Minutes of the Friday MUCOOL Meeting
                 14th April, 2000
	

 Scribe:  Steve Geer


 1.  Introduction               SG

     The neutrino factory / muon collider collaboration
     sub-projects (for example MUCOOL) require a lot of 
     time and resources. It is important that our R&D 
     program does what is needed and avoids what is not 
     needed. We said that we would review our R&D plan
     once the 6 month study was done.  Its now done, so
     now is the time to review it and decide what we 
     want to propose in the MUTAC meeting in June.

     For the cooling R&D there are some things
     we know, some important things we don't yet know, 
     and some things we strongly suspect.

     We Know:

     a)  We know that cooling needs the highest gradient
         RF thats practical. This is an R&D topic that we
         have been pusuing, and must continue to pursue, as 
         vigorously as we can.

     b)  We know that the absorbers need to be engineered 
         and tested, and that the windows might be an 
         issue. This yields is a clear cut R&D program
         that we have begun, and must continue,  as 
         vigorously as we can.

     c)  We know that the cooling performance has as much to
         do with the preparation of the beam before the cooling
         channel, as it has to do with the cooling channel itself.
         This may yield a set of R&D issues for the piece before
         cooling that we must not neglect.

     We dont yet know:

     a)  We dont know whether cooling is a part of an entry level
         neutrino factory.

     b)  We dont know whether scattering and straggling uncertainties
         are significant for the cooling channel performance.

     c)  We dont know what the optimum cooling lattice is, or whether
         engineering tolerances (for example, alignment) are an issue.

     We strongly suspect:

     a)  It would take 3-4 years before we could possibly (if not
         funding limited) have a piece of the cooling channel built
         and bench tested.

     b)  To build a piece of the cooling channel would require vastly
         more resources than we currently have.

     c)  If there is a sum rule in operation (indicated by Mike W.) then 
         it would appear that building a muon beamline now will subtract
         directly from the other things we want to support.
     
     
   With all of the above in mind, the object of the MUCOOL meeting 
   today is to review the RF and LH2 absorber R&D and discuss what
   we want to do about a muon beam.


 2.  RF R&D     Norbert

     RF program simple to state ... we need it, we must do it, and 
     to develop an RF cavity takes an estimated 2 years if pursued
     vigorously. There was wide agreement. 

 3.  LH2 absorber R&D     Mary-Anne

     Issues:  (i) windows, (ii) absorber bench testing, 
              (iii) absorber beam testing, (iv) safety.

     Need to spell out the window R&D ... which materials 
     are candidates, and exactly how do we test them -> 
     a detailed plan for MUTAC.

     Need to design, build, bench test a first LH2 absorber. 
     It was estimated that it takes 2 months to build an absorber.
     If this is true, then the time-line for the first test will 
     be dominated by preparing an area, and safety stuff. In this
     case we should vigorously pursue the making the current favorite 
     absorber design, in order to get to the point where we have 
     the test facility as soon as possible. Then other absorbers can 
     be built.  If it takes much longer to build an absorber, then 
     more care should be taken in choosing which to build first.
     All of this should be clarified by MUTAC so we have a crisp story
     to present.

     We need a beam (proton, electron) that can dump in the right 
     amount of energy so that we can test absorber survival. Mary-Anne will
     send round a message with the required beam characteristics 
     to see who knows about which candidate beams. We need to identify
     a beam before MUTAC.  We also want a well thought out list 
     of what we need to measure in the beam (temperature gradients,
     pressure, density variations, .... ?) and an explicit plan for
     how each of these measurements will be made.

     Safety is a big part of everything.


 4.  Muon Beam.      Alvin

     Alvin introduced this topic, by proposing we do all of 
     the above, plus continue the simulation work, plus matrix-based
     calculations. Alvin also pointed out we might need proton/electron
     beams to test RF cavity stability, etc.

      Alvin asked: Why do we need a muon beam soon ?  A possible answer
      is:  To measure scattering/straggling.  BUT WE DONT KNOW THIS YET.
      So the answer may be we dont need a muon beam anytime soon. Alvin
      proposed that a test of a short cooling section was useless, and that
      the best way to test a significant cooling section was with the
      neutrino factory. 

      There was lots of discussion ... nearly all of it reinforcing Alvins
      position. In particular it was stated fairly unambiguously that we
      do not want to go to MUTAC in June seeking to build a muon beamline. 

 5.  Other discussion

	We need to go through all of our R&D program (not just MUCOOL) 
        .... and the next few Friday MUCOOL meetings were offered for 
        this.  It is important for us to understand whats needed for
        an entry level neutrino factory, and to build our R&D program
        around these things. Only after we make sure these critical 
        path essentials are covered should we entertain which additional
        things should be added to the R&D list.