| 62 | | Apologies: |
| | 62 | |
| | 63 | |
| | 64 | * Action items |
| | 65 | * CW: No response from others, will try again. |
| | 66 | * Main issue is to determine how close to the target the first lens can be and provide options for differential pumping, shielding against activation, route out for the laser, etc. |
| | 67 | * AK will try to arrange a meeting this week. |
| | 68 | * JPas: Chris Rogers suggested using a solenoid lens to separate electrons and protons. |
| | 69 | * Floor plan |
| | 70 | * End stations: Only other detail is reconfiguration for 2 end stations. |
| | 71 | * JPas: independent extraction ports for the FFA. Would affect cost. |
| | 72 | * AK: Could increase foot print. |
| | 73 | * AK: details of the extraction. |
| | 74 | * Should add this on the floor plan update. |
| | 75 | * JPas: no dispersion matching for injection into FFA. |
| | 76 | * AK: is there any additional floor space needed for the in vivo experiments? |
| | 77 | * JPar: The existing box on the ground floor is fine for the irradiations. |
| | 78 | * AK: Any updates on the holding facility? |
| | 79 | * JPar: spoke to Mark Hill, won't need much space for the holding facility. Goal is to have a small space. Shouldn't need to be included in the floor plan, can just have this as a comment in the pre-CDR. |
| | 80 | * AK: Capture section may need to add power supplies. |
| | 81 | * AK: Beam transport. Need details to work out floor plan. |
| | 82 | * JPas: don't have spec for in vivo beam. |
| | 83 | * JPar: Depends on what experiments are being done. Would like a range of beam sizes. |
| | 84 | * JPar: to define beam specs for in vivo experiments. |
| | 85 | * GA: Looking at expanding on the WBS. Want to see laser safety to pare down safety case from ISIS level of detail. |
| | 86 | * KL: Need to include access. |
| | 87 | * WBS |
| | 88 | * JPas: Abort line should be on the floor plan. |
| | 89 | * Parameter table |
| | 90 | * Needs to include sufficient detail to define the baseline. |
| | 91 | * Including details on collimators, rebunching cavities, spaces between |
| | 92 | * CW: Should add charge density. |
| | 93 | * JPas: and magnetic field, collimator |
| | 94 | * AK: What would be the lowest extraction energy that would be of interest. |
| | 95 | * JPar: 15MeV in vivo would be for very superficial tumours. |
| | 96 | * AK: level of detail for the FFA |
| | 97 | * JPas: Need more detail to be able to fully define the magnet such that a designer can do an engineering solution. |
| | 98 | * AOB |
| | 99 | * KL: |
| | 100 | * RFI talk went well. Hopeful that we may get endorsement of the concept in the future. |
| | 101 | * IBC have arranged a special edition of a nuclear physics journal and we have been invited to submit an abstract. Deadline early December. |
| | 102 | * Also IPAC, PTCOG, APAC. |
| | 103 | * AK to prepare list of the 4 abstracts needed. One abstract, 4 different "spins". |
| | 104 | * SG meeting on Thursday. AK will present baseline design. |
| | 105 | * AK to draft outline R&D plan and circulate for comments before Thursday. |
