Saskatoon, November 21, 2004
CMCF Beamline Design Team meeting
Attendees:
CMCF BDT members: Delbaere UofS, Emil Pai UofT, James Rini UofT, Mirek Cygler BRI-NRC, Louis Bart Hazes UofA, Ernst Bergmann ASI, Joe Schrag BRI-NRC, Natalie Strynadka UBC (via telephone), Pawel Grochulski CLS.
Regrets: Stan Moore UofS
Guests: Elder Matias CLS, Russ Berg CLS, Skeeter Abell-Smith CLS, Lavina Carter CLS, Rene Coulombe & Pierre Bonneau Boehringer Ingelheim, Michele Loewen PBI-NRC, Dieter Schneider BNL, Ross Doyle MarUSA.
The meeting started at 10:40 with a tour of the CMCF 08ID-1 beamline.
Schedule
Lavina presented the preliminary model of accessing the CMCF beamline including rapid access. The BDT concluded that it is a typical model for current PX beamlines on other PX facilities, but wants a FedEx type of operation as a basic model for the CMCF beamlines to be implemented. Pawel replied that we (CLS) do not have the manpower yet to operate it in that mode. Mirek noticed that the cost of traveling for the investigators outside of Saskatoon and Alberta would be substantial and that the plans for CMCF beamline operations from the beginning were based on a substantial contribution of the ‘FedEx’ access model. This should be reflected in the CLS document describing the rules of access to the CMCF facility. A sub-committee of four BDT members (Mirek, Ernst, Jim, and Louis) was selected to prepare a discussion document for the access mode to the CMCF beamlines. The subcommittee will prepare a draft by the end of February 2005 and will present it to other members of the BDT for further discussions. The final document will be submitted to Lavina by March 31, 2005 for evaluation and comments.
Pawel described all elements of the beamline, including the parts not yet installed but fabricated and tested at ACCEL, namely the goniometer and peripherals of the end-station. He explained that the shimming of the small-gap in-vacuum undulator is a very tedious process with many electrical and mechanical problems that have to be sorted out. There is a chance that the SGU will be in the ring for the January of 2005 run, but the bake out of it would have to be done after its installation in the ring. Next, Pawel described the features and the status of the control system that is being developed for the beamline. Comments and explanations were provided by Skeeter and Elder. The next item that was discussed was the sample auto-mounter. Pawel indicated that CLS is currently planning to build a robot based on the ALS and BNL experience. Dieter described the differences between auto-mounters developed at various synchrotrons and provided more detailed description of problems that he is encountering with the development of the auto-mounter at BNL. Based on the fact that this is still a development design the BDT members concluded a need for re-evaluation of the initial assumptions of building the auto-mounter at CLS to reduce the costs and recommended that Pawel should contact MSC/Rigaku and for the possibility of testing and evaluation of their sample changing robot ACTOR at the CMCF beamline for reliability and ease of use since it is the commercially available system that is advertised for its high reliability. A reliable robotic sample changer installed at the CMCF at the onset of the operation is essential for the success of the ‘FedEx’ program.
On behalf of Natalie, Ernst described the status of the CMCF #2. The successful CFI proposal provide funding for the construction of a BM beamline with full automation, allowing users remote access to the beamline and/or operate in the FedEx mode. At the present time chicaning a second SGU in the same straight was deemed to be too risky an operation, whereas BM technology is very well developed. Ernst pointed out that 5 years salaries for a programmer, beamline scientists and engineers are incorporated in the budget that was approved by the CFI. The matching funds are not yet available but Natalie pointed out that she is optimistic about getting matching funds from the BC provincial government.
Subsequently, the issue of management of the CMCF beamlines was discussed. The question was whether the CMCF beamlines should operate separately responding independently to the Scientific Director/Experimental Facility Manager of CLS or if the CMCF should operate as one unit with one person responsible for their seamless operation and that person responding to the Scientific Director/Experimental Facility Manager. Taking into account that the ‘FedEx’ mode of operation would require tight cooperation between the beamlines, that much of the software and hardware will be common to the beamlines and that more efficient use of personnel would be possible by sharing responsibilities across beamlines all BDT members voted unanimously that CMCF beamlines should run under one leadership. Natalie commented that while she fully supports this model of operation, the CFI funding dedicated for the second beamline has to be spending accordingly.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:50 pm