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

[Gustaaf Brooijmans <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu>]

Hi,

There are two issues with float: the first is that right now we're not 
sure what the L0MDT float actually is.  That should be fixable.  The 
second is that a) the needed-at-CERN dates are crap as the CERN schedule 
will be revised, and b) our simulation is based on baseline + the two 
covid BCPs so those projections assume no further covid effects, which 
is also crap.  That's not really fixable at this point in time, so those 
numbers are just that.

If you show the required numbers, you're going to show that you're short 
on float by a few months for eg sMDT, and somebody will ask "what do you 
plan to do about it?"  And you'll answer "well, those numbers are crap 
because of covid."  Ok, next slide.

I'm all for showing available float.  It's good to show we're not in 
negative territory yet.  But the 70% and 90% needed numbers have no 
value in my mind.

Best,

Gustaaf


On 6/14/21 4:47 PM, Thomas Schwarz wrote:
> Hi George,
>
> Are you sure we shouldn't show float?  The reviewers will want to know 
> what the float is, and I'd imagine they'd ask about the 70/90% CL, as we 
> had before.  Why don't we want to show it?
>
> Tom
>
> ===================
> Tom Schwarz
> Associate Professor
> Department of Physics
> University of Michigan
> Office: 734-764-8941
> Lab: 734-763-7805
> schwarzt AT umich.edu <mailto:schwarzt AT umich.edu>
> ===================
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 3:24 PM Redlinger, George <redlinge AT bnl.gov 
> <mailto:redlinge AT bnl.gov>> wrote:
>
>     Here's a version of the summary with the float filled in (for
>     information only).
>
>     It's recommended not to show the float nor the schedule contingency
>     in the L2 talks because of the large uncertainties (see Gustaaf's talk).
>
>
>
>     -----Original Message-----
>     From: Gustaaf Brooijmans <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu
>     <mailto:gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu>>
>     Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2021 6:28 AM
>     To: Schwarz, Thomas <schwarzt AT umich.edu <mailto:schwarzt AT umich.edu>>
>     Cc: Redlinger, George <redlinge AT bnl.gov <mailto:redlinge AT bnl.gov>>;
>     usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>     <mailto:usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov>; Bee, Chris
>     <Chris.Bee AT cern.ch <mailto:Chris.Bee AT cern.ch>>; cjmey AT iu.edu
>     <mailto:cjmey AT iu.edu>
>     Subject: Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l] early risk
>     simulation results
>
>
>     On 6/12/21 11:27 PM, Thomas Schwarz wrote:
>      > Ok, thanks.  So, looking at this, I'm assuming the only thing we
>      > really want to show is the 70 and 90% points, as we did before. 
>     So for muons:
>      >
>      > image.png
>      >
>      > Will we be getting a float simulation, as before, too?
>
>     Yes, it's in the file you will get.
>
>      >
>      > Also, what kind of questions should we be prepared to answer
>     based on
>      > the above simulation?  I mean, it says how our costs might end up
>     now
>      > with covid, but I'm not sure what I should be saying about it.
>      >
>
>     Only the two COVID BCPs are in this, so further covid costs, but for
>     most systems it's possible there may not be much more to add.  For
>     muons, it's fairly clear: the base cost went up substantially, but
>     the amount to add for 70% and 90% CL went down as expected when
>     things mature.
>
>     I don't think you should comment on covid, but rather about
>     evolution in maturity and risks.
>
>     Best,
>
>     Gustaaf
>
>
>      > Thanks,
>      > Tom
>      > ===================
>      > Tom Schwarz
>      > Associate Professor
>      > Department of Physics
>      > University of Michigan
>      > Office: 734-764-8941
>      > Lab: 734-763-7805
>      > schwarzt AT umich.edu <mailto:schwarzt AT umich.edu>
>     <mailto:schwarzt AT umich.edu <mailto:schwarzt AT umich.edu>>
>     ===================
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 2:51 AM Gustaaf Brooijmans
>      > <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu <mailto:gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu>
>     <mailto:gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu
>     <mailto:gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu>>> wrote:
>      >
>      >
>      >     Hello all,
>      >
>      >     There are a few mistakes in the historical numbers in the
>     file George
>      >     sent.  (90% costs are base costs.)  Use this one instead.
>      >
>      >     Best,
>      >
>      >     Gustaaf
>      >
>      >     On 6/10/21 9:30 PM, Redlinger, George wrote:
>      >      > Hi All,
>      >      >
>      >      > So as we just discussed in the meeting, I’m sending around the
>      >      > simulation results we have so far for Tile and Muons.  The
>     tabs
>      >     “Cost
>      >      > Range Analysis” and “Historical” give the high-level summary
>      >      >
>      >      > Concerning how we present this material, docDB 876 is what we
>      >     prepared
>      >      > for the FDR:
>      >      >
>      >
>     
> https://atlas-hllhc.docdb.bnl.gov/0008/000876/004/risk_summary_NSF.20190815.xlsx
>     
> <https://atlas-hllhc.docdb.bnl.gov/0008/000876/004/risk_summary_NSF.20190815.xlsx>
>      >
>      >
>     <https://atlas-hllhc.docdb.bnl.gov/0008/000876/004/risk_summary_NSF.20
>     <https://atlas-hllhc.docdb.bnl.gov/0008/000876/004/risk_summary_NSF.20>
>      > 190815.xlsx>
>      >
>      >      >
>      >   
>       <https://atlas-hllhc.docdb.bnl.gov/0008/000876/004/risk_summary_NSF.20190815.xlsx <https://atlas-hllhc.docdb.bnl.gov/0008/000876/004/risk_summary_NSF.20190815.xlsx>
>      >   
>       <https://atlas-hllhc.docdb.bnl.gov/0008/000876/004/risk_summary_NSF.20190815.xlsx <https://atlas-hllhc.docdb.bnl.gov/0008/000876/004/risk_summary_NSF.20190815.xlsx>>>.
>      >
>      >      > Presumably each subsystem would show its piece of the
>     table shown
>      >     in the
>      >      > Summary tab.
>      >      >
>      >      > We’ll probably have to discuss whether or not we want to
>     show the
>      >      > historical evolution.
>      >      >
>      >      > As mentioned, it takes about a day to run each subsystem
>     so LAr and
>      >      > Trigger should be appearing in the next couple of days,
>     hopefully.
>      >      >
>      >      >                 -George
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      > _______________________________________________
>      >      > 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>
>      >     <mailto: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
>     <https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l>
>      >   
>       <https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l <https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l>>
>      >      >
>      >     _______________________________________________
>      >     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>
>      >     <mailto: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
>     <https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l>
>      >
>      >
>     <https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf
>     <https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf>
>      > -l>
>      >