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

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

Hi Hong,

        Good point!  I will change that one back to the original 3-6 months.
	BTW, during the steering mtg last week I asked Nicolas about the 
progress on the French robotic test system (since they did not make any 
presentation during LAr week).  His reply was basically "progress is 
being made, but unfortunately not at the rate we hoped".  He said they 
would hopefully be ready to start some initial testing with the system 
in "about 2 months".  It sounded more like a hope than a plan.  When I 
asked whether the plan is to then to build a second system to send to 
BNL, or just tell BNL the "recipe" for building their own, he said this 
had not been discussed yet.  I came away even more pessimistic than 
before, and with the feeling that it will be months (probably at least 
4, more likely more) before you could be operating such a system at BNL. 
 I did not get a chance to talk with Gustaaf after the meeting, but I 
would expect he was also less than convinced.  If you get a chance to 
raise the issue with the PO this week, hopefully they would be ready to 
move ahead with the feasibility study.
        Regards,
                John

On 3/11/23 2:52 PM, Ma, Hong wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> The changes are all very reasonable except we may want to hold off the change 
> for PA/Shaper’s external dependency as we are still proposing to PO that we 
> need to reduce that risk by looking for alternative robotic test.
>
>
> Best,
>
> Hong.
> ________________________________
> From: John Parsons <parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu>
> Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 1:54 PM
> To: Ma, Hong <hma AT bnl.gov>
> Cc: usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l AT lists.bnl.gov 
> <usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> Subject: Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>          Just got back to NYC from a productive LAr week!
>          As Hong explained, we need to finalize SOON the two RRs (ie. the
> "regular" one and the "supply chain" one), so that the MC can be run in
> advance of freezing everything for the NSF rebaseline review.
>          I went over both RRs on the flight, and make some (significant)
> proposed changes.  I attach the new version, where changes are shaded in
> yellow.  Please take a look at your parts of both asap and let me know
> any comments.  This was, of course, largely motivated by the recent
> realization that the very conservative values we put in the Supply Chain
> RR back when it was created are causing a float problem for the NSF
> scope.  While those very conservative assumptions were sensible back
> then, when almost nothing in industry was working well and it was very
> hard to make any sensible predictions, clearly things have improved a
> lot by now.  For example, we have seen no custom ASIC delays, and in
> fact received the PA/S and ADC preprod wafers earlier than scheduled.
> We are finding no significant delays in PCB fab either.  There are still
> some delays for COTS components, but we can mitigate those by submitting
> the production orders early, using the "priming" scheme put in place by
> ATLAS.  Given all these very encouraging signs, I propose significant
> changes to the Supply Chain RR.  In addition, I propose also some
> adjustments to the main RR.
>
>          Let me know asap if you propose any changes to what I have put in the
> attached versions.  We need to get these to Chris by early next week at
> the latest, so prompt attention would be greatly appreciated!
>
>          While writing, let me also say that next week is Spring Break at
> Columbia and I will be away on vacation Sunday-Friday.  So unfortunately
> we will not be able to meet next Friday at our usual time.  However, I
> will keep an eye on my email, so let me know of any things to discuss.
>
>          Thanks,
>                  John
>
> On 3/10/23 11:51 AM, John Parsons wrote:
> > Just landed at Newark. I spent time on the flight working on the RR and
> > will send new version for checking later this afternoon
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On Mar 10, 2023, at 10:36 AM, Ma, Hong <hma AT bnl.gov> wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > >                  As John is traveling back, we are not meeting today.
> > >
> > >                  There is a urgent request by PO to update the supply
> > > chain risks, which was discussed when we were preparing for the DR.
> > >
> > >                  Chris wants to run the MC next week.
> > >
> > >                  Please take a look at the latest risk registry,
> > >
> > > https://atlas-hllhc.docdb.bnl.gov/cgi-bin/public/ShowDocument?docid=196 
> > > <https://atlas-hllhc.docdb.bnl.gov/cgi-bin/public/ShowDocument?docid=196>
> > >
> > > and propose changes.
> > >
> > >                  The simplest is probably to drop the probability from
> > > 63% to a much lower level.
> > >
> > > Please also note Gustaaf’s suggestion to increase the FW complexity
> > > risk cost.  I am not sure if I understand the logic, that adding
> > > resources will increase the cost when there is actually no new scope.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > >                  Hong.
> > >
> > > *From: *Gustaaf Brooijmans <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu>
> > > *Date: *Friday, March 10, 2023 at 9:32 AM
> > > *To: *Ma, Hong <hma AT bnl.gov>
> > > *Cc: *Parsons, John <parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu>, Meyer, Chris
> > > <cjmey AT iu.edu>
> > > *Subject: *Re: supply chain risks?
> > >
> > > Hi Hong,
> > >
> > > Those recommendation were made in  summer 2021 because we had no good
> > > basis at that time for individual estimates.  As you point out, we do
> > > now, so you should feel free to update the numbers.
> > >
> > > BTW, looking at BCP 1058, the FW complexity risk maxed out at $150k,
> > > and we will now have added ~$1M in FW effort.  I would suggest to
> > > revise the upper value on that upward, as I think we are likely to
> > > have to add even more FW effort if we can find it.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Gustaaf
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >      On Mar 10, 2023, at 3:03 PM, Ma, Hong <hma AT bnl.gov
> > >      <mailto:hma AT bnl.gov>> wrote:
> > >
> > >      Hi Gustaaf,
> > >
> > >                      I had an exchange with John after yesterday’s 2pm
> > >      meeting.    John is traveling today back to the US.
> > >
> > >                      We will not be able to provide the updated risks
> > >      by Monday noon, as Chris requested at the meeting, but we will try
> > >      to get it sometime next week.
> > >
> > >                      We will remove some of the risks (PA/Shaper
> > >      preproduction fabrication, for example), but there are still many
> > >      left with very high probabilities (63%), based on the
> > >      recommendation we had when the risks were first entered.
> > >
> > >                      Is there a new recommendation, or should we just
> > >      use our own judgement to update it?     The recent experience with
> > >      the vendors is not too bad, so some adjustment is warranted.
> > >
> > >                      Best,
> > >
> > >                      Hong.
> > >
> > >      *From:*Gustaaf Brooijmans <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu
> > >      <mailto:gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu>>
> > >      *Date:*Friday, March 10, 2023 at 7:25 AM
> > >      *To:*Parsons, John <parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu
> > >      <mailto:parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu>>, Ma, Hong <hma AT bnl.gov
> > >      <mailto:hma AT bnl.gov>>
> > >      *Cc:*Meyer, Chris <cjmey AT iu.edu <mailto:cjmey AT iu.edu>>
> > >      *Subject:*supply chain risks?
> > >
> > >
> > >      Hi John, Hong,
> > >
> > >      I think we’ll need your revised supply chain risks sometime next
> > >      week.  Is this possible?
> > >
> > >      Thx
> > >
> > >      Gustaaf
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l mailing list
> > > Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> > > https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l
>
> --
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
> 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: 
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.nevis.columbia.edu/*parsons/__;fg!!P4SdNyxKAPE!B3TfNP6jTbYtvLDnsxsP559An5DDZw-RpPJyrkmPfbpprG8azL05DKYQGWM12xrh__-wh-2v2KgtciM_vVx0Ew$
>
> ______________________________________________________________________

--
______________________________________________________________________

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: 
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.nevis.columbia.edu/*parsons/__;fg!!P4SdNyxKAPE!DJoyLqLxBjR8scUk-mqGtBMdVGbRPu9anxTc78Am45HoGhGKB5SCKcstjPNYYvAvyPzJH5wDWHdx-1qEkBjRUqDxvtXaGwzLq9bFWXxUq_D6JQ$
      

______________________________________________________________________