Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l - Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l] February variance reports

usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov

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

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Gustaaf Brooijmans <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu>
  • To: Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov
  • Cc: Andy Haas <andy.haas AT nyu.edu>, Tim Andeen <timothy.robert.andeen AT cern.ch>, Elliot Lipeles <lipeles AT sas.upenn.edu>
  • Subject: Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l] February variance reports
  • Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2023 17:01:20 -0400


Hello again,

-6.4 still needs to be updated to indicate the fractional contributions of
each
-6.4.1: Tim, to be clear, it is the sentence "The preproduction/engineering
run for the COLUTA chip was be submitted in November and payment finalization
began in December of 2022 and finished in Feb. 2023.” that doesn’t seem to
make sense anymore, since this is now in the past. I would propose to remove
it
-6.4.2 is still missing the SV explanation, impact and CA
-6.4.3: there is no cost variance, please remove the associated statements.
Why is there no impact from a $400k schedule variance? That needs
justification.

-6.8 and 6.8.4 are still missing

-6.10.2 I approved.

Only a few days left now before the report goes to NSF.

Thanks!

Gustaaf

> On Mar 26, 2023, at 4:25 PM, Gustaaf Brooijmans
> <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> -6.4: since there are multiple contributions to the SV you should indicate
> the fractional contributions of each (which is easy to read from the CPR).
> Also, if the ADC is now done it doesn’t contribute anymore, so ADC-related
> statements should be removed. I have unlocked.
> -6.4.1 needs to be fixed and resubmitted. Why is the SMU CV explained in
> two steps if it’s all the same cause?
> -6.4.2: the schedule variance statements are missing
> -6.4.3: there is no cost variance, please remove the associated statements.
> Why is there no impact from a $400k schedule variance? That needs
> justification. I’ll unlock.
>
> -6.5.3 looks good
>
> -6.8 is missing
> -6.8.4 is missing
>
> -6.10.2 is missing
>
> Thx
>
> Gustaaf
>
>> On Mar 23, 2023, at 5:01 PM, Gustaaf Brooijmans
>> <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> Here are my comments on the February variance reports.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Gustaaf
>>
>> -6.4 is missing
>> -6.4.1: if the payment was finished, that part of the SV will not change
>> anymore… I will unlock.
>> -6.4.2 and 3 are missing
>>
>> -6.5.3 looks good
>> -6.5.4 is missing
>>
>> -6.6 looks good
>> -6.6.1 looks good
>> -6.6.3 looks good
>> -6.6.4 looks good
>> -6.6.5 looks good
>>
>> -6.8 is missing
>> -6.8.3 looks good
>> -6.8.4 is missing
>>
>> -6.10.2 is missing
>> _______________________________________________
>> Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l mailing list
>> Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>> 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
> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l
>





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page