Comments on slides

["Daniel S. Carman" <carman@jlab.org>]

Tim,

Things are looking better and better in your talk.  I have gone
over the slides and my comments are below.  Let me know if you
have any questions.


				Regards,

					Daniel

**********************************************************************
pp.8 : Meaning of Phi=119.5cm in upper-left corner?

pp.10 : Make figure slightly smaller to separate it from bullets.  This
        is a problem on several slides in your talk.  Note that 20 micron
        is wire diameter.

pp.12 : Labels overlap figure.  Make it slightly smaller to separate
        from bullets.

pp.14 : For the text in the lower right, make it span 2 lines to avoid
        overlap with the slide number.

pp.16 : eliminate punctuation on 4th bullet for consistency.

Note: leaks are not the real problem (for a non-flammable gas mixture).
      The issue is contamination of the gas from water and oxygen.  In
      general, if things can get from the inside to the outside, they
      can surely get from the outside to the inside!

pp.19 : Missing ")" on 2nd bullet.  Note that FDC assembled as single
        structure for installation.  Note that 118 cm diameter is too
        small.  This is the O.D. of the frame and does not account for
        the cabling.

Note: You have not mentioned anything about the FDC cable support
      inside the solenoid (outside the BCAL).  Is the current plan
      too premature/underdeveloped for at least a mention?  Chuck
      has a picture that I included in the FDC TDR.

pp.20 : On 3rd bullet, use "o-ring grooves".

pp.21 : The wording "structural skin" is unneccesarily repeated repeated.

pp.22 : Again, 20 microns and 80 microns are wire diameters.  Use the
        term "sense wire" and not "signal wire".  Also note that the
        tension choices for the W and CuBe wire are chosen to match the
        gravitational sag.

pp.24 : Fig. labels overlap bullets.  Also the lower figure does not
        make sense to me.  It looks like we have square frames.  It
        might be worth mentioning that tubes/skins will be light-weight.
        Skins will not allow for current path in case of a magnet
        quench.

pp.26 : The point of this slide is not clear.  This model is being made
        and calculations carried out to determine the hole locations and
        sizes to ensure a uniform gas mixture and (semi-) rapid gas
        volume exchange.  It is crucial to have no pockets of stagnant
        gas.  Also note that the holes in the cathodes rotate from
        cathode layer to cathode layer.

pp.27 : Labels overlap bullets.

pp.28 : Move slide contents further below the title.

pp.29 : Note that wire frame boards are only partially stuffed prior to
        wire stringing.  Additional components (including the connectors)
        are added after stringing.

pp.32 : FDC installed from the upstream end should be stated explicitly.

pp.33 : All bullet for why we extract from downstream end for servicing.
        The point is not to disturb the CDC, target, start counter,
        beamline, etc. (or their alignment).  Also note that the first
        step in downstream extraction is to move the downstream carriage
        downstream and then to install the service platform.

pp.34 : Spurious "[" on first bullet.  Also I do not know what you are
        saying in the 2nd bullet.

pp.36 : Meaning of 2nd bullet unclear.  Also statement on minimizing
        material in the active area is unclear.  The bars themselves
        are in the active area.

pp.37 : On 3rd bullet, use 252 cm**2 (i.e. superscript) active area.
        On 4th bullet, use "6 cm" not "6cm".
        On 5th bullet, use "readout" not "read".
        On 6th bullet, is hole 12 cm**2?

pp.38 : Fig. labels overlap words.

pp.40 : Missing your footer here.  Also you have not mentioned the
        movement of the downstream carriage.

pp.41 : Slide is incomplete.  State what has been done to address this
        issue in the FDC, CDC, and TOF.  Mention Al endplate for CDC.
        Ref. Elton's GlueX note and give some relevant scale for the
        forces involved.  In other words, beef this slide up a bit.

pp.43 : Note that this is an example for one subsystem (the FDC) and
        that this hazard analysis has been done for all Hall D/GlueX
        subsystems and the Hall itself.

pp.44 : On 3rd bullet, I would say "Some details still need to be ironed
        out".
        On 5th bullet, why not say "personnel and equipment safety".
        We are designed the detector and all construction/installation
        procedures certainly to protect the workers, but a big part of
        the design is also to protect the system (our investment) in
        case of failures or problems.
**********************************************************************
**********************************************************************
*                                                                    *
* Dr. Daniel S. Carman                   e-mail : carman@jlab.org    *
* Staff Scientist                        office : (757)-269-5586     *
* Jefferson Laboratory                   web: www.jlab.org/~carman   *
*                                                                    *
**********************************************************************