1. Structure Update Installation & Building Update Revisions Outlined Costs Revisited (since given to Gina) Jeff Nelson Fermilab

2. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 2 Reminder of current scintillator detector concepts and alternatives >What’s different in liquid vs solid? Installation Update Value engineering summary Cost summaries

3. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 3 Basic Object For either scintillator use same structure >Liquid needs 3cm gaps instead of 1.7cm gaps >Simple adjustment in structure Alternating view every 8” Strips 4cm wide readout 14.5 m 180 m 885 planes 14.5 m

4. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 4 A detector “unit” Units made from natural OSB dimensions 8” x 48ft x 8ft 2 or 3 pieces of wood in 8 layers Two 30-strip modules which are 4ft x 48ft Encased in wood and captured with clips Step in z every 8ft End view of single unit

5. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 5 Building up the detector Next one here

6. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 6 Structural Properties of a Stack Bob Wands Bob Wands using an ANSYS FEA model tested extreme cases for some quick answers Horizontal with 2 or 3 supports along entire length

7. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 7 Deflection and Stress in an Extreme Case Maximum deflection is 0.9” Maximum stress is 562 lbs

8. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 8 Bob’s Conclusions There are no particular structural issues >Stresses and loads low (Vic’s conclusion too) >Bulking not an issue JKN Comment: FEA results say unsupported out vertical is at less then 30 degrees is fine >He see no need for any bookends other that to start construction >Expansions is global if bottom treated with low enough coefficient of friction >Only question is do you want to do something to control bulk expansions for maintaining alignment for physics >Thought container engineering more “interesting” problem…

9. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 9 Installation Update Model unchanged except >Stacks make in industrial building (e.g. MINOS surface building) >Gets your floor space a lot cheaper & at grate >Nathaniel stack production layout needs 5X surface building >Earl scales it at $3M Revisited number of FTE >Some double counting >34 -> 28 (plus support staff)

10. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 10 Putting up the units Rigged using rotating vacuum fixture >Just like every piece of MINOS steel Bob Wands verified that a stack’s weight is well within specifications for commercially available devices with cups specified with for porous surfaces Bob also says he’s convinced the stresses within are stack are safety below levels that could lead to structure failure in the material during a light

11. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 11 Main changes of WRT Estimate APDs & modern PPD electronics ($ and channel count go down; 10m -> 14.5m) U loop reduces fiber costs; increases uniformity Step scintillator at near end (15% reduction in volume) Factory managers update shows machines and throughput OK; machine costs Earl updated building scaling; Staging facility Progression (Detector without buildings) >$119M for M64 (L=10m) no changes from MINOS (Brajesh) >$ 98M for APD (L=14m @ July talk) >$ 93M more detailed costs; remove G&A; double counting (now) $163/m 2 including electronics

12. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 12 Solid Scintillator Cost Summary

13. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 13 Liquid Version Based on MINOS R&D summarized in P.Border et al NIMA 463:194,2001 >Documents a structural and mechanical design (to ME masters theses on these issues) >Liquid added after erection, light, and leak tests >Extensive studies of the effects of aging on optical and mechanical interactions of materials

14. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 14 Liquid Scintillator Cost Summary

15. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 15 Solid Scintillator Cost Summary

16. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 16 Some personal extras

17. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 17 Want more light? 0.8mm -> 1.0mm fibers Gives 36% more light for $5M

18. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 18 RPC vs Solid Scintillator 20% in FOM -> 45% in reach (using document values for both) >Pulse height info vs technique ??? Costs are indiscernible for RPC vs Solid with current costing uncertainties (esp. with contingency) Very low risk for the solid design >Scaling production factor of 5 vs factor of 100 for RPC >Direct Fermilab experience in scintillator production & APDs >MINOS used many institutions for production and same would be true for Off-Axis >Comparable cost, better performance, & lower risk

19. 9/03 OA4 - FNAL Page 19 Solid vs Liquid Active components 33% cheaper (  =$20M) Would guess that increased contingency would eat this difference at this time Would propose solid as baseline and liquid as a “value engineering” option Look at reoptimization of solid;  could decrease