1. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #1 Risk Based R&D Plan Martin Cooper Los Alamos

2. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #2 Outline The Process Reevaluation of the Program Iteration on the Contents Risk Methodology The Plan Assumptions Schedule Overview Risk Overview Contract Project Manager Actions The Schedule Challenge News Summary

3. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #3 The Process

4. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #4 Reevaluation of the Program One day of the October collaboration meeting was devoted to reevaluating every part of the R&D plan The CPM appointed an advisory committee Jan Boissevain (Consultant) – Chief Engineer Bob Golub (NCSU) Geoff Greene (Tennessee/ORNL) Mike Hayden (SFU) Steve Lamoreaux (Yale) – Co-spokesperson Committee reported their evaluations individually CPM made decisions

5. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #5 Iteration on Contents WBS1.1.2.1Title3He relaxation time Funding SourceDOE Constr.Institutions Duke, Illinois Funding Avail.$20kOpportunity Goal (Completion Dates): The overall goal is to measure the 3He relaxation time from 0.3-0.6 K to insure that the neutrons and 3He remain polarized throughout the measurement cycle. At 30,000 sec, there is essentially no impact on the sensitivity. Any value greater than the neutron storage time provides a small degradation to the sensitivity. At Duke, the result for a cell coated with dTPB is a subsidiary measurement to the geometric phase measurement. (4/1/07). At Illinois, the measurement is to be made on materials used in the valves and transfer lines as well as dTPB (6/1/07) Risk Descriptions: Obtaining a value >1000 sec at 0.5K is crucial to having a small impact on the EDM sensitivity. No measurements have been made at the operating temperature. The advisory committee judged this quantity to be the major scientific unknown in the design. RiskLikelihoodImpactOverall Risk TechnicalLikelyCriticalHigh ScheduleUnlikelyMarginalLow CostUnlikelyMarginalLow CPM Actions: Support both efforts at Duke and Illinois. The measurement on dTPB is difficult and important enough to warrant duplicate effort. The measurement on materials to be used in the valves is important.

6. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #6 Risk Methodology MarginalSignificantCritical Cost Impact on project contingency is: <$25K$25- $100K >$100K Schedule Impact on project schedule is: All elseLevel 1 or 2 Milestones Impacts project completion date Technical Impact on project performance is: Optimal specification will be within 20% Minimal specification will be bettered by 80% Minimal specification may not be met MarginalSignificantCritical Cost Impact on project contingency is: <$200K$200- $500K >$500K Schedule Impact on project schedule is: All elseLevel 1 or 2 Milestones Impacts project completion date Technical Impact on project performance is: CD-4 will be met and performance will exceed Minimal Specification s CD-4 will be met and performance will be degraded from Minimal Specifications CD-4 will not be met R&D Project

7. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #7 Risk Methodology Overall Risk Rating Likelihood of Occurrence Impact/Consequence MarginalSignificantCritical Very LikelyMediumHigh LikelyLowMediumHigh UnlikelyLow Medium Risk Likelihood Very Likely>90% Likely>50% and <90% Unlikely<50%

8. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #8 The Plan

9. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #9 Assumptions Most R&D will be completed by the end of CY’07 Technical feasibility will be established by the end of CY’07 Resources will move as needed Some small amount of new funding will be found The R&D will be evaluated by the impact of all results on the sensitivity of the EDM experiment

10. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #10 Cost during FY’07 Funding Source*Investment ($k) DOE Project Funds300 DOE Operations40 LDRD457 Opportunities90 Total887 *Only $300k applies to TPC at present

11. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #11 Schedule Overview

12. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #12 Schedule Overview

13. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #13 Risk Overview Risk TypeRiskNumber TechnicalHigh6 Medium8 Low6 ScheduleHigh0 Medium2 Low18 CostHigh0 Medium2 Low18

14. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #14 Risk Overview A high risk subsystem due to unpredictable outcomes of R&D Risk NameRisk TypeProbabilityImpactRisk 3 He Relaxation TimeTechnicalLikelyCriticalHigh Light CollectionTechnicalLikelyCriticalHigh Valve DevelopmentTechnicalLikelyCriticalHigh High Voltage StudiesTechnicalLikelyCriticalHigh 4 He Evaporative PurificationTechnicalLikelyCriticalHigh 3 He InjectionTechnicalLikelyCriticalHigh

15. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #15 Contract Project Manager Actions Promote duplicate effort on 3 He relaxation Get other institutions to assist in valve development Search for addition funding for full valve test Encourage NCSU team not to distract Duke team Get agreement on magnet uniformity requirement Search for addition funding for the 3 He holding coil Increase scientific staffing on the HV tests Redirect engineering and technician efforts to the new cryostat Get Yale to coordinate the SQUID effort Get other institutions to assist in the 3 He injection test Decide whether to fund the laser fluorescence work Withhold funding of the slow controls prototype Request a set of standards for slow controls

16. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #16 The Schedule Challenge

17. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #17 HV Test Cryostat ABS The New Cryostat

18. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #18 “Film Burner” “Film Burner” pump out “Cs Region” Transition Region

19. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #19 Tri-coil Helmholtz magnet Holding Coil

20. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #20 NMR pickup coil Polarized 3He beam 40mm Pyrex O- ring joint Kapton seal 3 He Collection Volume

21. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #21 Cesium ring Teflon O-ring to seal Cs when warm Cs Film Controller

22. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #22 Heat sink to DR still Super-fluid film flow Heat sink to 4K shield Heat sink to 1 K pot “Film burner” pump out Solenoid magnet, Φ4” The Film Burner

23. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #23.5mm gap to create gas flow impedance Super-fluid film flow Knife edge Film Burner Detail

24. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #24 News

25. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #25 1/Fill Time = Production Rate - Loss Rate Absorption Time 1/Detector Loss Rate Storage Time Measurement Concept

26. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #26 100 s holding time Time (s) Counts (/s)

27. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #27 Results – 300 & 50 K Delay Time (s) ln(counts) 230±5 s 110±10 s

28. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #28 Crazing

29. Office of Nuclear Physics R&D 12/14/06 #29 Summary The Process Reevaluation of the Program – No major changes but some additions where possible in response to the CD-1 review Risk Methodology – Separate impact evaluation from the main project The Plan Assumptions – The technical challenges dominate Schedule Overview – New cryostat is the critical path Risk Overview – 6 high and 12 medium evaluations out of 60 Contract Project Manager Actions – Working to optimize our effectiveness The Schedule Challenge – The new cryostat is a significant experiment in its own right News – Storage time measurement