The Cold Neutron Chopper Spectrometer

1
The Cold Neutron Chopper Spectrometer

• Paul Sokol, Penn State University -- PI
• M. Aronson (Michigan), S.-H. Chen(MIT), R.
  Dimeo(NIST), H. Strauss(Berkely), H.
  Taub(Missouri)

2
Status Report

• Technical, Cost and Schedule Review -- Jan 2002
• Baseline Design
• Realistic Budget
• Installation Plans
• Current Design Status
• SNS ProposalAugust 2002
• Construction Plans
• SNS
• IDT
• Organization
• Beam Time Allocation

3
Baseline Review

• Comprehensive Review of all Instrument Details
• Early in development
• plans reasonably well developed
• Extensive costing of installation

• Budget is important
• Instrument must be built within budget
• Construction budget 9.7 M - Fixed!!!
• Must have adequate contingency to ensure
  instrument is built

4
Baseline Budget (Jan 02)
5
Review Criteria
Build the highest performance spectrometer
possible for the money available
Cost
Obvious - 9.7 M

• Data Rate Flux on Sample x
• No. of Detectors
• Sample Environment
• Reliability
• Maintainability
• Analizability

Performance
Neutron Design performance and resolution of
instrument Lechner, Copley, Carpenter, Cook,
Neuman Conventional Design Engineering effort
for flight paths Laman, Brandt, Brocker,
Linzell Components Choppers, Detectors,
Electronics, etc. Broholm, Adams, Cook,
Santadonato Installation Building, assembly at
ORNL Gallagher, Bohringer
6
Results

• Incident Guide design
• Curved guide instead of bender
• Fixed final funnel
• No Optics Carousel
• Savings 700K
• Choppers
• High speed
• Pulse Shaping Fermi
• Energy Selection Double Disc Al
• Low Speed
• Frame Overlap Only
• No T0 chopper Future option
• Savings 150K

• Final Flight Path
• Evaluating Shorter Flight Path
• Design
• Outsource Some Effort
• Building
• Final Flight Path
• SNS/IDT demarcation
• Inside/Outside building
• Safety
• Costs
• Consistent contingency
• Common Cost Basis

7
Incident Beamline
m2
m2.5
m3.5
m1
m2.5
m3.5
Design Reports Mid April Review by SAC
8
Choppers
Choppers Pulse Shaping Fermi _at_ 6.5 m Energy
Selection Disc _at_ 37.8 m Frame overlap Disc _at_ 7.5m
and 33m
Fermi Chopper
Frame Overlap Choppers Transmission
Dual Disc Transmission
Transmission of Chopper Configuration
Flux From Moderator
Design Reports Mid April Review by SAC
9
Engineering
Design Firms Burns and Roe ENR 40 APT
Project DOE Advanced Technology Bid on
SNS Gannett Fleming ENR 47 Laboratories and
nanotechnolgy facilities Pennoni Associates ENR
152 Full service ME, EE, CE and geotech Applied
Research Lab - PSU

• Instrument Design
• SNS
• Incident Shielding
• Shared Design
• Highly integrated with neighboring instruments
• Background issues
• IDT
• Guide
• Choppers Specification
• Building
• Final Flight Path

Request for Proposal Mid April Joint review by
IDT and SNS
10
Beam Time Allocation

• Outside Users 40
• IDT/SNS - 60
• Roughly 50-50 split (over 10 yrs)
• Construction versus Operation

• IDT Time
• No Fixed Allocation for members
• Reviewed Proposals
• Program Continuity
• New Science
• Rapid Access
• Instrument Scientist (as part of IDT)

• SNS Time
• General User time
• Instrument Scientist Support (primary)

11
Dr. Helen Kerch Program Officer
               
 
 
 
 
IDT and General Members
SNS/EFAC
Paul E. Sokol Principal Investigator
Review Committees        
Aronson, Chen, Dimeo, Taub, Strauss Executive
Committee
Scientific Review Committee
Conventional Facilities Review Committee
Paul E. Sokol (acting) Scientific Officer
Niki L. Page Financial Officer
Paul E. Sokol (acting) Development Officer
To be Named Safety Officer
To be Named ORNL/SNS/IDT Liaison
Kent Crawford ANL/IDT Liaison
To be Named PSU Staff/Support
To be Named Engineering Firm
Robert Meyer ECOS Research
Larry Kurek ANL Finance
To be Named ORNL Finance
  PSU Shops
SNS Instrument Systems Group
ANL Instrument Systems Group
  Engineering Staff
SNS Conventional Facilities Group
  Architect Staff
SNS Installation Group
  Costing Staff