1. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 1 LArTPC Detector Costs Context History Next (perhaps) steps

2. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 2 Context: Making the Ultimate Step for Large Liquid Argon TPC Detectors What is the penultimate step? David Finley to LArTPC Group Meeting Fermilab June 12, 2006

3. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 3

4. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 4 The Ultimate Step Assumptions for beginning the ultimate step: –A timely, cutting edge physics justification Examples may be: Neutrino oscillations, proton decay, neutrinoless double beta decay, supernovae, etc –A project for a 50 to 100 kton TPC liquid argon detector –An international collaboration that agrees detectors will be in one or more of these locations: Under rock/dirt in Italy Under rock/dirt in the Western US On the surface in the NuMI beam (or anywhere else on the planet)

5. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 5 The Penultimate Step Making the penultimate step assumes completion of: –A compelling physics case for the ultimate step In the context of a globally coordinated neutrino physics program, which in turn requires A functional international collaboration in place with possible, but unapproved, funding sources for the ultimate detector, and A physics case for the penultimate step would be a BIG bonus –A credible schedule, which requires (see next slide): –A credible cost estimate, which requires (see next slide): –A compelling demonstration of the engineering/technology and the experimental physics capability for the ultimate detector, probably with the construction and operation of a “penultimate detector” as well as the physics analysis of data provided by it.

6. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 6 The Penultimate Step Making the penultimate step requires completion of: –A compelling physics case for the ultimate step … (see previous slide): –A credible schedule, which requires: Time for peer reviews, lab reviews, and government approvals Completion of R&D for the engineering/technology and physics capability required for the ultimate detector Time for construction and operation of the ultimate detector –A credible cost estimate, which requires: A technical design to accomplish the physics A credible schedule (see above) Engineers and project management techniques –A compelling demonstration … (see previous slide)

7. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 7 Penultimate thoughts from Hans Thanks, David. Very well said. Unfortunately I did not receive your last slide which must say something like: "The Penultimate Detector: Requires: --finding a physics justification for a (1 to 3 kton ?) detector --implies defining the location, rates, physics expectation --A credible schedule --A credible cost estimate -- A credible collaboration" Hans [email to lar_at_fnal June 8, 2006]

8. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 8 Now for costs … –A credible cost estimate which requires: A technical design to accomplish the physics A credible schedule Engineers and project management techniques –And the cost estimate will be used to … Identify large costs (and cost uncertainties) which might be reduced by –technical R&D including more detailed engineering designs or –getting information which is closer to firm quotes from vendors Increase costs to reduce risk or improve technical performance or to advance/stretch the schedule (for whatever reasons) Identify all tasks (i.e., costs) by using a WBS (see later slide) Compare to other techniques and approaches (e.g. Water Cherenkov, surface vs. below ground, etc.)

9. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 9 History: What has been done? ICARUS –“Rumored” cost is ~$20M for 1.2 kton Math gives: ~17M$/kton or ~830M$/50 kton And math gives: a factor of ten cheaper would be ~83M$/50kton This is an “experienced based” cost estimate.

10. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 10 History: What has been done? ICARUS –“Rumored” cost is ~$20M for 1.2 kton Math gives: ~17M$/kton or ~830M$/50 kton And math gives: a factor of ten cheaper would be ~83M$/50kton This is an “experienced based” cost estimate. LArTPC NuSAG submission –$57.45M for 15 kton Math gives: 3.8M$/kton or ~190M$/50kton This is not an “experienced based” cost estimate. NuSAG response –See next slide

11. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 11 NuSAG February 28, 2006

12. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 12 NuSAG Submission Costs 15 kton

13. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 13 50 kton estimate

14. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 14 50 kton estimate

15. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 15 50 kton estimate

16. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 16 NuSAG LArTPC Cost Pie 15 kton

17. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 17 End of History: WBS here See docdb 166

18. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 18 Schedule The LArTPC schedule in the NuSAG submission allowed our Director a moment of levity. –The DOE approval process was not included.

19. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 19

20. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 20 Schedule in NuSAG Submission

21. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 21 Next (perhaps) cost steps - 1 Methodology and archeology –“Include project management” items so that the Directorate can compare LArTPC costs to other DOE-costed competitors for the funds. –“Get ICARUS costs directly from INFN” and relate “Italian cost accounting” to “DOE cost accounting” so one can better specify what NuSAG meant by “about an order of magnitude” less OR NOT … because why is a relative cost improvement relevant? Is it not the TOTAL cost to various taxpayers that is important?

22. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 22 Next (perhaps) cost steps - 2 What does “cost” mean? Does it mean: –“DOE defensible” or –“Engineering credible” or –Just more “physicist scaling”? –Or some combination? Specific design choices –3 kton … three 15 kton … ten 3 kton … 50 kton … what else? … and what experimental requirements drive these choices?

23. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 23 Next (perhaps) cost steps - 3 Next on the hit list for “cost” … –Is it not obvious that there are added costs for the “many small” approach? More argon (see next slide) and more steel. And what exactly does “fiducial volume” mean anyway? And what does the increased cost buy? –Reduction in risk by having shorter wires … how short is short enough? –“Obvious” control of systematics »similar to Braidwood Reactor Neutrino design with multiple detectors »how well does a single large detector control systematics? –Staging

24. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 24 All the argon will be bought, but how much is used for physics? From Pushka Spring 2005 Radiation length is 14cm

25. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 25 Next (perhaps) cost steps - 4 The “3 kton penultimate PHYSICS detector” needs its TPC specified –Strike a balance between “engineering demonstration for the ultimate detector” and reducing risk to the “physics experiment” –This may be harder to do than it may seem. All “credible costs” require Engineering support from PPD. –Is this actually true? Can the engineering not be “bought”? … with US dollars and/or with Euros?

26. David Finley / LArTPC Group Meeting / June 13, 2006 @ Fermilab Slide 26 Today’s Final “Ultimate” Questions Is there any chance at all that Europe/INFN/Japan/Asia/et al would “cost share” on the Ultimate Detector in the US? Or will three different detectors, one in each region, be the “obvious” thing to do because –“ultimate” LArTPCs will become the “obvious” detector for several “obvious” physics experiments –… for less than (a mere) ~$0.5B each … –over the next 20 years or so?