usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: U.S. ATLAS HL-LHC Upgrade LAr Level 2 and Level 3 Managers Mailing List
List archive
Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?
- From: Tim Andeen <tandeen AT utexas.edu>
- To: John Parsons <parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu>
- Cc: usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l AT lists.bnl.gov
- Subject: Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?
- Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2023 09:45:13 -0700
Hi John,
Sorry for the slow response (I took a long week for the start of our spring break).
I this is probably already running, but just confirming that the changes for the optics and ADC look fine.
One quick question that I’m pretty sure I know the answer to. This is the risk of SC delays with respect to the rebaselined schedule, correct?
Best, Tim
On Mar 13, 2023 at 9:01:23 PM, John Parsons <parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu> wrote:
Ok thx.
Sent from my iPhoneOn Mar 13, 2023, at 8:18 PM, Xu, Hao <haoxu AT bnl.gov> wrote:Thanks John. It looks good to 6.4.4.Regards,Hao________________________________From: Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l <usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> on behalf of John Parsons <parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu>Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 6:44 PMTo: 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,Any more feedback on the modified RRs? I need to get them to Chrisasap. I made proposed mods to all L3s, so I need everyone to check(both NSF and DOE).Thanks,John> On 3/11/23 6:57 PM, John Parsons wrote:>> 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 ParsonsNevis Labs, Email: parsons AT nevis.columbia.eduColumbia University Phone: (914) 591-2820P.O. Box 137 Fax: (914) 591-8120Irvington, NY 10533 WWW: https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.nevis.columbia.edu/*parsons/__;fg!!P4SdNyxKAPE!GmUuAuFR5J2BYK0YCO0YAkjP9yr2w9g_ac7MbqSNAbIy6MLB-ZCKsg2oq6a3V1reaY-Vi7i9cu074n85v5PInFJatFxIhzl75M4rJRADxuzqqg$_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l mailing listUsatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l AT lists.bnl.govhttps://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l
_______________________________________________
Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l mailing list
Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l
-
[Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?,
Ma, Hong, 03/10/2023
-
Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?,
John Parsons, 03/10/2023
-
Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?,
John Parsons, 03/10/2023
-
Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?,
Ma, Hong, 03/11/2023
-
Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?,
John Parsons, 03/11/2023
-
Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?,
John Parsons, 03/13/2023
-
Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?,
Xu, Hao, 03/13/2023
- Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?, John Parsons, 03/13/2023
- Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?, Ma, Hong, 03/14/2023
- Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?, Tim Andeen, 03/14/2023
- Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?, John Parsons, 03/14/2023
-
Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?,
Xu, Hao, 03/13/2023
-
Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?,
John Parsons, 03/13/2023
-
Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?,
John Parsons, 03/11/2023
-
Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?,
Ma, Hong, 03/11/2023
-
Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?,
John Parsons, 03/10/2023
-
Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] FW: supply chain risks?,
John Parsons, 03/10/2023
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.