1. G. Carboni - Muon Meeting – 13.02.2004 1 Muon Meeting 12/13.02.04 Agenda IntroductionGiovanni (30’) GEM and TDR AddendumWalter (20’) Update on M1 ratesAlessia (15’) Discussion on M1 granularityall (25’) Material procurement – LogisticsPierluigi (20’) Panel production Short updates on the status of FE/FI/PZ (30’) Chamber acceptance specs Lunch DatabaseAlessio (15’) Reharsal of VCI talkGaia (25’) Integration issuesBurkhard (45’) AOB

2. G. Carboni - Muon Meeting – 13.02.2004 2 Introduction News since last Muon Meeting (November) PRR LNF (December) PRR PNPI (January) Comprehensive review (January - BS, AL, GC).  New set of electronics milestones (LHCC) (Adriano’s talk)  Concern for the Muon Schedule in general  GEM choice well received In general positive answers from the PRR referees. All the PRR were well prepared and the referees were in general well impressed by the “excellent state of the production sites”. There were some general remarks, however the reports did not show concern about the 3 centers surveyed so far to be able to reach the nominal production rates. “Even though only a small sample of chambers have been produced at the PNPI I site, the site is, in the view of the reviewers, very well thought through and optimised for handling and speed of production as well as a continuous and rigorous quality control” This is maybe a little optimistic

3. G. Carboni - Muon Meeting – 13.02.2004 3

4. 4

5. 5

6. 6 PRR (continued) However a number of remarks have been made Decide on final acceptance test to be agreed by the institutes (see later) source scan or equivalent recommendation for cosmic-ray test of a large sample with final electronics long-term testing Concerns about the closing for glued chambers safety margin HV connectors (see later) Database Cleaning safety concerns (isopropyl alcohol)

7. G. Carboni - Muon Meeting – 13.02.2004 7 Production Concerning the production capacity of the various centers, it seems that the reviewers did not want to discuss in detail the production rates and the assumptions done in the planning. However we should feel concerned. We have been too optimistic: large delays in startup long training curves at the moment unclear if the nominal production rates can be achieved material supply problems (panels, resistors) forecasts have been consistently downgraded We should know very soon if the production capacity can be reached in all centers We should also look more carefully to the installation phase: how many days (weeks) in advance chambers should be at CERN when and where the final electronics will be installed is CR testing with CARIOCA still a possibility?

8. G. Carboni - Muon Meeting – 13.02.2004 8 # built by 31.01.04 # planned by 31.03.04 * (est) Nominal rate planned (est) PRR CERN514 (14)13.02 (31.01)Done LNF843 (20)20.01 (1.03)Done PNPI236 (12)31.03 (30.04)Done FE0 37 (4) 9.03 (31.03)~ March 04 FI07.07 (7.07)~ April 04 130 (50) 9 % (3.5%) Detector production startup Assuming the new dates for the nominal rate and rescheduling the production accordingly: Delay w.r.t. original planning ~ 1 month full production ~ 50 chambers → Impact on installation to be clarified

9. G. Carboni - Muon Meeting – 13.02.2004 9

10. 10 Installation Milestones Buffer Duration of installation period 1st half M2R4(PNPI1)12 weeks5 weeks 2nd half M2R4(PNPI1)8 weeks5 weeks 2nd half M1R4(LNF/FE)4-8 weeks5 weeks 1st half M1R4 (LNF/FE)3-7 weeks4 weeks 2nd half M4R4(PNPI2)0 weeks 12 weeks 2nd half M5R4(FI)1 week12 weeks Reshuffling could be considered later, but it could cure only minor problems. Notice that PNPI2 is already marginal and a further delay is planned since CMS production will end by June and not April We also should carefully consider the availability of the electronics chip availabilty chip testing board production board testing board installation on chambers

11. G. Carboni - Muon Meeting – 13.02.2004 11 Possibilities for increasing productivity Panel gluing: at present limited by 1 panel/day per gluing table (glue curing) 2 tables needed for 10 panels = 2.5 chambers in 1 working week  more tables  small chamber panels could be glued two at the time Wire gluing (done on wiring machine) 2 wire planes 24h glue curing  the frame holding the two panels can be removed and replaced with a 2nd one  for smaller chambers 4 wire planes possible M1 chambers have only 2 wire planes  faster construction (3 chambers/week possible, already considered) Spares present schedule assumes now 8 ch for each R4, 4 for R3, 2 for R1 and R2  construction can be moved to the end (but we don’t know the yield yet!) proposed some time ago by Burkhard. Can we agree on it?

12. G. Carboni - Muon Meeting – 13.02.2004 12 70 ch ~ 5% total 31.03.04

13. G. Carboni - Muon Meeting – 13.02.2004 13 31.03.04 35 ch ~ 2.5% total

14. G. Carboni - Muon Meeting – 13.02.2004 14 31.03.04 14 ch ~ 1% total

15. G. Carboni - Muon Meeting – 13.02.2004 15

16. G. Carboni - Muon Meeting – 13.02.2004 16 Conclusions (as presented in the Comprehensive Review) Much progress was done in 2003, both in electronics and detectors But the Muon System is very large and complex…… Achieving the nominal rate for all centers in spring is crucial We will review the situation once we know the effective production rate Increases of productivity could have to be considered Otherwise a priority in the installation schedule has to be worked out

17. G. Carboni - Muon Meeting – 13.02.2004 17