Free Electron Laser Commissioning/Diagnostic Meeting
Tuesday, March 18, 1997
Recorder: R. Legg
Next Meeting
- Date: March 25, 1997
- Time: 3:00 - 4:00
- Place: Test Lab Conference Room
Attendees
R. Legg, C. L. Bohn, J. Boyce, B. Bowling
J. Bennett, R. Walker, D. Douglas, K. Jordan
Addenda/Errata to Previous Minutes
-------------------------------
- I omitted the names of G. Krafft and Q.S. Shu from
last weeks minutes. They were in attendance.
Items of Discussion
----------------------
- J. Boyce talked about the Accelerator Readiness Review
process and the FEL. He reviewed:
The basic tenents of readiness.
Readiness phases of a WBS
Levels of review
- He said one of the issues in deciding how ARR was implemented
was coming to an agreement with the regulatory parties (Navy,
DOE site office) about whether ARR covered technical issues
or EH and S issues only. At that point J. Bennett said he
thought it should cover technical issues and Jim Boyce said
that was the typical DOE answer whereas the lab had consistently
tried to limit the process to EHS issues. An agreement
needs to be reached by FEL management prior to implementation
of the proposed system. R. Legg agreed to try to arrange for it
by 4/15.
- At this point Jim said that operation of the accelerator was
not contingent on completing the ARR process. What the ARR
process does do is allow routine operation of the entire system
in a productive fashion, so we can commission without
going through the entire ARR.
Jim also said that he would prefer to defer the ARR external review
until commissioning was essentially complete so that only one
meeting would be necessary to complete the process.
- Jim proposed that to keep the regulatory parties up to date
in the meantime (minimizing "face time") that the ARR system
be put on the web with predefined forms to describe problems
and an overview matrix of WBS's and stages of Readiness with
pointers to goto the detailed forms.
- Kevin asked what the value added was to the process for this
work. Jim said that it allowed anyone with access to the JLAB
web to determine the project status. Kevin said the people
who needed that sort of information already get it weekly.
However, Jim said, the ARR process was necessary to let the
regulatory parties know what was going on; it wasn't a
value added for Kevin unless he wanted to operate the
accelerator after it was commissioned.
- Legg will try to arrange for a meeting between the responsible
parties by 4/15. Jim will try to get the prototype www pages
generated by 4/30 (that's only 6 weeks!)
New Issues
----------
- What is the drive to quantify the longitudinal emittance
so long as it is less than the spec?
Action Items
------------
- Legg and Boyce to get things rolling on the ARR system.
Action Priority Items (assigned)
----------------------------------
A-05 2 Injector energy precision Douglas
A-15 1 Commissioning Procedure Legg, Krafft 5/16/96
A-19 0 Web Documentation weekly
A-20 1 10->42 MeV dump Douglas
A-24 1,2 Beam loss Bohn
A-29 1 Software Planning for Longer Term Bohn, et al.
A-30 1 Burnthrough/Conflat Expansion Denard, Kloppel
A-34 2 Consistent Linac phasing plan Yunn
A-35 1 simultaneous transverse and longitudinal Kehne/Engwall 8/6/96
A-39 1 report on ARR plan Legg 8/23.
A-42 2 2nd gun for long term tests Bohn 10/1/96
A-44 1,2 Start Rui on emittance code Bohn 8/13/96
A-47 1 OTR beam interaction number by Denard 9/11
A-54 1 FEL Turn-On Proc S. Benson 11/1/96
A-55 1 Laser Diagnostic Proc Benson 11/1/96
Action Items (pending)
------------
P-02 1 Laser phase modulator Jordan
P-05 1 Devise fine-tuning procedure for buncher gradient Krafft/Kehne
P-08 1,2 How do we change energy? What is the energy range? Benson
P-14 1 How is the gun/laser operated? Benson
P-15 Discussion on robustness of controls Legg
P-19 2 Consistent linac/bunching phase sets Yunn
P-20 1 Lock plans (who in particular) Johannes?
P-21 1 Save/restore plans Benesch
P-25 1,2 RF control sensitivities/ Merminga
Microphonics Diff for FEL/
Pathlength effect
P-29 2 FEL/linac interaction Merminga
P-30 2 Tracking including realistic wiggler fields Douglas
P-37 1 42 MeV dump design and interlocking Wiseman
Agenda for Next Meeting
-----------------------
Item Person Responsible Time
---- ------------------ ----
* Review agenda/corrections to minutes Legg 5 min.
* ITS: After "MUST", what? legg 20 min
* Discussion all 10 min
* New Issues ALL 10 min
* Agenda for next meeting All 5 min.