Changes between Version 19 and Version 20 of Research/DesignStudy/Meetings/2018-08-14-ERC

Timestamp:

Aug 14, 2018 9:07:56 PM (6 years ago)

Author:

longkr

Comment:

--

Research/DesignStudy/Meetings/2018-08-14-ERC

@@ -29 +29 @@
 == Notes: ==
 
-'''Present:'''
+'''Present:''' KL, CH, JPa, AK, LM, RT, VB, JY, OE, SG
+
+1. **Outcome of naming competition:**
+ * See slide.  Some late entries were recorded.  No one wanted to change their vote on the basis of the new ideas.
+ * We noted that CHIARA and LARA each scored three votes with one 'second-choice' vote asigned to CHIARA.  There was an objection that the system is not compact, making LARA a prefered choice.  
+ * After some discussion we agreed to revisit the naming issue at next week's meeting.
+1. **Status of proposal:**
+ * See slides.
+ * The costing for the work that we propose to do is significantly in excess of the budget that can be requested.  To inform the discussion later in the meeting we noted the need to maintain as far as possible:
+   * A meaningful radiobiology programme; and
+   * The novel aspects in the accelerator facility (source/capture, rep rate, coupling to conventional beam transport and delivery).
+1. **Costing and Discussion:**
+ * See presentation.
+ * VB described the costing and the elements that made up the total.  Overall, after the laser system had been removed, the requirement for the scope proposed was almost twice the possible budget.
+ * We discused possible descope options, including emphasising the source and capture at the expense of transport and end-station.  We noted that even in this case the available budget looked like it would be exceeded.
+ * We **//agreed//** the following actions:
+   * **KL, VB, OE, AK:** Review the costs once more to seek a solution that meets our criteria and falls within budget;
+   * **All:** Complete the proposal as conceived so that we would have a short vision piece (B1) and a fully costed proposal (B2) to be used in preparation for future bids;
+   * **All:** Continue to work towards a publication documenting our hybrid scheme.
+ * JY asked whether the proposed system would be a step on the way to a future clinical system.  KL answered that, in his view, the answer was yes as the combination of source, capture and transport over came some of the limitations arising in conventional sources.