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

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

Hi Andy,

        We have some issue getting a consistent story on the SRTM delays:

on p. 17, you say these 2 things:

"COVID caused ~9 months of delay in progress on hardware and firmware 
development (reduced efficiency of remote work), as well as ~12 month 
delay in feedback from LASP specs / testing"

"Supply chain disruptions caused ~8 month delay in availability of Zynq 
FPGAs needed for assembly of v1.5 sRTMs"

	If I add those together, I would end up with a total "World Events" 
delay of about 29 months.  With 20 working days per month, this would be 
29*20 = 580 working days.  Yet, in my L2 talk I give a range of 324-356 
days, since that is what I find adding up the delays from the 4 "COVID 
BCPs".  So, I think the COVID BCP preparations did NOT count the LASP 
delays as COVID-related.  In which case, we need to be consistent now 
and not count them that way.

        Regards,
                John

On 3/26/23 10:42 AM, Ma, Hong wrote:
> Hi Andy,
>
>                  A few comments on the slides:
>
> Slide 5: “Deliverable” refers to the US deliverable, but the description is 
> for the whole BE system.  Add a bullet on what US will deliver?
>
> Slide 7:  The table as provided in the template is meant to show the US 
> responsibilities of the US deliverables.  I think you want to show US will 
> deliver 100% of sRTM.   Then the first column should be sRTM, not LASP.       
> I suppose Annecy and CPPM are still considered international partner since 
> LASP and sTRM are closely coupled, even though there is no percentage for 
> them.
>
> Slide 9: “Will submit PCB for sRTM v2 in March 2023”.   Will it be submitted 
> by the time of the review?   If sRTM v2 is the Prototype, it may be helpful 
> to point out too.
>                  “Will adapt to lower…” is it already in the rebaseline?
>
> Slide 18: In another email thread on “Milestone date evolution”, John Hobbs 
> pointed out the “ delays waiting for the LASP ”.   Should that be mentioned 
> here?   i.e., risk of dependency on external partner was partially realized.
>
>                  Best,
>
>                  Hong.
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l <usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov> on 
> behalf of Andy Haas <andy.haas AT nyu.edu>
> Date: Saturday, March 25, 2023 at 11:27 AM
> To: Parsons, John <parsons AT nevis.columbia.edu>
> Cc: usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l AT lists.bnl.gov 
> <usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> Subject: Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-lartl2l3-l] weekly mtg (at slightly shifted time)
> I've added a draft of my talk here: (and on the agenda page)
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1MCdLnGynBkoLT498P19bdY7UjZnBHQyhEXkebIMqnug/edit?usp=sharing__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!CGc_zjydB7rAd952GBW3h3jUK3Arro71oWu1F-j-Gl71Zlew8HSMMzWFSGOkhmyZdpslvJhviXWc318Frjp9el_sBOdm85eRhEF9d0Yc$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/presentation/d/1MCdLnGynBkoLT498P19bdY7UjZnBHQyhEXkebIMqnug/edit?usp=sharing__;!!P4SdNyxKAPE!CGc_zjydB7rAd952GBW3h3jUK3Arro71oWu1F-j-Gl71Zlew8HSMMzWFSGOkhmyZdpslvJhviXWc318Frjp9el_sBOdm85eRhEF9d0Yc$>
> _______________________________________________
> 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!BiSs7t0lKPItSBOd3pKqhInS_NQDdmY6itzf01oMXGgn8_u1tpQFp0TE4WtQ-mV5Rkxnz508U1YuIlqih2OnssYmKWDQt5xlr3-9BsH-LQVI1Q$
      

______________________________________________________________________