U.S. ATLAS HL-LHC Upgrade LAr Level 2 and Level 3 Managers Mailing List

[John Parsons <parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu>]

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Fwd: RE: critical paths
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 15:20:11 -0400
From: Gustaaf Brooijmans <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu>
To: John Parsons <parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu>




-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: RE: critical paths
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 18:46:45 +0000
From: Novakova, Penka N <penka AT bnl.gov>
To: Gustaaf Brooijmans <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu>

Let me know if this is what you need

-----Original Message-----
From: Gustaaf Brooijmans <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu> Sent: Monday, May 
13, 2019 1:50 PM
To: Novakova, Penka N <penka AT bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: critical paths


Hi,

Our proposal is to put the schedule contingency task between SYS460343 
and FEB21725EX10.  Only one.

Best,

Gustaaf

On 5/13/19 1:17 PM, Novakova, Penka N wrote:
> The GM critical path was approved by Eric and I wouldn’t change it now.
> I can't get the critical path for LAr - what are the successors of these 3 
> contingency activities that you and John are suggesting?
> Thanks,
> penka
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gustaaf Brooijmans <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu>
> Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019 12:07 PM
> To: Novakova, Penka N <penka AT bnl.gov>
> Subject: critical paths
>
>
> Hi Penka,
>
> I decided to take one last look at critical paths.  For the real review, a 
> few things we may want to fix:
>
> -GM: the critical path excludes the acceptance test at CERN, 
> BULK20510, so the advertised float in the critical path file (95 days) 
> differs from that in the full schedule (50 days).  One can argue 
> whether acceptance testing at CERN should be part of the critical path 
> for all deliverables or not (probably not), but the OC is a special 
> case: it's a huge piece
> (2 m diameter carbon fiber cylinder) so shipping is very delicate.
>
> -LAr: in the flood of messages you probably missed it, but both John and I 
> disagree with what's currently shown as the critical path:
> John: "Yes, I agree we should base the critical path on the FEB2. [...] For 
> firmware, it is even more decoupled since some of the work at the end is done in the 
> teststand at BNL, and not at CERN at all. "
> Gustaaf: "So I think the LAr critical path is SYS460343 => 
> FEB21725EX10,
> 209 days of float.  That's where I would insert the schedule contingency task. 
> [...]  tasks SYS460360, SYS460374 and SYS460420, and have floats of 210, 225 and 
> 255 days, respectively."
>
> Best,
>
> Gustaaf

--
Gustaaf Brooijmans - Columbia University
@Columbia: (212) 854 4527; Nevis virtual phone: (914) 591 2804

Als sie mich holten,
gab es keinen mehr, der protestieren konnte.

Attachment: 6.04 LAr CriticalPath2.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document