Difference between revisions of "General Meeting Summary 12/2/19"

From cua_phy
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
::::* vertexing brings in position resolution
 
 
::* 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 two sub-conveners, one for each technology
+
::* 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
::* Should also be considered when evaluating detector technologies
+
::* 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