1. CDF Detector Operations Budget and Resource Planning Rob Roser IFC Meeting October 17, 2005 1

2. FY05 Year in Review ● Accelerator performed well and met their metric (goals) ● CDF saw luminosities as high as 150e30! ● Began slow process of constructing a trigger table for luminosities of 200-300 e30 – requires setting physics priorities ● Completed installation and commissioning of most upgrades – level 2 trigger decision crate – Hardware Event builder – New firmware for TDC’s – modified hardware – New secondary vertex track trigger made substantial progress – Central preradiator – a new detector system installed in 2004 shutdown part of stable operations since the beginning of 05 ● No significant problem of note in FY05 – We collected data with an average efficiency of 85%

3. Integrated Luminosity 3 1328 pb -1 Delivered 1063 pb -1 Recorded

4. Data Taking Efficiency 4

5. Budget Process ● CDF requested $1.4 million for Detector Operations ● Expect to get most of what we ask for – a remarkable demonstration by the lab given its budget situation and financial pressures from future initiatives ● Reminder that much of detector operations deals with fixed costs (flammable gas, cryogens, computer maintenance…) ~$900k can be written now to cover next year ● Visitor budget held constant, no where near sufficient to honor all requests ● Working with the lab to get additional technical staff to reduce burden on scientists where appropriate

6. M&S Budget CategoryExplanationFY05 ActualFY06 Req. ComputingOn-line DAQ, Level 3, licensing, slow controls $500k$350k ConsumablesArgon, Ethane, LN2, He, Alcohol $600k$450k Time and Material labor (T&M) Electrical, rigging, HVAC Maintenance $50k$25k Infrastructure Maintenance HVAC, Compressors, Engines, pumps $200k$225k General Operatingphones, pagers, vehicles, office supplies misc catchall $200k Mechanical SupportPipes, fittings, bolts, tools, safety $100k$75k UpgradesInstallation Costs (e.g. Scaffolding..) $150k$25k Total$1,800k$1,350k

7. Last Years Budget Review ● From the spreadsheet I gave you… – FY05 Actual Cost was $2.0M (for non offline) ● Costs based on previous agreed upon combination of salary and M&S ● Actual Spending was within a few $k of FY05 budget projection – Major expenditures last year included: ● Trailer recertification ● COT Gas filtering system ● New HVAC Water Chiller – Costs associated with upgrade installations complete

8. Data Taking Operations ● Difficult to keep enthusiasm for taking data over an 8-10 year data run ● Working on ways to either make it easier to participate or reduce the scientific effort required – Testing a remote control room. ● Reduces travel ● Covers difficult midnight shift here – Working with the lab to replace some positions currently staffed by scientists with trained Fermilab technical staff on shift

9. Evaluating Personnel Resource Availability http://www.fnal.gov/directorate/program_planning/P5/P5_Sept2005/ HEPAP_Subpanel_P5_Meeting.html

10. Summary Plot of Needs

11. “The Shot Heard Round the World”

12. Summary of Needs in FTE’s 20072009 Operations55 Offline2620 Management10 Algorithms3526 Total Service126111 FTE  fraction of total working week. NOT: fraction of research time; NOT fraction of 40 hour week!

13. Summary of Subgroups…(needs) in FTE’s 20072009 Core Physics8164 Total Service126111 Core+Service207175

14. “Person-power” survey ● Spreadsheet developed as first stage in DØ 2005-2007 MOU (that we stole) ● Request FTE (2.) effort dedicated to CDF vs Year – Faculty, scientist, postdoc, student ● Request details of institutional commitments ● Notes: 1. 2008-2009 less certain… 2. FTE  fraction of total working week. NOT: fraction of research time; NOT fraction of 40 hour week! ● Responses from 53/57 institutes

15. Results of Survey by Country in FTE’s 20052006200720082009 U.S. 242.8221.2176.6110.282.8 Spain 11.813.28.77.7 Italy 63.459.752.242.241.6 Canada 15.715.89.35.12.1 Switz. 6.64.13.122 Germany 1510.67.94.82.6 Russia 0.62200 Korea 12.99.99.5 U.K. 26.525.518.310.65.2 Japan 21.718.21713.38.8

16. Results of survey: 2005-2007 - Fall off for both US and non-US roughly consistent with HEPAP survey CDF Year200520062007 non-US100% 91% 74% US100% 91% 73% all.expt100% 91% 73% HEPAP100% 88% 69% FTEs 434 381304

17. Comparison of FTE availability and needs: 2007 Sufficient effort to operate experiments and support a broad physics program Assumes people spend 50% of time on “service” and 50% doing “physics” “Service” 126 “Core” physics 86 Total needs 1: (service*2) 252 Total needs 2: (service+“core”) 207 Available FTE 304 Available-needs 1: 52 Available-needs 2: 97

18. Results for 2009 Calculated from 2007 MOU FTEs using HEPAP ratio for 2009/2007 Expt. CDF Available FTEs non-US75 US116 all.expt191 Needed FTEs 1: service*2222 2: service+core175 Available - needed FTEs 1:-31 2:16 If we used the survey, Total available is 162 FTE

19. Conclusions ● CDF is operating well. FY05 was a very good year for us! ● Spending has been in line with our budget requests. ● Staffing at the moment looks ok – but requires constant attention and management to insure we are able to cover our needs

20. BACKUP

21. Detector Operations Detail Management5250 Alarms and Controls1100 Online and Data Acquisition8350 Data Quality Monitoring8110 Silicon Detectors17725 Outer Tracker5230 Calorimeters14260 Muons13300 Subgroup # People Total % FTE/subgroup Time of Flight250 Luminosity Detector2100 Trigger5250 Level 1 Trigger7225 Level 2 Trigger8130 Event Builder/Level 3 Trigger7225 Total Scientific Effort1233300 Infrastructure Support212040 Shift 3122241

22. Diving Down in Operations Calorimeter Subsystem is comprised of the following categories… Each one has an estimate associated with it. For CDF, the numbers are shown to the right… PeopleFTE Central EM10.3 Central hadronic 10.3 Electronics40.3 Forward20.4 Far Forward10.3 Timing20.2 Leadership20.5 HV10.3 TOTAL142.6

23. Core Physics Analysis ● Picked 10 physics analyses that are scientifically compelling measurements and demonstrate the potential of the collider program – a combination of precision measurements and searches/discovery potential – Searches ● SM and MSSM Higgs, SUSY searches, Z’, LED, B s   – Precision ● Top mass, Vtb, W mass, Vtb, B s mixing, B s lifetime

24. Algorithm Development CDF ALGORITHMSFY05FY07FY09 Muon Reconstruction0.5 Tracking8.95.13.4 Calorimetry2.72.2 Taus1.81.70.9 Jet Energy Scale10.04.82.8 b-tagging3.52.51.3 Trigger6.57.84.1 Simulation5.53.02.7 Luminosity0.3 0.2 High Level Data Handling7.5 Infrastructure0.0 TOTAL ALGORITHMS47.235.425.6

25. Core Physics Analysis CDF PHYSICSFY05FY07FY09FY05 Bs (Mixing, Rare Decay, Lifetime)18.516.013.022.0 EW(W mass)5.0 13.0 Higgs(SM and SUSY)17.0 15.519.5 New Phenomena(Trilepton,Squarks & 14.511.57.013.0 Gluinos, Stop&Sbottom, LED, Z') Top (Mass and Single)19.517.511.522.5 Core physics management7.0 5.07.0 Tevatron Combination0.33.0 0.3 Godparents/Ed.Boards4.0 TOTAL PHYSICS88.581.064.0101.3