Andrei Seryi reported on progress developing work packages for the Beam Delivery System during the Engineering Design phase. His talk is available
here, and there is more information at the
SLAC BDS website. Summary of discussion during his presentations:
There are ATF and ATF2 work packages included in the ILC BDS EDR work package set, since this is necessary for getting work done on them in the next few years, and to allocate FTEs and money for the projects.
One issue is selecting detector and L* models to use for studies of L*. Andrei expects that they will pick 2 models -- a small detector with a short L* and a big detector with a large L* -- and work on these until such time as the detector community converges on 2 detector concepts which will go forward.
One suggestion was to identify the WPs which currently have no people working on them.
Collimation system efficiency can form a contribution to the tolerances and specifications of the beamline devices -- it has been shown that the efficiency is sensitive to the transfer map from the collimators to the IP (ie, the current design has a non-optimal transfer map, so the collimators would need to be closed further in the current design than would be necessary in an optimal design).
Andrei includes loss monitor specification in his WPs. This should perhaps be handled at a higher level, since all areas will need loss monitors.
PT showed some sample work package sets for the
RTML and
main linac, which are being worked on in collaboration with the area leaders of those areas. The key thing in these descriptions is that there is a fairly clear definition of the work to be done and the timeline for accomplishing it, which everyone agreed is essential. The RTML document includes a suggested amount of labor for a SLAC "bid" on the WPs; at the moment there's no such information in the linac WPs, nor is there any indication of whether SLAC is interested (we are, but there are obvious issues about available people and whether this is a work package where we should contribute, given the substantial number of people at other institutions who are available).
Chris Adolphsen suggested that the linac WPs should include a WP to develop a better analytic model of the linac emittance growth issues, similar to some work done by Ron Ruth many years ago for the X-band main linac. This will be added at some point.
On the issue of the feedback / feed-forward system for RTML: several people pointed out that the feedback system for the entire facility should be developed as a single WP, rather than being developed separately for each area.
Late addition (07-Sep-2007): Tor thinks that both ML (under Chris A) and BDS (under Andrei S) need to develop analytic models which can be used to parameterize their beamline systems, and which can aid in optimization of the systems. Thus, one action item for each of them from this meeting!
There are minutes attached to this event.
Show them.
