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

[Tim Andeen <timothy.robert.andeen AT cern.ch>]

Hi John, 

I'm attaching a draft of my variance report. It's brief, and before it can be sent on we need to remove the note regarding the optics schedule (partially due to a bug I was aware of). 

I have some personal (moving-related) work to do in Austin this morning that I can't postpone. Then I catch a plane to Newark early afternoon. It's unlikely I'll be able to reply to any comments before later tonight (I don't expect to get to the hotel before 10 or 11pm?). If you need to change anything just go ahead. 

Best, Tim

On Sat, Jul 27, 2019 at 3:24 PM John Parsons <parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu> wrote:

Hi Tim (and Andy),

        We need a more formal step here.  You need to write
an actual variance report, namely a few lines explaining what
is behind and why, and what will be done to get back on track.
We need this text today/tomorrow (ie. BEFORE the review starts
on Monday), so prepare it right away and send it to me for
feedback.
        Gustaaf's talk in the plenary will include the status
(see p. 26 of his slides).  At the recent DOE review, this triggered
a LOT of discussion and trouble, so we should expect the same here.
We need to have the formal variance reports in hand, and be prepared
to show them if the discussion goes that way.

        Tim, your SPI is 0.84 and so not so far from the threshold
at 0.9.  However, your L3 has spent a lot of money and therefore
this discrepancy amounts to a lot that is "behind", ie. ~249k.
So you need a clear story to be expressed in the variance report.

        Andy, your SPI is MUCH worse (0.44)!  It is in fact the
lowest by far across the entire project, with the next lowest
being 0.72!  You can partly argue that relatively little was
supposed to be spent by now, so that the discrepancy is "only" ~72k.
However, it is still true that you were supposed to have done
~127k of work and have only done ~56k, which is a VERY large
discrepancy!  So, you need a clear variance report and plan, and
to be prepared to speak to this.  I cc. John H., who has a lot
of experience with these reports from Phase 1, in hopes he can
help you.  As I said, we need the report this weekend, before
the review starts on Monday.

        Regards,
                John

On 7/27/19 5:58 AM, Tim Andeen wrote:
> Hi John, Got it, took look quickly and I think I understand where we're
> behind. I'll be prepared to answer questions next week. best, Tim
>
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 8:17 PM John Parsons <parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu
> <mailto:parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu>> wrote:
>
>
>     Hi all,
>
>              Here is the June CPR.  Take a look, and make
>     sure you understand your numbers.  Let me know any
>     questions or concerns.
>
>              Tim/Andy, you will each need to write a
>     variance report, since you both have SPI below 0.9.
>     Tim is a little below, but will need to explain.
>     Andy, you are WAY below, with Az in particular
>     being way off (0.14)   You need to figure out why
>     the statusing is so far off, and what can be
>     done about it.  Based on the recent DOE review,
>     I suspect our reviewers will have access to these
>     numbers, which might cause problems; you certainly
>     need to be able to speak to it.
>
>                      John
>
>     -------- Forwarded Message --------
>     Subject: [Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-l] June CPR
>     Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2019 08:55:43 +0200
>     From: Gustaaf Brooijmans <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu
>     <mailto:gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu>>
>     To: usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>     <mailto:usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
>     <usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>     <mailto:usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-l AT lists.bnl.gov>>
>
>
>     Hello all,
>
>     Here's the June draft CPR.  Please look it over for potential mistakes.
>
>     NSF L2s: for any deliverable with SPI below 0.9, please have the
>     Level-3
>     manager prepare a variance report explaining the source of the schedule
>     variance and its impact.  If a corrective action is needed, describe
>     it.
>         We want to have this in our back pocket for the review.
>
>     Thanks
>
>     Penka and Gustaaf
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l mailing list
>     Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>     <mailto:Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
>     https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l
>
>
>
> --
> ---------------
> Tim Andeen
> Assistant Professor, Department of Physics
> College of Natural Sciences
> The University of Texas at Austin
> Austin, TX 78712-1192
> web: tandeen.web.cern.ch <http://tandeen.web.cern.ch>
> office (TX): PMA 10.208
> office (CERN): 304/1-024
> ph (TX):  +1 512 475-9575
> ph (CERN): +41 (0)22 76 758 14
> email: tandeen AT utexas.edu <mailto:tandeen AT utexas.edu>
> ---------------

--
______________________________________________________________________

John Parsons
Nevis Labs,             Email: parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu
  Columbia University   Phone: (914) 591-2820
P.O. Box 137            Fax: (914) 591-8120
Irvington, NY 10533     WWW: http://www.nevis.columbia.edu/~parsons/   

______________________________________________________________________

--

---------------
Tim Andeen
Assistant Professor, Department of Physics
College of Natural Sciences
The University of Texas at Austin
Austin, TX 78712-1192
web: tandeen.web.cern.ch
office (TX): PMA 10.208
office (CERN): 304/1-024
ph (TX):  +1 512 475-9575
ph (CERN): +41 (0)22 76 758 14
email: tandeen AT utexas.edu
---------------

Attachment: VR_641.docx
Description: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document