Report on the commissioning activities

1. Report on the commissioning activities G. Mornacchi, P. Perrodo and Sub-Systems Collaborators Commissioning

2. ATLAS components breakdown Inner Detector TILES DCS MUONS LARG Commissioning

3. View on the ATLAS work packages MUONS LARG Cooling/ Ventilation WPs DAQ TILES Commissioning

4. Concrete example: Tiles calorimeter WP1: Detector and Modules WP4: FE Electronics on the truck Racks,DCS Interlocks Active WPs WP9: Laser system WP8: Cesium system WP9: HV system BE LV system WP2: Cables Racks, DCS Cooling, Sniffers WP5: FE LVPS insertion WP3: Rack equipment FE electronics at IP Racks WP11: TILES DCS TTC DAQ DB WP6: Cosmics L1 receivers WP7: BE electronics Offline FE-BE integration Laser calibration L1 receivers WP12: min Biais events Updated on 27/01/05 Commissioning

5. System Analysis Break down in components Work Package Break down WP detailed System document Start end times Tests & expected results WP Elaboration Detail schedule and resources Well ahead of execution WP Execution WP SIgn off Process Overview Documents stored in EDMS Under ATC/commissioning/phase I/ We are ~ here Requirements WP Schedule -> ATLAS schedule WP excel sheet, PPSPS document (safety) Agree on WP outcome -> input to sign off Document results Preserve operational information Commissioning

6. Phase 1WP: next 3 months Commissioning

7. Phase 1WP: next 3 months Commissioning

8. Sign Off • A number of infrastructure sub-systems have already been commissioned or are in the process of being so: • C&V • Cryogenics plant on surface • Cryogenics in USA15, Magnet equipment • Cranes • For these we envisage a sign off procedure only • To collect the performance parameters • To understand open issues and problems • To integrate them in a uniform documentation scheme, easy to trace back Commissioning

9. Sign Off • A formal procedure to make sure that: • Installation (if any) has been properly done: e.g. w.r.t. TC procedures (Install. DB, etc…) • Proper grounding & safety issues have been taken into account • Documentation is available: • Technical and maintenance documentation for H/W and S/W • User guides, operational procedures, including the test procedures • Planning for maintenance and responsibilities are defined • Performance is according to specifications • Or we understand where, how, possibly why, there is a disagreement • We know what are the open problems and issues • And what actions can be defined • It is clear who is authorized to use the system once commissioned: • Sensitive items: ID cooling, LARG high voltage, TILES Cesium system,… • The sign-off procedure may occur in several steps: • For a complex WP one may envisage intermediate milestones, hence sign offs • Associated to a repetitive aspect: • E.g. ROD crates, FE electronics, muon chambers. Commissioning

10. Installation report Inventory, grounding, safety, … Performance specifications Expected functionality Quantitative performance figures Test report Checklist of tests and results Operational documents Indicates who is responsible, who to contact for problems Maintenance procedures/plan Pointers to relevant documentation Operational procedures Test procedures Component manuals List of open issues/problems Sign Off In the Work packages document: WP outcome: (Agreed before WP activation) Final sign-off procedure Work packages tree: Execution of the WP Follow-up during the Commissioning meetings EDMS Archive documents Commissioning

11. Weekly meetings at Point 1 • Make use of sub-system installation meetings to follow phase 1 sub-system specific commissioning • Phase 1 has too many WPs to concentrate their follow up in a single weekly meeting • Avoid proliferation of meetings • Assume that emphasis will shift from installation to commissioning • Weekly meeting • The same morning as the follow-up of the management meetings for UX15 (EAM) & counting rooms (CRM) • Use for topical discussion, sign off, follow sub-systems w/o an installation meeting (e.g. DSS, DCS, DAQ, trigger) Minutes can be found at: • Experimental Area Management (EAM): http://atlas.web.cern.ch/Atlas/TCOORD/Activities/Logistics/G1/EAM_minutes_index.html • Counting Rooms Management (CRM): ATC-C-IM-0001 • Inner Detector: ATC-GE-MM-0132 • Calorimeters: ATC-GE-MM-0125 • Muons: ATC-GE-MM-0126 Commissioning

12. Monthly meetings • Start discussion of phase 2 commissioning - > monthly meeting • Overall status and issues to be escalated: TMB, EB Commissioning

13. Potential difficulties • Elaborating the commissioning work to be done needs time and some distance with the daily work on site. • Collaborators involved in commissioning in the sub-systems are too often overloaded by many other things (e.g. production/installation tasks). • More effort needed to prepare the “functional work packages” following installation. • The new installation planning is very tight (no float anymore). This can jeopardize the tests and the commissioning. Determine priorities in the tests. • Test programs, software and analysis tools ready in advance is an important asset. • Centralized management of the computers and network at point 1 is mandatory to avoid confusion. • Need of a centralized support for the counting rooms. Commissioning

14. Phase II commissioning • Define a reasonable “end of Phase I” for the sub-systems. • We won’t go sequentially Phase 1-> Phase 2. • System integration: • Partitioning the ATLAS detector: Trigger (CTP,LTP), DAQ (RCD), DCS, DB • Integration Sub-detectors + DAQ + DB + Offline data • Integration Sub-detectors + central DCS + DBs • Operations L1calo + LARG + TILES (Workshop Feb.. 1st 2005, next in April) • Functional tests: • Noise tests and Calibration Pulse tests on large scales involving sub-detectors and L1. Involves ROD crate DAQ. • Partial cosmic runs : Tiles + Muon Barrel sector 13 (+ alignment) + LARG (later). Involves ROD crate DAQ. • Toroid tests (after completion) + Sub-systems • Infrastructure (cooling, ventilation) + sub-systems (detectors, electronics, TDAQ, DCS) Commissioning

15. Phase II commissioning • More local combinations: • LARG + cryogenics • Magnets + cryogenics • ID + gas system • Muons + gas system • Work organization: • Many ideas are around and we already feel the pressure to take cosmics asap. Need a clear formulation (WP) to decide the priorities and build a planning. • Working groups being organized : • “L1”, “DAQ” or “DCS” oriented • Detector performances and physics coordinators: calibration data, cosmics • Elaborate WPs. Monthly meetings to discuss and plan them. • Role of commissioning coordination • Need a place to operate the detector being commissioned (proto Control Room) • . can be considered not as Phase II, but as A natural extension of Phase I Commissioning

16. Conclusion • Continue to initiate the mechanics of WPs with the various ATLAS systems. Milestone of June, before the barrel calorimeters move to IP. • The success of a well commissioned ATLAS system is the result of the sum of many detailed tasks.They have to be well thought and prepared to be meaningful for the future.This required more collaborators involved in these aspects. The acknowledgment of this work is of importance. • Centralized management of the computers and network at point 1 will become soon mandatory to avoid confusion. • Need of a centralized support for the counting rooms. • Start thinking seriously soon to a proto control room. Commissioning