U.S. ATLAS HL-LHC Upgrade Level 2 and Deputies-NSF only Management Mailing List

[Hal Evans <hgevans AT indiana.edu>]

Hi Elliot and John,

Yes - you should just take the top 5 ranked risks from your risk 
register and expand on them a bit: why they are highly ranked, what 
we're doing about them, etc.

For the technical requirements: just choose 5 from the US ATLAS Tech 
Specs document (#216) and state what progress has been made on them, 
i.e. have they already been achieved in prototypes. Also say a word or 
two about how they will be verified during QA and/or QC.

Cheers  -  Hal

On 9/11/19 8:35 PM, Gustaaf Brooijmans wrote:
> This message was sent from a non-IU address. Please exercise caution 
> when clicking links or opening attachments from external sources.
> -------
>
> It's technical, to demonstrate that there is no technical hurdle left. 
> So ADC ENOB, 25 Gbps link speeds, etc.
>
> On 9/11/19 8:27 PM, Elliot Lipeles wrote:
> > I second Johns suggestion on the risks.
> >
> > I'm a bit stumped on the "what are the (5) major technical 
> > requirements,". I.e. what level are we talking about?...
> >
> > Should this be extracted from the technical specifications document?  
> > E.g. TP provides external links, full-mesh backplane data sharing, 
> > and mezzanine I/O for 8 ITK layers (input event rate of 1 MHz for 10% 
> > of the detector plus 100 kHz for the full detector) or 5 ITK layers 
> > (100 kHz for the full detector) for first and second stage, 
> > respectively.
> >
> > Or something more flowdown like, e.g. HTT provides 2 GeV tracking in 
> > region that comprise 10% of the detector data at 1 MHz?
> >
> > Elliot
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 8:19 PM John Parsons 
> > <parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu <mailto:parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >     If we interpret #3 as, as it sounds to me, the top 5
> >     risks by rank per subsystem, can't we just ask George to extract
> >     that info based on the ranks in the RR?  (sorry George,
> >     but you did volunteer! :)
> >
> >     (and if we interpret it that each L2 should choose which
> >     5 "bother them most", we just open ourselves to the
> >     question of what the risk rank in the RR actually means)
> >
> >     On 9/11/19 7:55 PM, Gustaaf Brooijmans wrote:
> >      >
> >      > Hello all,
> >      >
> >      > Just to be clear, the questions with input needed from the
> >     L2s/system
> >      > teams are:
> >      >
> >      > 1. if you haven't done so yet, please provide an earliest/latest
> >      > decision point to Hal to update our table
> >      >
> >      > 3. Please provide an ordered table to me
> >      >
> >      > 4. Each L2, please send me and Hal the item you're most worried
> >     about,
> >      > and we'll downselect
> >      >
> >      > 7. LAr to provide 1-2 slides
> >      >
> >      > 8.  LAr and muon to provide a few sentences each
> >      >
> >      > 9.  Mike, please provide a phrasing that's not too contradicting
> >      >
> >      > 10. Each L2 provide 2 slides: one with top 5 items, one with DD
> >     for one
> >      > of them
> >      >
> >      > 11.  Mark K: please provide a slide
> >      >
> >      > Thanks,
> >      >
> >      > Gustaaf
> >      >
> >      > On 9/11/19 5:36 PM, Michael Tuts wrote:
> >      >> Probably homework assignments are obvious…enjoy
> >      >>
> >      >> *From:* Tony Beasley <tbeasley AT nrao.edu 
> > <mailto:tbeasley AT nrao.edu>>
> >      >> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 11, 2019 5:26 PM
> >      >> *To:* Michael Tuts <tuts AT pmtuts.net <mailto:tuts AT pmtuts.net>>;
> >     Mark Coles (mcoles AT nsf.gov <mailto:mcoles AT nsf.gov>)
> >      >> <mcoles AT nsf.gov <mailto:mcoles AT nsf.gov>>
> >      >> *Subject:* Homework - Day 1
> >      >>
> >      >> Dear Mike,
> >      >>
> >      >> Please find some questions from the Panel to be addressed at 
> > 8:30am
> >      >> tomorrow. Expect a short paragraph, verbal description or
> >     diagram in
> >      >> most cases.
> >      >>
> >      >> thanks… Tony
> >      >>
> >      >>  1. Descope/upscope items - please provide both
> >     preferred/scheduled and
> >      >>     need-by dates...
> >      >>  2. Please provide a schedule of expiration of descope options
> >      >>     throughout project. please focus on dates...
> >      >>  3. Provide top 5 risks in rank order (worst->least) for each 
> > major
> >      >>     subsystem. The risk register is dense .. would like to see
> >     the major
> >      >>     concerns.
> >      >>  4. Hank Evans: please provide a rank-ordered list of 
> > remaining work
> >      >>     packages (in the pre-MREFC project) - what are you most
> >     concerned
> >      >>     about? Please mention your “plan B's”.
> >      >>  5. Please provide the total project BOE distribution - pie
> >     chart format.
> >      >>  6. Columbia mgt decision to implement 30 subawards generates 
> > a cost
> >      >>     impact ~$186k ...   was this to support EV reporting?   What
> >     did the
> >      >>     project gain from this change?
> >      >>
> >      >>  7. What risks are being carried forward by the project by the
> >      >>     (aggressive?) scheduled downselect of the ADC in 
> > December? e.g.
> >      >>     radiation tolerance of the ADC ASIC version 3? Please 
> > clarify
> >      >>     statement on radiation tolerance of commercial ADC option.
> >      >>  8. What is the schedule risk of the late delivery of the 
> > production
> >      >>     version of lpGBT?
> >      >>
> >      >>  9. Please restate/clarify Scientific travel – where is it
> >     covered in
> >      >>     the MREFC award?  Suggest: please produce List of
> >     significant things
> >      >>     not in there yet.... don't let us find them.
> >      >>
> >      >> 10. For each subsystem - what are the (5) major technical
> >     requirements,
> >      >>     and what is your assessment of your ability to meet them
> >     (and what
> >      >>     is the basis of that assessment?). Please trace one major
> >      >>     science/technical specification from the international ATLAS
> >      >>     specification, through your US ATLAS specification set, 
> > indicate
> >      >>     where addressed in design, and demonstrate how you intend to
> >     assess
> >      >>     compliance.
> >      >> 11. Please describe the connections between the EPO manager, 
> > the L2
> >      >>     managers, and the EPO proponents at the partner
> >     universities. How is
> >      >>     communication/coordination occuring between these groups? 
> > How
> >      >>     specifically will the project take advantage of community
> >      >>     initiatives like QUARKNET? Give examples of joint activities
> >     being
> >      >>     considered.
> >      >> 12. How exposed is the US project to CERN Project Management
> >      >>     uncertainties in schedule? If CERN schedule drifts across 
> > many
> >      >>     subsystems, could the US project be negatively impacted 
> > beyond
> >      >>     current expectations?
> >      >> ///
> >      >>
> >      >>
> >      >>
> >      >>
> >      >> _______________________________________________
> >      >> Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l mailing list
> >      >> Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > <mailto:Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> >      >>
> > https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l
> >      >>
> >      >
> >
> >     -- 
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> >
> >     John Parsons
> >     Nevis Labs,             Email: parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu
> >     <mailto:parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu>
> >        Columbia University   Phone: (914) 591-2820
> >     P.O. Box 137            Fax: (914) 591-8120
> >     Irvington, NY 10533     WWW:
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.nevis.columbia.edu_-7Eparsons_&d=DwIDaQ&c=aTOVZmpUfPKZuaG9NO7J7Mh6imZbfhL47t9CpZ-pCOw&r=Z0wuTxQYnTTMlYma4lGZlO3skeCGVBrGGurYkWbhJsJuG5HaY82rmCNSdFOV7C4Z&m=QmXFkjjm7kvHTI3zuSjkPm_NAHfhDWgT9kqSRzQKOrc&s=utMfkvqWsR7l_ekRvJPDYbrChTMFqHmgKDEntVEZGME&e=
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l mailing list
> >     Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > <mailto:Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> > https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l
--
^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v
 Hal Evans                        hgevans AT indiana.edu
           https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__pages.iu.edu_-7Ehgevans_&d=DwIDaQ&c=aTOVZmpUfPKZuaG9NO7J7Mh6imZbfhL47t9CpZ-pCOw&r=Z0wuTxQYnTTMlYma4lGZlO3skeCGVBrGGurYkWbhJsJuG5HaY82rmCNSdFOV7C4Z&m=2rRASFJbVuGww8l33dKAR3XO1oVeda_bPz0ALSD1ANI&s=iRmqK5VrhTqzF-enLS6Fkl-gxBd4zjpFH5Z4EFEwlAs&e= 
 Tel: (812)856-3828                Fax: (812)855-5533
 253 Swain Hall West               Indiana University
 727 E. Third St.               Bloomington, IN 47405
v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^