker re PAC "approval".
Rolf said that PAC is approving 2 weeks running with test apparatus, hoping it can happen in 2014. We don't know if the 2 weeks includes setup and commissioning, the factor of 2 for time on the floor, etc. He also said that HDice has a similar need for 2014 beam time, and that beam time will be limited, making interference in Hall B inevitable. Beam time wouldn't be available until June, 2014.
7-9 weeks is allotted to physics running in 2014. Schedule has uncertainties because of budget uncertainties for the lab.
Running in Hall B should probably be close to the present location, since a good deal of money is required to establish the beamline at the alcove. HPS Test and HDice setups are not compatible in this geometry.
Rolf has urged us on several occasions to consider setting up in Hall A. We should.
Rolf wants a meeting between lab management and HPS management to work out plans for going forward end of July.
Stepan proposed we prepare two scenarios for what HPS Test Run running would require, one for Hall A and one for Hall B. (Perhaps we should think through setting up the Hall B alcove as well) These would include schedule information (time to commission beamlines, install and commission apparatus, commission electron running in HPS Test, and take data), resources required, personnel required, etc. We should write these up to give to management prior to our discussions. We should also include what resources we need to upgrade HPS test for a successful run. It will be valuable to have an update of trigger and tracking performance for the discussions as well, to demonstrate our current understanding of the validity of the EGS simulation.

2. John reviewed a recent discussion with Alan Stone of DOE HEP.
We should submit FWPs from both Jlab and SLAC as soon as we know what resources are needed for preparing for the 2014 run. Alan seems favorably disposed toward funding them, especially if they are in the 100k-200k range, and doing so early in FY13. Alan thinks it only makes sense to submit a proposal for full HPS when the lab has fully approved it. The project limit is 5M$--if we propose something less than that, we need not go through DOE's formal project steps, which are time consuming and energy consuming. There is a 2M$ limit to capital equipment. (These limits differ from what we had heard earlier form Kogut; John will try to understand the differences.)

3. Work needed for HPS Test run.
The list includes: SVT DAQ upgrade; Ecal motherboard remanufacture and replacement; New amp boards; new design of Ecal support; vac chamber preparation with flanges; new CTP and firmware; stepper motor control and readout commissioning; any SVT sensors to replace? develop trigger diagnostics and firmware; engineer electron beam interlocks and control software for safe SVT operation.
In addition, a good deal of monitoring software and procedures have to be developed to check timings and performance of the trigger and the DAQ, and to check data quality online for Ecal and SVT.

4. Next meeting of EC on July 13.

  • No labels