Meeting 16 Dec 2011

Added by Tunnell, Christopher over 12 years ago

  • actions and minutes (Tunnell, EB)
  • matters arising from the TB, and RF review (TB minutes were distributed by Tim Hayler, enclosed)
  • matters arising from the video conference
  • status and plans of constructions SS, AFC, CC, RF power ...
  • status of paper(s) (Maurizio)
  • data being public (Colling)
  • collaboration meetings in 2012
  • MPB (8 March) and FAC (19 March) meetings in 2012
  • common fund (Ken)
  • A.O.B.


Added by Tunnell, Christopher over 12 years ago

Maurizio Bonesini:

Dear all
on Friday I will flight back to Milano from RAL, apologies for
my absence at the EB. About the paper status a few comments:
- Beamline paper: Paul and ma are waiting for some missing comments/mods
 (the deadline expired about 3 weeks ago). If they arrive soon we may
 still hope to have the paper submittable to JINST by Christmas.
- Emittance paper: still waiting from a draft to be circulated to the
 collaboration from Mark (R). Apparently it is a problem of overbooking
 with other commitments from T2K.
Best regards Maurizio

Added by Tunnell, Christopher over 12 years ago

Dear EB,

I would like to bring this up at the next EB however, I may well be travelling
(to RAL) during tomorrow's EB so I decided to send an email instead/as well.

I think that we should openly and publicly make all our data and software
open source. There are two reasons for this:

- Our funding agencies are pushing relatively hard for this (see for example

- In practical terms this makes a whole load of things a lot easier and we
are effectively already doing this by putting our data and code on publicly
available websites.

Are there any objections to this approach or can say this is MICE policy?


Added by Tunnell, Christopher about 12 years ago


  • Chris Tunnell
  • Dan Kaplan
  • Vittorio Palladino
  • John Cobb
  • Yagmur Torun
  • Alain Blondel
  • Ken Long (later)
  • Alan Bross (later)
  • David Colling (later)

Hall Probes (unscheduled)

Ken and Alan want three hall probes per tracker. Blondel wants to know how many hall probes we have and if we need to remake any.

TB and RF review

  • Milestones seems to be going well with Hanson leading.

ACTION: Andy. How are things moving in the hall between Feb and May? Need Schedule. The tracker group requested one. Need to see it at next CM. Step 4 installation countdown.

  • RF review. Closeout notes presented at VC. Blondel reminds us that a beam physicist needs to work with the RF team to make sure the RF fits the requirements: C&M? We're missing a fulltime RF engineer. Maybe this is a place that FNAL can help out with? Derun has two postdocs within sphere of influence.

ACTION: Bross. Need person to overview RF operation within the cooling channel, Bross to initiate search for such a person. Make sure pieces fit together. RF Integrator.

h2 . Status plans of construction

SS, AFC, CC, RF: things are following course.

Was SS talk at VC, looks good.

CC: Working on instrumentation plan, need to modify FSU cryostat, final design review mid-February. In Feb., drawings could get sent to Qichuan. Have good plan. Nessi and CERN director could help. At Daresbury, possibilities. Alain may be able to get a couple of man-years of help from his funding agency. Fermilab will help with first CC but not others.


EUronu CERN and Neutrino 2012 Japan.

Common fund

Funding for travel. There is some disagreement as to if the common fund should be making up the difference in the US budget. Exceptions only!

See slides.

How much will SS cost to store since we just spent 2k on shipping something smaller since it was an "extraordinary load"? Is this covered by CF?

Muons Inc hasn't paid CF, but left. Do we push it?

Colling suggests that if they haven't paid CF, then they left effectively April 2011 and after a year they are removed from the author list...

AOB Free data and software

See email. Mix of philosophy and being efficient.

People seem to agree to the idea. There were some objections from Dan Kaplan that non-MICE people shouldn't see our data sicne they haven't helped obtain it. Need clear message that this isn't endorsed by the MICE collaboration if people write their own papers based on this data or software.

ACTION: Colling to draft a disclaimer at next EB.