Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l - [[Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l] ] NSF I&I schedule and risks

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: "Evans, Harold G." <hgevans AT iu.edu>
  • To: "usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov" <usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
  • Subject: [[Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l] ] NSF I&I schedule and risks
  • Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 19:56:09 +0000

Hi all,

Thanks for your input on the I&I numbers. In case you don't have it at your fingertips, the google sheet with the schedule is at:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1StoBECnlOoSRLEZ47BA2EvTpLuQNYdsl9UxyXjrkZmc/edit?usp=sharing

I'm also attaching the current version of the risk register, which includes all the "no enhanced testing" risks that you sent to me. Looking at the summary in the "Analysis" tab, I'm struck by one big thing: the additional risk that we take on by *not* doing enhanced surface integration testing is (at "90%" CL):
    $1.5M
while the total cost of doing the enhanced surface integration testing is:
    $3.3M

If I were NSF, I'd say that *not* doing the testing is the better deal. It would cost them half what actually doing the testing would do. This is clearly not the message that we want to send. I think that we're going to have to beef up the risks here. Perhaps the logic that we should follow is that if we don't do surface integration testing, then we risk that getting to the point where the surface tests would put us will be harder in UX15/USA15 (take longer and cost more). So the upper impact of the risk should be larger than the total work required to achieve the results on the surface. We may get lucky with the integration, so the lower impact should be smaller than the surface integration total, but that seems fairly unlikely to me.

Please let me know if this logic makes sense to you and if you think you can implement it in a new version of the "no surface integration" risks.

Thanks  -  Hal
-- 
------------------------------------------------------
 Hal Evans                             hgevans AT iu.edu
               Professor of Physics
           http://hgevans.pages.iu.edu/
 Tel: (812)856-3828                Fax: (812)855-5533
 253 Swain Hall West               Indiana University
 727 E. Third St.               Bloomington, IN 47405
------------------------------------------------------

Attachment: Risk-Register_IIC_v3a.xlsx
Description: Risk-Register_IIC_v3a.xlsx



  • [[Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l] ] NSF I&I schedule and risks, Evans, Harold G., 08/22/2024

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page