FP6 Design Studies

1
FP6 Design Studies
ESGARD meeting 3rd September from Roy Aleksan

• Originally 3 DS calls, November 2003, 2004,
  2005
• Now 0
• Two reasons - want to fund additional
  projects from round 1 70MEUR ? 90MEUR - big
  budget reduction (next I3 60M ? 140M)
• Left 30-40MEUR for round 2
• Decided it isnt worth holding another DS for
  this!

• Possibility had been known for some time
• RA asked Brussels if new JRA in CARE possible

Answer No!
2
FP6 Design Study
WP Title Responsible Summary
1 Management Edgecock
Proton Driver Garoby Insufficient manpower
2 Targetry Bennett RD on targets to prove viability engineering of target station
3 Collection Campagne Viability of horn
4 MICE Blondel RD on critical components
5 FFAGs Meot RD on SC dipoles
6 Machine Haseroth Cost and performance optimised Neutrino Factory Design
7 Physics and detectors Mezzetto Strolin Define parameters for accelerator detector, inc. detector cost



JRA
JRA
JRA
NEST, etc
?
New detector I3
3
Possibilities

• Wait until FP7 call 2006, 2007, ..
• Submit Neutrino Factory I3 - call 4th
  November - 140MEUR - RA, DP no chance
  for accelerator RD proposal
• Do what we can with individual WPs -
  Neutrino detector I3 - Non-scaling FFAG PoP
  NEST - Others?

4
Possibilities
Detector RD I3

• CARE is accelerator RD I3
• Detector RD/Neutrino I3 is also possible!
• In ESGARD - Neutrino detectors - LHC
  upgrade - linear collider
• Seems too complex impossible to organise in
  time
• Candidates should contact Roy!
• Is a Neutrino Detector RD I3 possible?

5
Others

• Targets and collector would work as 1 or 2 JRAs
• Need to be part of an I3!
• Could they be part of a Neutrino Detector
  I3??? ? Upgraded CERN Neutrino Facility I3???
• Would need careful wording, but might work?

• MICE could make a JRA from components - RF
  with windows/foils - RF in magnetic fields
• But where?
• Another possibility high Tc SC focus coils
  NEST - not MICE - probably already funded

• Design and engineering FS - no idea!!!

6
So, what to do?
In my (very humble) opinion, we should..

• Prepare a non-scaling electron FFAG NEST
  Adventure - check when/if next call
• Investigate urgently Detector/Neutrino Facility
  I3 - include target/collector JRAs - who will
  do this?

7
Realization of this possibility was made only in
DESY in Nov. 2004 Time was short (4 mo) Getting
lab managements on board took 2 months.The
remaining 2 months were really too short!
Timing was somewhat too early (MICE still in
approval process, Only recommandations made to
CERN about study, no action yet at management
level) A number of legal issues do appear in
the writing process
8
from
to Design Study
A European Integrated Infrastructure Initiative
for Long Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Physics
What did we achieve?
9
Proposed structure
Access to Research Infrastructures TA
Networking activities (NA)
Joint research activities JRA
The 3 activities are mandatory for an I3 We were
advised to submit a modest proposal Between 5-7
M total. The duration of projects should be 3
years. The focus should be
BEAM AND EXPERIMENTS
10
NA1. project management
OK
11
NA2. Extension of BENE to new groups

Here I think we should try to investigate if this
would be possible anyhow (Polish and Bulgarian
groups in particular)
would have been OK
12
Joint Research Activities
JRA1 target and collection systems Lettry and
Efthymiopoulos (CERN) proposed a nice set of
activities (Tests of solid and liquid targets,
Horn PS, TTA2?) collaboration with Polish group.
(but RAL, PSI?)
JRA2 Muon beam at RAL Bradshaw proposed a MICE
based activity (spectrometer solenoid,
detectors, manpower, international collab.) OK
13
JRA3 Detector development for neutrino
experiments Paolo Strolin We have identified
four main fields of research on detectors that
can be developed and improved in the future. 1.
Large area or high sensitivity economical photon
detectors 2. Large volume liquid argon detector
possibly in magnetic field 3. Large magnetic
detectors 4. Emulsion detectors Photo-detectors
proposal by Saclay (Mosca et al) issue raised
EU collaborators? Inclusion of Photonis, a
private company. Magnetic detectors Ragazzi
(ex monolith) proposed to supervise design a
40kton mag detector. Liquid Argon. Obviously.
But deadline was too close (A. Rubbia) Activity
on emlsions or similar was not identified MUST
CONTINUE and EXPAND
14
JRA4 Tools for analysis of neutrino oscillation
experiments. group was identified but did not
materialize. Steve King Eligio Lisi, Mezzetto,
Donini, Rigolin, Hernandez, Gomez-Cadenas
Migliozzi, Lindner
15
Access to Research Infrastructures
ARI 1 Access to CERN for targets and collectors
studies, as well as access to test beams for
detector developments. Will be prepared together
with JRA1 was not prepared
ARI 2 Access to RAL for muon beam (MICE and low
energy test beam for detector developments)
Will be prepared together with JRA2 Peter
Norton put together a preliminary document.
ARI3 access to INFN infrastructures.
16
Possibilities

• Wait until FP7 call 2006, 2007, ..
• Submit Neutrino Factory I3 - call 4th
  November - 140MEUR - RA, DP no chance
  for accelerator RD proposal
• Do what we can with individual WPs -
  Neutrino detector I3 - Non-scaling FFAG PoP
  NEST - Others?

but do not wait start from where we are and
move forward.
17
Towards aNeutrino Factory scoping study

• The original plan from EMCOG was that RAL would
  be the mother house of the
• superbeam/NF DS. Ken Long received a letter from
  John wood to this effect.

18
Background

• Intellectual
• Feasibility studies
• US I, II, Ia
• EU CERN yellow report
• JP Design report
• Need inter-regional cooperation for Study III
• Recognised at NuFct03
• Social
• Essential to develop collaboration
• Neutrino source for precision measurements of
  neutrino properties necessarily requires an
  international collaboration
• Political
• European Strategy Forum on Research
  Infrastructure
• Preparing roadmap for major research
  infrastructure
• Funding
• FP7 Design Study call, expected autumn 2006
• UK funding cycle

19
Scoping study request for proposal
20
Scoping study request for proposal

• Empowering invitation
• Recognition of crucial nature of international
  partnership
• Framework for discussion leading to
• Source(s) required for optimal precision
  exploration of neutrino properties
• Consensus on options to be taken forward
• Identification of critical RD items (h/w and
  concept development)
• Definition of interfaces, performance goals etc.
  that can be studied in the next conceptual design
  phase
• Establishment of collaboration for the next phase.

21
Discussion

• Just at the start request only a week old
• Take forward on afternoon of Thursday 17Mar05
• Proposed timescale (working backwards)
• Hand in proposal 27May05
• Full draft of proposal 13May05
• Meeting to discuss/agree content 08-08May05
  RAL
• An exciting opportunity!
• (And much work to do)

22
-- Engelen agreed with my strong feeling that
CERN should be associated with the upcoming
Neutrino Factory design study and that the
'TESLA' story (a European lab designing an
accelerator without CERN support or even with
CERN pushing a competing solution) should not
repeat itself. -- His opinion from discussing
e.g. with the previous SPC chair (Joel Feltesse)
is that Europe, countrary to Japan and apparently
contrary to the US does not have a clear long
term strategy for neutrino physics. Therefore he
would like to suggest an independent committee to
evaluate the situation and issue recommandations.
-- His suggestion would be that such a
committee could be generated in the framework of
the SPC. The aim could be to make a clear
recommandation for a choice between future
options, i.e. beta-beam/superbeam and neutrino
factory options or to define an ordering between
them. (see discussion with Ken Peach tomorrow)