DZero RunIIb Director’s Review February 3, 2005 1 Run IIb Project Status Vivian O’Dell.

DZero RunIIb Director’s ReviewFebruary 3, 2005

1

Run IIb Project Status

Vivian O’Dell


2

Run IIb Upgrade Project

Project Status Overview Ingredients of the upgrade Baselined Costs Management Current Status

Cost Schedule

Response to July Director’s review


3

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

9/29/03 9/29/04 9/30/05 10/1/06 10/2/07 10/2/08 10/3/09

Date

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Run IIb Luminosity Projections

~2.8e32 peak~8 fb-1 integrated

Accelerator draft plan:Peak luminosities

Pea

k Lu

min

osity

(x1

030cm

-2se

c-1)

D0 Peak BS ~9.36E31

Upgradeinstallation

D0 Peak AS ~9.35E31


4

Run IIb upgrade

Project consists of: New Silicon Layer Zero detector

inner layer of silicon – Mitigate tracking losses due to radiation damage and detector

aging– Provide more robust tracking and pattern recognition for higher

luminosities– Improve impact parameter resolution

Trigger Upgrade Complete upgrade program to keep trigger rates down as

luminosity increases– L1 upgrades (Calorimeter, Central Track Trigger, Cal Trk-Match)– L2 upgrades (Silicon Track Trigger, L2 processors)

New electronics for central fiber tracker (AFE II)– Helps tracking efficiency in higher luminosity/occupancy

environment – Not (yet?) formally part of the project – more on this later

DAQ/Online upgrade Upgrade needed to handle higher luminosities Upgrade level 3 processing power, database & host servers,

control systems– Most of the technical work on this is done. – Still buying computing (ALAP)


5

AFE/TriPChiPA. Bross

Run IIb ProjectV. O’Dell, Project Manager , R. Lipton, Deputy M. Johnson,Technical CoordinatorT.J. Sarlina, Asst Project Manager, D. Knapp, Budget Officer T. Erickson, Adminstration

Trigger InstallationD. Edmunds

Silicon InstallationMechanical:W. CooperElectrical:L. Bagby

L1 CalUpgradeM. AbolinsH. Evans

ReadoutA. NomerotskiR. Sidwell

SensorsM. DemarteauR. McCarthy

MechanicalDesign &FabricationW. Cooper

DetectorModules &IntegrationL. Bagby

InstallationR. Smith

DAQ/OnlineS. Fuess

TriggerP. PadleyD. Wood

Silicon Layer 0A. Bean(R. Lipton)

L1 Track TriggerM. NarainD. Lincoln

L1 Cal/TrackMatchK. Johns

L2 upgradeR. Hirosky

Silicon Track TriggerU. Heintz

SimulationE. Barberis, M. Hildreth

Administration(A. Bean)

Administration(D. Wood)

L3 SystemsD. ChapinG. Watts

Network &Host SystemsJ. FitzmauriceS. Krzywdzinski

ControlSystemsF. BartlettG. SavageV. Sirotenko

DAQ/OnlineManagement(S. Fuess)

Run IIb Upgrade Organization

Installation /commissioning not formally part of the project

•Clearly important

•We have a structure in place working on this

•More on this later in this talk

•Project personnel are overseeing installation

•Recently added L1 Calorimeter installation management team (see talk by Darien Wood)

•Will be updating org chart soon


6

Silicon Layer Ø

Universities on DØ-LØ

Brown California State,FresnoCINVESTAV Mexico FermilabUniversity of Illinois ChicagoKansas State UniversityKansas UniversityLouisiana Tech University Michigan State University Moscow State UniversityNorthwestern University Rice University University of Rochester SUNY-Stony Brook University of Washington

Large NSF MRI grant (~$700k)Additional in-kind university

support

See talks by

A. Nomerotski/W. Cooper


7

Run IIb Trigger Upgrade

Level 1 Calorimeter trigger upgrade

sharpens turn-on trigger thresholds more topological cuts

Calorimeter track-match fake EM rejection tau trigger

L1 tracking trigger upgrade (CTT) improved tracking rejection especially at higher

occupancies Level 2

L2 Processor upgrades for more complex algorithms Silicon Track Trigger expansion

More processing power use trigger inputs from new silicon layer Ø

New Readout Electronics for Central Fiber Tracker Not yet part of the project

See talks by

B. P. Padley

D. Wood

E. Barberis


8

Central Fiber Tracker readout upgrade (AFE II)

AFE II + TriPT will Improve noise floor and pedestal stability

Better hit efficiency Addresses analog readout saturation issues Readout architecture much more flexible Added functionality of the TriPT (z information)

Significant reduction in track reconstruction time R&D for AFE II is going well

AFE + TRiP and TripT all currently under test This is not formally part of the Run IIb upgrade program

Need internal DØ review– Part I held 12/06/05– Part II held 1/24/2005

Reviewers working on report– If review is positive, the project would like to review the

cost/schedule estimates– After completing cost/schedule review ask for formal laboratory

review– If all reviews positive, then will go ahead with project

Have earmarked Run IIb project money for this– $1.47M + 0.7M Contingency– Will have to revisit this estimate after project review of

cost/schedule

See talk by P. Rubinov


9

Installation/Commissioni

ng Installation and commissioning is NOT part of the Run IIb project However project people are heavily involved in planning and overseeing

installation and commissioning Costs are not born by the project – must come out of operating Installation tasks are not reported on in the same way as the project

However, we do have a fully resource loaded schedule– But this is a living document as we learn about installation

The schedule has been run through COBRA– We can get fully burdened costs, etc with the lab cost management tool

Schedule recently extensively updated to include what we have learned from the L0 aperture measurements

Results are very preliminary – we are still reviewing this With new information on installing Layer 0, total collision hall access 14 weeks Previous schedule had detector closed after 10 weeks

Project plan includes full system technical commissioning before installation

Some preparatory work was done in the FY04 shutdown Some layer 0 infrastructure installed CTT/L1 Cal infrastructure for pre-installation commissioning

Installation/Commissioning schedule includes all installation and commissioning tasks needed to bring the system up

Project on track for installation during 2005 shutdown Again, we request flexibility in shutdown scheduling More on this later

Physics commissioning includes all tasks associated with recording physics quality data

Have formed a collaboration wide committee (SC-IPC) to examine the full physics commissioning phase..

See talk by R. Smith

See talk by G. Blazey


10

Cost Analysis

Status of Project: Cost


11

DZero RunIIb Director’s Review

Obligation Profile in AY k$ (by subsystem)FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 TOTALSilicon (incl. G&A and FNAL labor) 17 1326 440 3892 267 0 5942Trigger (incl. G&A and FNAL labor) 0 330 716 1516 2392 40 4994Online (incl. G&A and FNAL labor) 0 0 64 311 377 311 1062Administration (incl. G&A and FNAL labor)0 0 274 217 225 207 924Sub Total 17 1656 1494 5935 3261 558 12921R&D (incl. G&A and FNAL labor) 0 1361 2519 0 0 0 3881Contingency 0 0 0 1582 1354 188 3124Total Project Cost 17 3017 4014 7518 4615 746 19926Percentage by FY 0 17 23 29 27 4

Total Project Costs, burdened AY k$ as rebaselined January 2004

Includes MRI + InKind + R&D over lifetime of the project


12

DZero RunIIb Director’s Review

Total DOE MIE Costs, burdened AY k$ as rebaselined January 2004

Includes AFEII costs: $1.47M in trigger costs + 0.7M in contingencyThis is the rebaselined total for the project

Estimated AFE cost ($2.1M) is in the trigger profile

FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 TotalRunIIb Silicon + Closeout $0 $2,542 $0 $0 $2,542Silicon Layer 0 $0 $687 $244 $0 $931Trigger $494 $1,439 $1,946 $40 $3,919DAQ $64 $311 $377 $311 $1,062Admin $274 $217 $225 $207 $924SubTotal $832 $5,196 $2,791 $558 $9,378Contingency $14 $1,568 $1,354 $188 $3,124Total $846 $6,764 $4,145 $746 $12,502

MIE Obligations in AY$ (K)


13

Project Reporting

Vehicles for reporting Use MS Project to track progress of project

Monthly updates by L2/L3 managers Update % complete/forecast dates

Use parts of COBRA (lab project reporting machinery) reports actual costs/baseline scheduled value/earned

value Monthly reports

Monthly reports to Lab and DOE management Include milestones/costs/obligations

Change requests Generated whenever there is a significant change in

project:– Schedule– Cost– Scope


14

Cost Performance Report 12/31/05

Cost Performance Report - Work Breakdown StructureContractor: Contract Type/No: Project Name/No: Report Period:Location: D0MASTER 1 11/30/2004 12/31/2004

Quantity Negotiated Cost Est. Cost Authorized Tgt. Profit/ Tgt. Est Share Contract Estimated ContractUnpriced Work Fee % Price Price Ratio Ceiling Ceiling

1 9,959,000 0 0 0.00 9,959,000 0 0 0Funding-CA Current Period Cumulative to Date At Completion

WBS[2] Actual ActualWBS[3] Budgeted Cost Cost Variance Budgeted Cost Cost Variance Latest

Work Work Work Work Work Work Baseline Revised DeltaItem Scheduled Performed Performed Schedule Cost Scheduled Performed Performed Schedule Cost BAC BAC BAC

EQU Equipment 1.2 Run IIb Trigger Upgrade 1.2.1 Level 1 Calorimeter Trigger 41,124 112,475 384,429 71,350 -271,954 571,972 566,889 483,667 -5,084 83,222 952,084 953,019 936 1.2.2 Level 1 Calorimeter Track Matching 10,758 3,911 19,382 -6,847 -15,470 216,069 218,753 186,911 2,684 31,842 257,773 257,773 0 1.2.3 Level 1 Tracking 74,945 7,353 194 -67,592 7,159 418,028 537,519 106,858 119,491 430,660 681,478 681,478 0 1.2.4 Level 2 Beta Processor 10,280 0 9,291 -10,280 -9,291 20,239 9,958 9,291 -10,280 668 59,891 59,891 0 1.2.5 Silicon Track Trigger Upgrade 16,475 0 7 -16,475 -7 242,252 157,103 49,047 -85,149 108,056 223,767 223,767 0 1.2.7 Administration 290 290 0 0 290 6,119 6,119 3,492 0 2,626 6,699 6,699 0 WBS[2]Totals: 153,872 124,029 413,302 -29,843 -289,273 1,474,679 1,496,341 839,267 21,662 657,074 2,181,692 2,182,628 936 1.3 Online Systems 1.3.1 Level 3 Systems 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 264,868 264,868 0 1.3.2 Network and Host Systems 16,856 12,862 0 -3,994 12,862 359,848 396,771 97,957 36,923 298,814 471,026 436,400 -34,626 1.3.3 Control Systems 105,072 433 0 -104,639 433 184,803 88,051 3,487 -96,752 84,564 219,494 219,494 0 1.3.4 DAQ/Online Management 612 612 0 0 612 12,636 12,636 0 0 12,636 17,824 17,824 0 WBS[2]Totals: 122,540 13,908 0 -108,632 13,908 557,288 497,459 101,444 -59,829 396,014 973,212 938,586 -34,626 1.4 Run IIb Project Administration 1.4.1 FY03 0 0 0 0 0 284,518 284,518 129,157 0 155,361 284,518 284,518 0 1.4.2 FY04 0 0 0 0 0 222,002 222,002 231,129 0 -9,127 222,002 222,002 0 1.4.3 FY05 20,237 20,237 14,538 0 5,699 58,072 58,072 48,600 0 9,472 229,649 229,649 0 1.4.4 FY06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 118,355 118,355 0 WBS[2]Totals: 20,237 20,237 14,538 0 5,699 564,592 564,592 408,886 0 155,706 854,524 854,524 0 1.6 Layer 0 Silicon Detector 1.6.1 Sensors 528 1,041 0 513 1,041 18,357 21,182 18,074 2,824 3,108 21,182 21,182 0 1.6.2 Readout Electronics 6,071 4,371 19,223 -1,700 -14,852 221,450 216,252 272,443 -5,198 -56,191 267,882 267,882 0 1.6.3 Mechanical Design and Fabrication 36,482 3,180 11,690 -33,302 -8,510 313,999 288,141 202,813 -25,858 85,328 322,617 322,617 0 1.6.4 Layer 0 Detector Modules 14,318 0 19,691 -14,318 -19,691 79,885 64,929 75,792 -14,955 -10,863 110,344 124,637 14,293 1.6.5 Final Detector Integration and Assembly 3,611 3,125 0 -487 3,125 111,913 111,517 9,751 -396 101,766 193,698 194,102 404 1.6.6 Silicon Project Administration 3,210 2,256 231 -955 2,025 45,428 44,957 12,716 -472 32,241 64,411 64,411 0 WBS[2]Totals: 64,220 13,972 50,835 -50,249 -36,863 791,032 746,978 591,589 -44,054 155,389 980,133 994,830 0Funding-CATotals: 360,870 172,146 478,675 -188,724 -306,529 3,387,590 3,305,369 1,941,185 -82,221 1,364,184 4,989,562 4,970,568 -18,994Sub Total 360,870 172,146 478,675 -188,724 -306,529 3,387,590 3,305,369 1,941,185 -82,221 1,364,184 4,989,562 4,970,568 -18,994Management Resrv. 4,969,438 4,988,432 18,994Total 360,870 172,146 478,675 -188,724 -306,529 3,387,590 3,305,369 1,941,185 -82,221 1,364,184 9,959,000 9,959,000 0


15

Cost profile plots by L2 (Trigger)

TRIGGER L2 BCWS, ACWP & BCWP IN K$(LIFE OF PROJECT)

-100.0

0.0

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

DEC,03

JAN,04

FEB,04

MAR,04

APR,04

MAY,04

JUN,04

JUL,04

AUG,04

SEP,04

OCT,04

NOV,04

DEC,04

JAN,05

FEB,05

MAR,05

APR,05

MAY,05

JUN,05

JUL,05

AUG,05

SEP,05

OCT,05

NOV,05

DEC,05

BCWSACWPBCWP

PO in place(Cost Accrued)

Cumulative to 12/31BCWS: $1,475ACWP: $839BCWP: $1,496BAC: $2,182


16

Cumulative SPI/CPI (Trigger)

SPI = BCWP/BCWS, CPI = BCWP/ACWP

Spending largely at Universities Accounting done by accruing according to earned

value Can only accrue if a PO is in place

WBS[2]

31JAN2004 29FEB2004 31MAR2004 30APR2004 31MAY2004 30JUN2004 31JUL2004 31AUG2004 30SEP2004 31OCT2004 30NOV2004 31DEC2004CPI 357.71% 357.71% 357.71% 387.57% 199.73% 238.% 278.99% 269.45% 358.94% 300.55% 322.17% 178.29%SPI 101.46% 76.76% 62.81% 82.35% 80.02% 89.27% 78.05% 98.94% 116.06% 109.99% 106.07% 103.68%

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

CPI

SPI

1.2 Run IIb Trigger Upgrade


17

Cost profile plots by L2 (Online)

-20.0

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

180.0

DEC,03

JAN,04

FEB,04

MAR,04

APR,04

MAY,04

JUN,04

JUL,04

AUG,04

SEP,04

OCT,04

NOV,04

DEC,04

JAN,05

FEB,05

MAR,05

APR,05

MAY,05

JUN,05

JUL,05

AUG,05

SEP,05

ON-LINE L2 BCWS, ACWP & BCWP IN K$(LIFE OF PROJECT)

BCWSACWPBCWP

Cumulative to 12/31BCWS: $557ACWP: $101BCWP: $497BAC: $973


18

Cumulative SPI/CPI (Online)


Labor has not been charged off properly working to fix this now

Some large purchases not yet invoiced Interesting effects when file reworked for latest online

purchasing philosophy See talk by S. Fuess

31JAN2004 29FEB2004 31MAR2004 30APR2004 31MAY2004 30JUN2004 31JUL2004 31AUG2004 30SEP2004 31OCT2004 30NOV2004 31DEC2004CPI 164.73% 169.81% 175.21% 424.33% 1149.3% 666.69% 641.38% 350.17% 388.19% 406.8% 476.67% 490.38%SPI 45.91% 43.42% 29.05% 42.34% 106.52% 123.48% 111.55% 115.68% 116.6% 111.31% 111.23% 89.26%

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

CPI

SPI

1.3 Online Systems


19

Cost profile plots by L2 (Layer 0)

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

DEC,03

JAN,04

FEB,04

MAR,04

APR,04

MAY,04

JUN,04

JUL,04

AUG,04

SEP,04

OCT,04

NOV,04

DEC,04

JAN,05

FEB,05

MAR,05

APR,05

MAY,05

JUN,05

JUL,05

L0 L2 BCWS, ACWP & BCWP IN K$(LIFE OF PROJECT)

BCWSACWPBCWP

Cumulative to 12/31BCWS: $791ACWP: $592BCWP: $747BAC: $980


20

Cumulative SPI/CPI (Layer 0)


Most of the DOE MIE cost is in Fermilab labor

31JAN2004 29FEB2004 31MAR2004 30APR2004 31MAY2004 30JUN2004 31JUL2004 31AUG2004 30SEP2004 31OCT2004 30NOV2004 31DEC2004CPI 806.88% 343.38% 314.32% 248.48% 228.03% 202.9% 171.9% 146.8% 145.82% 139.27% 135.55% 126.27%SPI 90.65% 90.55% 91.32% 94.86% 98.09% 93.09% 92.76% 97.91% 101.67% 101.45% 100.85% 94.43%

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

CPI

SPI

1.6 Layer 0 Silicon Detector


21

DOE MIE Current Spending Estimate To Completion

D0 RIIb EQU - December FYO5 IN $K

Current Current YTD YTD Current Prior Yr Total ProjectTask Expenditure Month Month Total Obligations Current PO Reqs In Total Cost by WBSNumber Category Total Cost Obligation Cost w/ Indirect Open Comm Process Cost Level 2

Trigger M&S 408.3 295.9 490.0 310.1 664.1 353.7 311.0SWF 0.0 0.0 8.9 8.9 0.0 0.0 0.0

OH 5.0 5.0 17.4 17.4 0.0 0.0 11.9Total 1.2 413.3 300.9 516.3 336.3 664.1 353.7 323.0 839.3

Online M&S 0.0 60.3 0.0 60.3 60.3 0.0 87.7SWF 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

OH 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.7Total 1.3 0.0 60.3 0.0 60.3 60.3 0.0 101.4 101.4

Administration M&S 0.3 0.3 2.8 2.8 0.0 0.0 6.3SWF 10.9 10.9 35.0 35.0 0.0 0.0 271.3

OH 3.3 3.3 10.9 10.9 0.0 0.0 82.7Total 1.4 14.5 14.5 48.6 48.6 0.0 0.0 360.3 408.9

Layer 0 Silicon M&S 2.0 5.9 6.1 13.8 7.7 0.0 29.9SWF 37.0 37.0 111.3 111.3 0.0 0.0 311.8

OH 11.7 11.7 35.0 35.0 0.0 0.0 97.4Total 1.6 50.8 54.7 152.4 160.1 7.7 0.0 439.2 591.6

Total Project M&S 410.7 361.5 513.1 387.3 778.4 353.7 1,364.1SWF 47.9 47.9 155.1 155.1 0.0 0.0 1,201.5

OH 20.1 20.1 63.4 63.4 0.0 0.0 532.6Grand Total 478.7 430.4 717.3 605.3 732.1 353.7 1,223.9 1,941.2

Total Project Cost (Inception To Date) = 1,941.2

Total Project Obligations w/ Indirect = 2,673.3

Total MIE Costs Through 12/31/05Includes PO’s, but not RIPS

Does NOT include RunIIb Silicon + Closeout Costs


22

Silicon Closeout, ETC

Silicon Closeout complete $607k under budget Not all invoicing complete, but the

obligations are complete. This is the final Silicon Closeout cost.

D0 RunIIb EQU in $KTotal Project Total BAC ETC Difference

Task Number Cost (DOE MIE)1.1 Silicon + Closeout $1,935.0 $2,542.0 $0.0 $607.0

DOE MIE Only


23

Updated Cost and Contingency

Average contingency at L3 Estimated on tasks to go at deeper levels

Large uncertainty on AFEII costs Not yet reviewed by project The money set aside for the AFEII is from the original estimate

Once we complete the AFEII review we will have a better estimate Installation costs still “fermenting”

Installation is off project We want to ensure that installation is paid for!

Latest BAC $

(w/o cont.) ACWPETC (w/o

cont.) Cont.

% Cont. for Remaining

Work

Original % Cont (for

comparison)

Total (BAC+Cont.) +

BAC Adj

1.1 Run IIb Silicon $1,935 $1,935 $0 $0 0% $1,935

1.2 Run IIb Trigger Upgrade $2,181 $839 $1,342 $600 45% 43% $2,810

1.3 Online Systems $973 $101 $872 $180 21% 31% $1,119

1.4 Run IIb Project Administration $855 $408 $447 $137 31% 25% $992

1.6 Layer 0 Silicon Detector $980 $591 $389 $357 92% 96% $1,337

1.X AFEII N/A N/A N/A $2,130 N/A $2,130

$3,404 $10,322

OTHER COSTS

1.5 Installation $1,435 $1,435 $718 50 100 $2,153

Project Totals

WBS Items

Project's Cost Estimate (Fully Loaded At Year) k$


24

Cost Contingency for Project Admin (1.4)

Project Administration FY03 BAC $284k, ACWP $129k

Project office began later in FY03 than we thought it would FY04 BAC $222k, ACWP $231k (4% high) FY05 BAC $229k, ACWP $48.6k FY06 BAC $118k (full salaries until 03/06)

Most of project completed by 12/05. Depending on AFE, may need project office beyond this, but at

a much reduced level– Not sure what is needed for project “closeout”

Estimate Adjusted BAC (removing additional FY03 money)

– $854.5 – $155.4 = $699.1 Contingency

– “Schedule” contingency• Assume 5 months at current cost (~$18.5k/month) = 92.5k

– “Cost” contingency on ETC• About 10% from past experience

Total contingency in $$ of $122k (42 %)


25

Contributions to the Projected Cost Underruns

by Subproject

Silicon + closeout is done. We know the underrun here. Substantial savings of $607k.

New trigger estimate shows a potential savings We were conservative with the original estimate.

Online systems estimate based on current prices and known work This estimate will pay for the Run IIb scope Ongoing replacement of L3 nodes is an issue – should be paid from operating after

RunIIb scope complete We can’t forget about this!

Layer 0 original estimate was very conservative. We feel comfortable with this current estimate

Most of the Project Administration underrun is due to the underrun in FY03.

We have not reviewed and updated the AFEII project cost. We are uncomfortable with reducing our total contingency until we do this.

Original BAC + Contingency (AY k$)

Updated BAC + Contingency (AY k$) Difference (AY k$)

% Difference to original BAC

1.1 Run IIb Silicon $2,542 $1,935 $607 24%

1.2 Run IIb Trigger Upgrade $3,451 $2,810 $641 19%

1.3 Online Systems $1,389 $1,119 $270 19%

1.4 Run IIb Project Administration $1,151 $992 $159 14%

1.6 Layer 0 Silicon Detector $1,824 $1,337 $487 27%

1.X AFEII N/A N/A N/A$10,357 $8,193 $2,164Project Totals

WBS Items


26

Schedule Analysis

Status of Project: Schedule


27

Project Schedule: Director’s Milestones

Milestone Description

L2/Director's Baseline (5/04)

Original Forecast (Aggressive)

(11/03)Forecast as

of 12/04

L2/Director's Variance (work

days)

Variance from Agressive

(work days) Notes

WBS 1.2 Trigger

L1 Calorimeter Trigger TAB/GAB Prototyping Complete 05/03/04 03/26/04 05/26/04 18 43 Complete

L1 Trigger Cal-Trk Match Production and Testing Completed 01/03/06 05/16/05 05/09/05 (158) (5) Rebaselined

Start Production TAB Fabrication 02/25/05 10/28/04 10/08/04 (90) (14) Complete

L2 Silicon Track Trigger Production and Testing Complete 10/17/05 01/31/05 05/27/05 (138) 44

L1 Calorimeter Trigger Production And Testing Complete 01/05/06 07/08/05 07/15/05 (114) 5

L2 Beta Trigger Production And Testing Complete 01/05/06 02/28/05 05/17/05 (155) 56

L2 Trigger Upgrade Production and Testing Complete 01/05/06 02/28/05 05/27/05 (147) 64

L1 Central Track Trigger Production And Testing Complete 01/10/06 04/20/05 08/16/05 (92) 85

L1 Trigger Upgrade Production and Testing Complete 04/10/06 07/08/05 08/16/05 (157) 23

WBS 1.3 Online/DAQ

Online System Production and Testing Complete 10/07/05 06/17/05 06/17/05 (78) 0

WBS 1.6 Layer 0 Silicon Detector

Freeze Mechanical Parameters 01/06/04 12/16/03 12/15/03 (9) (1) Complete

Release Sensors for Production 05/26/04 03/19/04 02/26/04 (63) (16) Complete

Release Hybrids for Production 06/04/04 03/26/04 03/25/04 (50) (1) Complete

Release Analog Cables for Production 06/04/04 03/26/04 03/19/04 (54) (5) Complete

All Analog Cables Delivered and Tested 03/11/05 09/29/04 08/10/04 (141) (34) Complete

All Sensors Delivered and Tested 05/23/05 11/17/04 09/28/04 (159) (36) Complete

All L0 Hybrids Delivered, Stuffed, and Tested 08/25/05 01/19/05 01/25/05 (150) 4

All Adapter Cards Delivered and Tested 10/17/05 02/23/05 03/18/05 (148) 17

Silicon L0 Module Production Complete 11/29/05 03/24/05 04/22/05 (151) 21

Layer 0 Silicon Detector Ready to Move to DAB 05/25/06 07/21/05 07/19/05 (210) (1)

L2/Director's Milestones vs Current Forecast

Director's Milestones: Baselined date/Aggressive Date/Current Forecast


28

“Float” Analysis since Rebaselining

# workdays current forecast date is ahead of L1 DOE Milestone date by month

Run IIb D-Zero Detector UpgradeLevel 1/2 Milestone Float Trend Analysis

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Nov-03 Dec-03 Jan-04 Feb-04 Mar-04 Apr-04 May-04 Jun-04 Jul-04 Aug-04 Sep-04 Oct-04 Nov-04 Dec-04

Reporting Period

Wo

rk D

ays

of

Flo

at

Online System Production and Testing Complete (WBS 1.3) Level 2 Trigger Production and Testing Complete (WBS 1.2)

Level 1 Trigger Production and Testing Complete (WBS 1.2) Silicon Ready to Move to D-Zero Assembly Building (WBS 1.6)


29

Schedule and Float

From previous 2 slides we learned: Online float/schedule fairly stable

Good confidence in schedule and cost here Reworked cost/schedule to coincide with changed philosophy

– Earmarked some contingency for possible additional L3 nodes – see Stu’s talk.

Silicon Layer 0 float/schedule fairly flat But just now going into module production – will learn a lot about the

schedule in the next 2 months or so– We will revisit the schedule float as we get more information from module

production L1 trigger float/schedule has some interesting features

Downward slope caused mainly by ADF delays– Prototype board is now under test and PRR is scheduled for Feb 11.– Current tests look good.

Some delays also in the CTT– PRR recently held, DFEA2’s should be going into production soon– BU has recently added additional effort for debugging and testing at

Fermilab L2 trigger has slid down as well

Due to L2 STT slipping – this is partially due to taking time to understand the TFC situation before moving ahead

– This is not an issue. L2 Beta has also slipped – effect of wanting to buy processors as late

as possible. – Also not an issue


30

What does this mean?

Pacing items: L1 Cal Trigger

Many delays in design and layout of ADF– Part of this will be made up in one less prototype cycle

1st prototype ADF v2 has been tested and works well– PRR for ADF scheduled for Feb 11– First module of production run scheduled to be tested mid-March

L1 CTT Runs neck and neck with L1 Cal as pacing item Critical path is DFEA2 boards

– Recently had PRR– Will likely enter production soon– First module of production run scheduled to be tested mid-May

L0 Silicon Module production has begun Start installing modules April 1 – so towards the end of April we will

have learned a lot about the integration effort. L0 folks are focused on the schedule risks.

Installation fixturing is also a pacing item, although in principle not part of the project.

Lots of understanding of installation/fixturing developed after 04 shutdown

We will understand our schedule much better after these items

We would like the lab to remain flexible on the scheduling of the 2005 shutdown


31

Response to July Review

Response to July Review


32

Director’s Review – Cost & Schedule

Cost Recommendations:1. Performance management indicators do not consistently reflect actual

costs for the work that has been completed. The area with the largest discrepancies is for work being done at the universities for which invoices have not been received. More effort should be put into getting estimated expenditures from the universities so the costs can be more accurately estimated and accrued, so a more detailed analysis of the cost variances can be performed to determine if corrective actions are required. This has been fixed. We are now accruing costs at Universities according to

reported earned value, providing they have a PO in place. In addition Universities are required to request authorization for any spending on approved codes larger than $1,500 and for any overspending on their project of any amount so that we can track any costing issues.

Schedule Recommendations1. Pitch Adapters for Layer 0 Silicon Detector were not part of original scope

and have been added to the work, are in the prototype state and are being paid on MRI funds. This scope of work was not added via a Change Request and not added to the schedule. Currently there are issues in the prototype phase. This additional scope could have impact on the schedule for Layer 0. The Pitch Adapter should be added to the project scope via the Change Control process and then added into the project schedule. This has been done. See Change Request. Both $$ and schedule impact are

minimal.2. Layer 0 has “Ready to Move” milestone with a baseline schedule

milestone of 5/25/06 an aggressive schedule date of 7/21/05. Layer 0 Management forecasts an approximate 2 months earlier completion date, but they have not modifying the aggressive/working schedule. The aggressive/working schedule should be modified to reflect the current forecast for work completion. This has been done. The Silicon Layer 0 project file contains the most up to date

thinking on milestone forecast dates.


33

Director’s Review – Cost & Schedule (Continued)

Schedule Recommendations (Continued)1. The four DOE Level 1 Milestones in the PEP have the same

completion dates for the equivalent Level II Directorate's Milestones, which does not allow any contingency between the milestones. To minimize the risk of the Level 1 milestone dates being missed, a heightened level of awareness needs to be adopted for these four milestones. This can be addressed by emphasizing these milestones separately in the Project's Monthly Report. Additionally, the Directorate should assess whether or not the dates of the equivalent Level 2 Directorate Milestones should be modified to allow float between the Level 1 and Level 2 milestones. This has been addressed by adding a section to the monthly report,

highlighting the four DOE Level 1 Milestones. We have not modified the dates of the L2 Director’s milestones for this.

There were several examples of variances between the current working schedule and how work will be performed. There are concerns from the project management that the effort to update the schedules and costing tool for the smaller changes could be difficult with the present level of project office support. The Project Manger should address this concern as soon as possible. We have updated these areas. We are trying to make do with the

level of support we have.


34

Director’s Review - Management

Recommendations:1. Resolve the issues about DOE Headquarters/DOE Field

Office/Directorate milestones. Done. (addressed in previous slides)

2. Include all tasks (ex: pitch adapter) in the project schedule. Done. (addressed in previous slides)

3. Formalize the L0 Silicon testing plan after May ’05 (end of production) and before the ’05 shutdown. We are working on this. See talk by A. Nomerotski.

4. Initiate communications with Division Heads and Directorate to obtain manpower resources in an appropriate manner. We have addressed this. We have already received support

from PPD for the AFE upgrade and for help at SiDet. 5. Insure availability of key personnel at SiDet for the L0

Assembly during the ’04 shutdown. We have addressed this.

6. Present a plan for the assessment and analysis of the risks connected with the L0 Installation. This is being actively worked on, especially in light of the Layer

0 aperture measurements. See talk by W. Cooper.


35

Conclusions (I)

Project is making impressive technical progress

All trigger components are either in production or very close to it.

This is good news! Layer Ø continues to move quickly

Module production has begun Online systems have “redesigned” server options

Allows us to take full advantage of Moore’s law These changes have been put into the project plan,

and a change request will be forthcoming Costs are under control

Tools in place to understand and track them Full project on schedule for 2005 installation We would like the lab to remain flexible in

scheduling the shutdown


36

Conclusions (II)

Installation/Commissioning plans have been revisited

Learned a lot about Layer 0 installation during FY04 shutdown

Also reworked the L1 Cal trigger installation with input from the project

Resource loaded installation schedule exists and we continue to update it as our understanding matures

New installation cost estimates from COBRA We would like some reassurance that the installation

costs will be covered by the lab We would like to have some flexibility in assigning

installation tasks– e. g. U of Washington is designing support fixtures – we

would like to be able to pay their engineering and M&S costs from an installation budget

SC-IPC (Standing Committee on Installation to Physics Commissioning) has studied the additional effort needed for DZero to return to “physics” running after installation

DZero RunIIb Director’s Review February 3, 2005 1 Run IIb Project Status Vivian O’Dell.

Documents

Transcript of DZero RunIIb Director’s Review February 3, 2005 1 Run IIb Project Status Vivian O’Dell.