Difference between revisions of "General Meeting Summary 12/2/19"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "ACTION ITEMS * Update slides for EICUG SC meeting (Tanja) * All think about possible subconveners - to be discussed in detail at the MIT meeting SUMMARY NOTES - DISCUSSION AB...") |
|||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
* Update slides for EICUG SC meeting (Tanja) | * Update slides for EICUG SC meeting (Tanja) | ||
− | * All think about possible subconveners - to be discussed in detail at the MIT meeting | + | * All think about possible subconveners - to be discussed in detail at the [https://www.jlab.org/indico/event/348/ MIT meeting] |
SUMMARY NOTES - DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PROPOSED MODEL AND SLIDES | SUMMARY NOTES - DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PROPOSED MODEL AND SLIDES | ||
− | * Overall approach: start with this initial version, then evolve the structure once the actual work begins | + | * Good start |
+ | |||
+ | * Overall approach: start with this initial version (with some edits), then evolve the structure once the actual work begins | ||
::* check effectiveness and make adjustments as needed | ::* check effectiveness and make adjustments as needed | ||
* Tracking (slide 2) | * Tracking (slide 2) | ||
::* Detector technologies are very different - makes tracking unique | ::* Detector technologies are very different - makes tracking unique | ||
+ | ::::* silicon based vertex detectors vs gaseous detectors | ||
::::* total performance dominated by lever arm | ::::* total performance dominated by lever arm | ||
− | |||
::* Much flux in system and difficult for one sub-convener so keep track of the evolution of the two technologies | ::* Much flux in system and difficult for one sub-convener so keep track of the evolution of the two technologies | ||
::::* unclear how much Si and how much goes in which region | ::::* unclear how much Si and how much goes in which region | ||
− | ::* Possible solution keeping one box: have | + | ::* Possible solution keeping one box: have one additional sub-convener to have one for each technology |
* Far-forward detectors | * Far-forward detectors | ||
Line 25: | Line 27: | ||
* Integration and Installation | * Integration and Installation | ||
::* Has to be considered when evaluating detector technologies, e.g. models of cooling, power, cabling, but the details should not impact progress with the main task | ::* Has to be considered when evaluating detector technologies, e.g. models of cooling, power, cabling, but the details should not impact progress with the main task | ||
− | ::* Concern about realistic model of integration | + | ::* Concern about realistic model of integration at the start of the efforts |
::* Current simulations do not include services, but this may impact the design | ::* Current simulations do not include services, but this may impact the design | ||
+ | ::* Agreement that task can likely start somewhat later | ||
* Detector Complementarity | * Detector Complementarity | ||
− | ::* | + | ::* evaluating detector technologies may naturally lead to this |
+ | ::* add box/task, but can also be started later | ||
* Simulation is key | * Simulation is key | ||
Line 37: | Line 41: | ||
* Computing (DAQ and electronics) | * Computing (DAQ and electronics) | ||
::* Special role of electronics: related to all detector technologies and has to be adequate to the DAQ model | ::* Special role of electronics: related to all detector technologies and has to be adequate to the DAQ model | ||
+ | ::* indicate special role clearer in diagram | ||
::* need to have good sub-conveners | ::* need to have good sub-conveners | ||
::* development typically takes 5-6 years (not less), so important to engage electronics groups from the start | ::* development typically takes 5-6 years (not less), so important to engage electronics groups from the start | ||
::* possibility for groups from particle physics to contribute? - there are many involved in LHC high luminosity upgrade | ::* possibility for groups from particle physics to contribute? - there are many involved in LHC high luminosity upgrade | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Summary of organization slides | ||
+ | ::* highlight some key points in introductory slide | ||
+ | ::* split organization slide text in two | ||
+ | ::* add complementary detectors as later task, make electronics role more clear | ||
* List of Sub-conveners | * List of Sub-conveners | ||
Line 50: | Line 60: | ||
::* organically grown structure - open to all groups - evolving with time | ::* organically grown structure - open to all groups - evolving with time | ||
− | * MIT Meeting | + | * [https://www.jlab.org/indico/event/348/ MIT Meeting] |
::* Plan on having one hour (closed session) from parallel session to evaluate pros/cons of subconveners - at the end of Thursday parallel session | ::* Plan on having one hour (closed session) from parallel session to evaluate pros/cons of subconveners - at the end of Thursday parallel session | ||
::* Could take additional time on Friday | ::* Could take additional time on Friday | ||
::* Add a slide to inform people of the time table | ::* Add a slide to inform people of the time table |
Latest revision as of 23:51, 3 December 2019
ACTION ITEMS
- Update slides for EICUG SC meeting (Tanja)
- All think about possible subconveners - to be discussed in detail at the MIT meeting
SUMMARY NOTES - DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PROPOSED MODEL AND SLIDES
- Good start
- Overall approach: start with this initial version (with some edits), then evolve the structure once the actual work begins
- check effectiveness and make adjustments as needed
- Tracking (slide 2)
- Detector technologies are very different - makes tracking unique
- silicon based vertex detectors vs gaseous detectors
- total performance dominated by lever arm
- Much flux in system and difficult for one sub-convener so keep track of the evolution of the two technologies
- unclear how much Si and how much goes in which region
- Possible solution keeping one box: have one additional sub-convener to have one for each technology
- Far-forward detectors
- many different technologies - detectors have to be integrated
- More consolidated detector technologies compared to tracking, so should be manageable by one sub-convener
- Integration and Installation
- Has to be considered when evaluating detector technologies, e.g. models of cooling, power, cabling, but the details should not impact progress with the main task
- Concern about realistic model of integration at the start of the efforts
- Current simulations do not include services, but this may impact the design
- Agreement that task can likely start somewhat later
- Detector Complementarity
- evaluating detector technologies may naturally lead to this
- add box/task, but can also be started later
- Simulation is key
- Clarify that a strong simulation team is essential
- The model will only work if a strong simulation team exists and it has to go beyond the existing efforts (eRD20 and eRD17)
- Computing (DAQ and electronics)
- Special role of electronics: related to all detector technologies and has to be adequate to the DAQ model
- indicate special role clearer in diagram
- need to have good sub-conveners
- development typically takes 5-6 years (not less), so important to engage electronics groups from the start
- possibility for groups from particle physics to contribute? - there are many involved in LHC high luminosity upgrade
- Summary of organization slides
- highlight some key points in introductory slide
- split organization slide text in two
- add complementary detectors as later task, make electronics role more clear
- List of Sub-conveners
- come prepared with a list of names, but only assign after MIT meeting (after discussion)
- Table on slide 4 will be presented empty
- Names added only after discussion
- Accept suggestion from audience
- important to figure out how to reach out to less well-known groups/people
- leave opportunity for people to step up
- organically grown structure - open to all groups - evolving with time
- Plan on having one hour (closed session) from parallel session to evaluate pros/cons of subconveners - at the end of Thursday parallel session
- Could take additional time on Friday
- Add a slide to inform people of the time table