Beams for European Neutrino Experiments (BEνE)
Topic: Neutrino beams of superior intensity and qualityCo-ordinator: Vittorio Palladino (INFN-Napoli, Italy)
Draft last updated 01/02/2003
This page prepared by : Vittorio Palladino
NB Text in Italic
should be viewed as preliminary generic text, likely to be replaced soon
by a more specific and suitable formulation. Introduction and summary of the activity Short description meant as an input to Table 2? Landmark discoveries have recently confirmed
that the investigation of the properties of neutrinos (ν)
is and will be revealing to us fundamental and unique
information on the basic nature and texture of fundamental matter.
We, the Muon
Study Groups, endorsed by ECFA since 2000, active since 1998,
apply for EC support of our Networking Activity. Our mandate
is to prepare the evolution of European research in the field of ν
physics beyond the present CNGS facility. Accelerator and particle
physicists together and coherently intend to plan the technical effort,
comparing the physics reach of the different approaches, while closely
monitoring the rapid evolution of the field.
While Europe is presently building a νμ facility (CNGS) based on a conventional π decay tunnel, the concept of a Neutrino Factory, novel multi-accelerator complex whose final stage is a high energy μ storage & decay ring, has been proposed as the ultimate tool for precise study of both νμ & νe properties. Its high power p-driver would also offer, however, early on the way, the possibility of a SuperBeam, a superior conventional νμ beam (as well as of an unprecedented facility for fundamental experiments with slow μ). In addition, the unique complentary physics reach of the BetaBeam, pure νe beam from a high energy storage & decay ring for β-active ions, has recently been pointed out at CERN, as a possible evolution of existing accelerators. Our NA will investigate coherently these few attractive main options. Integrating all the proposed studies, we intend to outline a road-map of technical milestones leading both to the most rewarding utilization of the existing facilities and to the realization of the most attractive and intense new European ν facility. Of this, we intend to complete a complete Conceptual Design Report by 2008. We intend to foster, prepare, launch and perform, assembling the necessary human and material resources, all the R&D and technical preparatory work indispensable to these achievements. Longer description to stay here? The investigation of the properties of the ν, 70 years after its invention, 46 after the discovery of the its first νe species , 27 after the first indirect evidence of its third and so far last ντ species, is and will still long be revealing to us fundamental and unique information on the basic nature and texture of fundamental matter. Recent experiments have established transitions in flight of one ν into another, very likely to be oscillations, over two independent long baselines (LBL), Thus ν do have non zero mixing rates and non zero masses. The exceptional smallness of the masses points to the existence of new fundamental physics occurring at a very high-energy scale, providing indeed the first experimental data constraining it. The pattern of large mixings is likely to carry the imprint of this new specific physics and, even more importantly, points to the possibility of a large leptonic CP violation phase. If true, this may be a key ingredient in the understanding of the matter-antimatter asymmetry of the universe (including the existence of our own physical bodies!), rooting it in a fundamental asymmetry of the mechanism of primordial lepto-genesis by decay of very heavy ν. This opens a field of research which will last several decades, perform the complete mapping of the patterns of masses and mixings and culminate with the discovery of leptonic CP violation. Long baselines impose very high power, constraints on the physics at the new scale will come only from statistically significant data samples. These studies will thus require an important investment in accelerator-based neutrino beams and experiments, improving significantly the present facilities and/or developing new ones. Proposed underground neutrino detector locations, both existing and new, will also need careful scrutiny. The present European program (CNGS) is expected to produce decisive evidence of nutau appearance. It will operate in 2006 and will, after that, benefit from R&D towards improved performance. In addition. not much later its operation, we must have a clear view of the nature, characteristics and logistics of the investments necessary for a further major upgrade of our discovery potential in this sector. This Networking Activity on neutrino beams, integrating all the proposed studies, aims at developping, from the present basic conceptual road map, a true road-map of technical milestones for the realization of an upgraded and/or new European neutrino facility. We plan to channel all our efforts towards the global strategic objective of submitting, to the European funding agencies and laboratory Directors, a complete Conceptual Design Report (CDR ) of such a facility by 2008, that appears the earliest conceivable date for new significant investments in an European particle physics program. We plan to continue to investigate coherently the requirements posed on accelerators by this long term program of experimental LBL neutrino physics, and to define and prepare, after HARP, MUSCAT and other current activities, the R&D necessary for the our present few main options of future ν beams of unprecedented intensity and quality. This implies a number of items to be assembled. A.Consensual physics requirements, mainly emerging from collective studies of ν oscillation physics, on the ultimate reach of the CNGS and on the value of a Neutrino Factory, Super-beam, Beta-beam or combinations of them (but also on the value of additional powerful facilities made possible by a high power proton driver, slow muons and much more). It will have to take into account the likely availability of funding and the state of the relevant technologies and provide indications on: B.The choice and design of a proton driver. Several possibilities are being considered: Superconductive Proton Linacs and similar CW machines in linear or cyclotron mode and/or Rapid Cycling Synchrotron. A careful study of the pros and cons of the various option, using the HARP data on particle production, could bring to definition of the baseline option by NUFACT05 (spring 2005) followed by complete design in view of the CDR: C. and D. The design of a Target and Collection Station. Considerable progress was achieved, in collaboration with the US, for the option of a liquid metal target with collection by a high field solenoid. This requires now the design and construction or refurbishment of large (20T or so) solenoid. Alternative options include other targets (liquid jet, solid levitating rings, solid granular targets) imbedded in a solenoid or a horn. Use of several target & horn systems in parallel is also proposed. Work on a proposal to set up a target test area (TTA) in Europe including a beam, a liquid jet and a high field solenoid is in progress. A proposal for a test area to test the limits of horns in term of rep. rate and sustainable beam power (resistance to radiation) is also being prepared. A viable final design of target and collection area for 4->10 MW beam power, perhaps the most formidable challenge of the entire program, including aspects of safety, radiation and waste disposal, may thus be achieved by 2008. D. The design of the Neutrino Factory Front-end (Ionization Cooling, Phase rotation) and of acceleration. The MICE experiment is being proposed and constitutes the major experimental effort in the area of muon cooling. R&D towards cheap, high peak power, pulsed RF power sources and fast kickers with large acceptance for future ring coolers is being undertaken. Comparative studies will be necessary of the two different European and American preliminary baseline front end designs (tboth based on cooling), as well as of the Japanese scheme that relies on little or no cooling, by means of a cascade of very large aperture (Fixed Field Alternated Gradient) accelerators. A viable final design of the front end can thus be achieved by 2008. The acceleration scheme, with re-circulating linacs or with FFAG, must also be defined down to complete conceptual design. E A first design study of a Betabeam. In preparation for that, we are considering target development studies at ISOLDE and possibly at at ISAC with high intensity proton bea, pre-acceleration, accumulation and storage studies at existing facilities (TSL in Uppsala, ESR at GSI, LEIR at CERN), and low intensity test (possibly in the SPS) of the high energy accumulation scheme using stable ions. This could result in ????????????? It should finally be kept in view that the launch of neutrino detector studies and R&D, for future neutrino beams, will also become a necessity, at some point. Such a coherent and coordinated European program on neutrino beams will involve the large majority of the European experts in this field and will allow Europe to play a world leader role. It will enhance considerably the collaboration between accelerator physicists on the one hand and will develop a synergy between particle physicists and accelerator physicists on the other, ensuring the long-term sustainability of the field. Very limited resources are presently available in Europe for accelerator neutrino physics. The LHC crisis appears to inevitably imply reduced support from the European agencies, even to the approved CNGS program. Decisive added value would result, from the EC support that we are requesting here, to the strategic goal of producing a timely European initiative and leadership in the fondamental area of neutrino science. This applies both to this Networking Activity and to R&D Projects. Among those, HIPPI, proposed within this IA, and MICE, entering soon its final design phase, appear as the natural continuation of the R&D projects (MUSCAT, HARP and the first BNL-CERN target experiment) that, as ECFA Muon Study Groups, we have initiated in the recent past. |
Objectives and Work Packages:
Summary of the objectives, described in terms of work packages
(where relevant) The practical implementation of the program will be carried out by forming the following specific working groups. A few words about Management and Communications should be inserted here?
|
Contracting Participants:
Participant number | Organisation name (and short name) |
Local responsible and team members, number of FTE (incl. associated members) | Interests, expertise (and relevant WPs) | Associated members (short names), number of FTEs |
1 (co-ordinator) | Sezione INFN Napoli, Italy (INFN-nu) |
Vittorio.Palladino@napoli.infn.it >8 scientists, >0,7 FTE |
Organization co-ordinating
a consortium of physicists from Italian Universities and
Sezioni INFN (see Table below) contributing long term expertise in the
field of neutrino physics, experiments & beams (design, detailed simulation,
operation and analysis of their data), involved in several major R&D
projects in progress (HARP,MICE). It will contribute to the
general steering and to the PHYSICS,
COLLECTOR, COOLING and BETABEAM WPs |
Padova, Genova,
Legnaro, Milano and possibly more |
2 |
Laboratori. Nazionali
INFN, Frascati, Italy (LNF) |
Michele.Castellano or Mauro.Migliorati@lnf.infn.it 3 scientists, 0,6 FTE |
The Laboratory will contribute
to the studies of COOLING techniques
both theoretical (simulation, design) and experimental (measurements of
emittances) as well as to the general steering (and to the PHYSICS
WP').
|
|
3 |
CERN, Geneva, Switzerland (CERN) |
Helmut.Haseroth@cern.ch 12 scientists, 1,75 FTE |
The Laboratory has made together with other European labs a feasibility study for a Neutrino Factory and is currently building the next European neutrino beam (CNGS). It will provide expertise and some leadership in the R&D for a neutrino factory in general and specifically in target technology. Theoretical and experimental among the users physicists will be contributing leading expertise in the field of neutrino physics, experiments & beams and promotion of betabeam studies. Depending on the requirements excellent test beams may be available. It will contribute to the general steering and to the TARGET, COLLECTOR, COOLING, BETABEAM WPs and probably more. | |
4 |
Univ. of Geneva, Geneva,
Switzerland (CH-nu) |
Alain.Blondel@unige.ch
or Andre.Rubbia@cern.ch 2 scientists, ? FTE |
Organization
coordinating a consortium of physicists from Swiss Universities (including
ETH and Zurich) contributing long term expertise in the field of neutrino
physics, experiments & beams (design, detailed simulation, operation
and analysis of their data), expertise in horn technology and in the
field of intense low energy muon beams and leadership in the experimental
studies of muon ionisation cooling,. It will contribute
to the general steering and to the PHYSICS, TARGET, HORN,
COOLING WPs and probably more. |
Zurich, ETH?, Novosibirsk? |
5 |
Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland
(PSI) |
Knud.Thomsen@psi.ch 2 scientists, 0,2 FTE |
The Laboratory operates
the highest power proton machine presently available and can contribute long term expertise in most sectors. It
will specifically contribute to the general steering and to the studies
of TARGET technologies. |
|
6 |
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory,
Didcot,UK (CCLRC) |
P.R.Norton@rl.ac.uk
or K.Peach@rl.ac.uk ? scientists, ? FTE |
The Laboratory will contribute to the studies towards a Neutrino
factory in general, and specifically to studies of proton drivers and
targets. It is providing the home and the technical and human resources
to make experimental studies of muon ionisation cooling possible. Infrastructure providing access? It will contribute to the general steeering and to the
PHYSICS, DRIVER, TARGET, COOLING WPs and probably more ....
to be revised by the local responsible |
all
the UK Universities? ITEP? |
7 |
Imperial College, London,
UK (UK-nu) |
Kenneth.Long@ic.ac.uk ? scientists, ? FTE |
Organization coordinating a consortium
of physicists from UK Universities, including Oxford and who else?,
contributing long term expertise in the field of neutrino physics, experiments
& beams), involved in most major R&D projects in progress (HARP,
MUSCAT, MICE). It will contribute
to the general steeering and to the PHYSICS, DRIVER,
TARGET, COOLING WPs and probably more. to be revised by the local responsible |
Oxford?
A few more? |
8 |
Forschungszentrum, Julich,
Germany (FZJ) |
g.bauer@fz-juelich.de ? scientists, ? FTE |
The Laboratory will contribute
to the general steering and to studies of high
power TARGETry and related
technologies with emphasis on liquid metal targets and their enclosure. The
main sectors will be: studies relating to the effects of pressure
wave mitigation in targets exposed to intense short pulses of energetic particles;
radiation effects in target walls and on the wall-liquid interface;
fluid dynamics and thermal hydraulics/ thermomechanics, spallation
products and associated technology issues; loop components,
diagnostics and remote handling issues; waste management.
to be revised
by the local responsible
|
Institute of Physics, University of Latvia(IPUL), NRG, Petten, NL |
9 |
GSI (Gesellshaft fur Schwerionenforschung) Darmstadt, Germany (GSI) |
B.Franzke@gsi.de 5 scientists, 0,5 FTE |
The Laboratory will
contribute to the studies of beam dynamics in general, high intensity
phenomena, beam stability. Main interest is in the general
steering and in the BETABEAM WP. ... to be revised by the local responsible |
|
10 |
Technical University Muenchen,
Germany (D-nu) |
Manfred.Lindner@ph.tu-muenchen.de 5 scientists, 2,05 FTE |
Organization grouping around it
a consortium of physicists from Germany Universities, including Dortmund,
contributing long term expertise in the field of neutrino and muon
physics and experiments. It will contribute to the general
steering and studies of the PHYSICS potential of future
long baseline experiments. The studies aim at guiding the exploration, planning
and construction of conceivable setups by identifying the capabilities and
the crucial components and limitations.
|
Dortmund? |
11 |
CEA/DSM/DAPNIA, Saclay, France (CEA) (CEA) |
pascal.debu@cea.fr 17 scientists, 2,0 FTE |
The laboratory
will mostly contribute to the studies of high power proton DRIVERs especially
the low energy end, but also to general steering, to the definition
of the PHYSICS demands on neutrino accelerator facilities, the COLLECTOR
systems, the COOLING effort and the BETABEAM R&D. |
|
12 |
IN2P3, France (IN2P3-nu) |
Stavros.Katsanevas@admin.in2p3.fr 9 scientists, 2,35 FTE |
The Institute
will coordinate a consortium including physicists from French CNRS and University
Laboratories (IPN Lyon, LAL, LPNHE Paris VI&VII) contributing long
term expertise in the field of neutrino PHYSICS, experiments &
beams. It expects then to contribute to the general steering and provide
technical expertise in the field of COLLECTOR technology (and of BETABEAM ???? ) design
studies... to be revised by the local responsible |
IPN
Lyon, LAL, LNPHE Paris 6&7 |
13 |
Univ. of Barcelona, Barcelona,
Spain (E-nu) |
Federico.Sanchez@ifae.es ? scientists, ? FTE |
Organization coordinating a consortium
of physicists from Spanish contributing long term expertise in the field
of neutrino PHYSICS experiments & beams, involved in major
R&D projects in progress (HARP). This consortium provides recognized
leadership in the general steering and identification of the physics
reach of future neutrino facilities. ... to be revised by the local responsible |
Valencia?
Madrid? |
14 |
Univ. Catholique, Louvain-la-Neuve,
Belgium (B-nu) |
Thierry.Delbar@fynu.ucl.ac.be 3 scientists, 0,6 FTE |
Organization coordinating
a consortium of physicists from universities and laboratories from Benelux,
contributing long term expertise in the field of neutrino physics, experiments
& beams, involved in major R&D projects in progress (HARP, MICE)
expected to contribute to the general steering, to the COOLING and the BETABEAM WP, where it holds extensive
experience in ion sources and in production of radioactive ion beams (6He,
13N, 18Ne, 18F,...)
... to be revised by the local responsible |
Bruxelles?
NIKHEF? |
Associated Members:
Organisation name (and short name) |
Local team responsible, number of FTEs | Interests, expertise (and relevant WPs) |
Associated to: (participant short name) |
Sezione INFN Genoa, Italy Sezione INFN Padova, Italy Lab. Naz. INFN Legnaro, Italy Sezione INFN Milano, Italy Sezione INFN Roma 3, Italy Bologna, Torino expressed interested Bari, Trieste may still join but what if INFN were just one organization? |
Pasquale Fabbricatore 3 scientists, ? FTE's Mauro Mezzetto >1 scientist, ? FTE's Ugo Gastaldi 1 scientist, ? FTE Maurizio Bonesini 1 scientist, ? FTE Domizia Orestano ? scientists, ? FTE Representative Representative |
general, COLLECT, COOLING general, PHYSICS, BETABEAM general, DRIVING, COOLING general, PHYSICS |
INFN-nu |
Institute of Physics, University of Latvia(IPUL),
|
Janis Freibergs
4 scientist 1,7 FTE's |
general, TARGET IPUL has many years of expertise in designing and operating liquid metal loops and in developing necessary equipment and technologies. IPUL will contribute to the study and development of liquid metal high power targets and make available its existing facilities for work within the collaboration |
FZJ |
NRG, Petten, NL |
Ed Komen
? scientists, 2,5 FTE's |
general, TARGET NRG is experienced in fluid dynamics, structural mechanics and thermal hydraulics calculations and in developing suitable computer software. Their contribution will be to the optimisation of the target configuration under the above aspects. |
FZJ |
ITEP, Moscow, Russia (ITEP) |
Boris.Sharkov@itep.ru and here? |
The Laboratory will contribute to the studies of beam dynamics and RF technology NB As any Russian institute this can only be a partner, not a participant. Groups of Russian particle physicists may be associated in similar way. | RAL? |
Novosibirsk, Russia ( NSBRSK ) |
A.N.Skrinsky@inp.nsk.su and here? |
The Laboratory will contribute to the studies of RF technology, superconducting magnets, general accelerator technology. NB As any Russian instituts this can only be a partner, not a participant. Groups of Russian particle physicists may be associated in similar way. | CH-n? |
US Muon Collider & NuFact Collaboration (MUCOLL) |
S. Geer, spokesman, Fermilab, USA |
We expect from contacts and synergy with the sister US Neutrino Factory Collaboration contributions of widest general scope aa well as significant technical impact on the work of all WPs. | Coordinating Organization? |
Japanese Nufact-J Collaboration (Nufact-J) |
Y. Kuno, spokesman, Univ. of Osaka, Japan |
We expect from contacts and synergy with the
sister NuFact J Collaboration contributions of widest general scope aa well
as significant technical impact on the work of all WPs. |
Coordinating Organization? |
Describe the results expected from the NA, in terms of achieved
designs, solutions to problems, etc...
Outline the milestones to be achieved by means of the NA, as relevant to each work package. Links to obtained results can also be given here (or a link to
a site prepared for disseminating the acquired knowledge) Describe the results expected from the NA, in terms of achieved designs, solutions to problems, etc... ..... specify the deliverables ...... The expected outcome of the NA will consist of technical notes, articles, reports, proceedings of workshops and meetings devoted to the solve (or prepare solution of) all problems necessary to launch in the shortest possible time complete conceptual design studies of a realistic option for each of the three mentioned types of future neutrino source. NB More work needed, considering that the main delivrables of a NA are described by the EC as -the organization of general meetings, workshops or specialized meeting with corresponding proceedings. Normally, the general meetings are meant to identify limitations, establish the state-of-the-art and share expertise, workshops and specialized meetings are meant to study particular issues. Important deliverables will be also -reports on comparative studies, - development of roadmaps, - definitions of joint research projects for which EU funding could be requested at a later stage. Other delivrables could be - the definition and selection of common protocols, for example for portability of software - databases - simulation codes and their maintenance. In any case, a detailed plan of the activities for the 18 first months with clear objectives and delivrables should be proposed and the longer-term perspectives should be explicited. A proposal for full Technical Design Study can also be given as a deliverable. ..... to be done largely by the 7 coordinators first and then in collegially by the NA SG ... for now, excerpts from contributions from Coordinators are being collected below PHYSICS
DRIVER. Meetings will be held regularly (about once every 2 months) to discuss progresses, and a general workshop once a year is foreseen. Proceedings will be published describing the results obtained and the strategy to further develop the R&D topics. The broadening of expertise within the network will allow a better definition of technological developments to be undergone. The creation and maintenance of a website will facilitate the sharing of information. Another important topic of the meetings and workshops will be a prospective to further extend the possible applications of such high intensity proton drivers in other physics domains and for practical applications. This would be an extra bonus to the R&D pursued within the HIPPI JRP. In addition, the regular publication of reports is a quality insurance of the JRP’s. TARGET The main oustanding expected deliverable is a consensus on the best way forward for the successful construction of targets for a European Neutrino Factory. Individual deliverables are expected to be 1) a comprehensive summary report, reviewing the present status 2) solidly rooted links with the presently loosely tied existing world wide expertise 3) establishment in Europe of the best possible up-to-date and durable knowledge base of world wide activities in target development 4) careful & structured dissemination of information and progress 4) detailed investigation and documentation of the possible solutions of the limitations of each of the technological options 5) expression of interest and proposals of detailed and realistic R&D projects capable to prove the solutions COLLECTOR The main expected deliverable is a comprehensive final report on horn designs, proposing multiple specific solutions respectivelly adequate to performance and lifetime requirements in a classical beam, a superbeam and ultimately in a neutrino factories.This will be based on detailed thermo-mechanical simulations, complete technical specification of electric supply and discharge equipment and state-of -the art knowledge of mechanical properties of alloys under high rate neutron irradiation. It will include specific solutions to the choices ( of material for the collection device, of machining, soldering and assembling techniques, of heat removal and cooling system) necessary to achieve a lifetime of 200 M pulses or more, as well as to the problems of real life integration of horn and target and of periodic replacement of either or both after 200 M pulses, in the average. The first deliverable for Summer 2004 will be a status report (R1) on existing collection systems used in the past and currently in operation (MiniBOON/K2K) and in construction (NuMI/CNGS). Then, till end 2006, studies will be condcuted, to produce a detail report (R2) on a specific solution for the SuperBeam project. Then, till the end of the NA Jan. 2008, it is foreseen to produce a detail report (R3) on the different solutions that will be avaliable for the Neutrino Factory project. The 2 last reports (R2 and R3) will be based on They will include proposition of specific solutions or R&D to be conducted necessary to achieve a lifetime of such system of few 100 Mega cycles or more. For instance, the documents will address solutions
document, and simulation programs that will be worth to develop for these studies. COOLING Main deliverables are 0) Formation of a European muon front end network , with consolidated link with US and Japan 1) Determination of the performance of the European design incorporating realistic fields and real engineerization. 2) Simulation of cooling free front ends in comparison with our baseline; quantitative appraisal of the indispensability of cooling 3) Simulation of front ends based on cooling rings 4)Assessment of the technologies required by 1)2) & 3) and of their feasibility 5) Proposal of a coherent R&D program as a result of this assessment 6) Determination of the resolution of MICE (in the measurement of emittance and emittance reduction) and of its potential beyond its baseline measurements plans BETABEAM We aims at a team including RAL, TSL in Uppsala, GSI, GANIL, INFN Legnaro associating TRIUMF and FermiLab. Its expected deliverables in the first 18 months are 1) Meeting at GSI in September 2003: Follow up of Moriond in March and discussions on possible synergy with the future GSI design study.2) International workshop on a beta-beam facility in June 2004 3) Theoretical study and appraisal of experimental tests of longitudinal stacking scheme for the decay ring (in the CERN PS) 4) Computer simulation and theoretical study of losses in the decay ring 5) Proposal for targets to be tested for the production of suitable beta-beam isotopes 6) Study of cyclotron injection into a storage ring using a charge injection scheme (TSL and Triumf) 7) Study of dynamic aperture in the SPS (RAL) A comprehensive report, "Ideas for a beta-beam facility", would conclude the first 18 months Further meetings would be held at least once a year but it will depend on a possible design study. Reports will be delivered as conference papers and as CERN reports. The next stage would be a conceptual design report but the likely date for that would heavily depend on a possible design study. Only fresh resources, presently unavailable, would evidently permit us to address a larger number of issues such as: lattice for decay ring and storage ring, optics for transfer lines and injection line, full simulation of stacking scheme, full simulation of losses, test of injection schemes (both storage ring and decayring), construction and test of prototype target at ISOLDE and test of targets at TRIUMF with a high intensity proton. Outline the milestones to be achieved by means of the NA, as relevant to each work package. ..... to be done largely by the 7
coordinators first and then in collegially by the NA
SG PHYSICS Plans for the first 18 monthes
COOLING (0) Q1 2004: have European network formed and working. The list below is a list of global deliverables tentatively produced
by Alain.
Links to obtained results can also be given here (or a link to a site prepared for disseminating the acquired knowledge) Bibliography? .... throu the EBNE Website, to be set up ..... recycling the wealth of the ECFA Muon site ... what else?
|
Describe the expected benefits and impact on the community. ie indicate how the participants and the relevant scientific community will benefit from the expected results of this particular networking activity. The NA plans to hold regular and structured Weeks of meetings and discussion organized 3 to 4 times a year. . In addition one or two dedicated workshop are foreseen per year. The international community meets once a year at the occasion of the ECFA-sponsored NuFact & Superbeam Workshop. A NUFACT School is held, since 2002, yearly on the same location of the Workshop ... this does not seem to be eligible ... Such a coherent and coordinated European program on neutrino beams will involve the large majority of the European experts in this field and will allow Europe to play a world leader role. It will enhance considerably the collaboration between accelerator physicists on the one hand and will develop a synergy between particle physicists and accelerator physicists on the other, ensuring the long-term sustainability of the field. R&D experiments and projects as the ones being performed (HARP, high intensity target R&D, horn R&D etc ) or planned (MICE), will be pursued and multiplied , will mark the technical progress of our studies and will provide training and learning opportunities to large number of students and postdocs. We should also contribute to the description of the overall plan to disseminate, promote and exploit the knowledge derived from the NA both within and beyond the consortium: publications, conferences, workshops and web-based activities aiming at disseminating the knowledge and technology produced. NB Only preliminary thoughts. We are suggested also to explain, looking at the ensemble of the “networking activities”, how they will enhance the services provided by the research infrastructures in the proposed programme of activities under consideration. To be done later. |
Describe in detail the execution plan in terms of a chart
showing the time expected to be spent concluding each of the milestones
specified in the different work packages. This chart can be made
with standard tools and inserted here. .e. give an indicative multi-annual execution plan (in tabular form) for the whole duration of the I3 that cover all the networking activities. For each activity, you should specify the relevant milestones and the expected deliverables. Additional information can be provided, if necessary, in free text. Detailed work needed here. A contribution of N4 to the18 months plan will also have to be
provided. ..... collecting here from the 7
coordinators first CNGS DRIVER. TARGET COLLECTOR COOLING BETABEAM |
Estimate of total cost per
participant and work package:
(including associate members)
Participants (give short name and include ass. members) |
WP1
a. FTE |
WP2
a. FTE |
WP3
a. FTE |
...... | Sum per participant a. FTE b. networking |
|
1 | a. b. |
a. b. |
a. b. |
a. b. |
||
2 | a. b. |
a. b. |
a. b. |
a. b. |
||
3 | a. b. |
a. b. |
a. b. |
a. b. |
||
... | ||||||
Sum per WP | a. b. |
a. b. |
a. b. |
Total FTE Total networking |
Requested cost per participant
and work package:
(including associate members)
Participants (give short name and include ass. members) |
WP1
a. FTE |
WP2
a. FTE |
WP3
a. FTE |
...... | Sum per participant a. FTE b. networking |
|
1 | a. b. |
a. b. |
a. b. |
a. b. |
||
2 | a. b. |
a. b. |
a. b. |
a. b. |
||
3 | a. b. |
a. b. |
a. b. |
a. b. |
||
... | ||||||
Sum per WP | a. b. |
a. b. |
a. b. |
Total FTE Total networking |
Additional information concerning
the cost estimate:
Specify additional details relevant to the structure of the budget
requested (number of workshops and collaboration weeks to be attended, new
events to be organised, eventual service tasks, fraction of young/senior researchers,
inviting high-level experts from outside the IA, support for dissemination
of the knowledge, educational tools and actions, outreach,...) Specify additional details relevant to the structure of the budget requested (fraction of total cost requested to be funded, number of workshops and collaboration weeks to be attended, new events to be organised, eventual service tasks, fraction of young/senior researchers, inviting high-level experts from outside the IA, support for dissemination of the knowledge, educational tools and actions, outreach,...) No attempt to fill the financial table has been done yet. Only an early first rough underestimate of the level of funding useful to adequately reinforce participation to these network of activities in 2004-7 was performed several weeks ago and is reproposed here as such for now. 1) assuming that about 20 people would be supported to travel for each of the Weeks, at 1000 € each, 60 to 80 K€ per year are needed 2) 20 to 40 researchers would be supported to travel to the NuFact Workshop (faculty and postdocs) and/or the NuFact School (postdocs and students). About 40 to 80 K€ per year will be needed 3) additional funds will be needed to cover expenses of invited speakers to the Weeks 4) additional funds will be needed to support participation to dedicated workshops. A request of 800 to 1000 K€ over 4 years emerged at the time, to be soon seriously revised. The Guide for proposers implies that the main cost is to be requested for the organization of meetings, travel and subsistence expenses. In some special case, the cost of for hiring a postdocs or a student can be supported provided his task is a service task (such as maintenance and exportability of code, database…). EU funding can cover up to 100% of the real costs of the networking activities. No explicit limit is indicated, however it seems that total amounts largely exceeding 1 Meuros for each NA over the entire IA period (i.e. 5 years) will be difficult to obtain. We are seriously considering requesting also the cost for hiring a postdoc in charge of the centralization, maintenance and distribution of the NA patrimony of simulation codes and of the NA Website. |
Management structure:
Specify the structure of the NA management, based on the guidelines
provided, with names and functions of the people nominated. Co-ordinator: Deputy co-ordinator: Work-package co-ordinators: A link to the WEB-based description of the central management structure of the CARE IA can be provided. Specific functions NA co-ordinators in the central management structure can be highlighted (for example the deputy co-ordinator of the NA is a member of the Knowledge Dissemination Board, etc...). |