FERMI NATIONAL ACCELERATOR LABORATORYREMOTE ACCELERATOR OPERATIONS
Mau. R, FNAL, Batavia, IL 60510, USA
Including extracts and summaries of the Global Accelerator Network (GAN) Workshops
Fermilab is a U.S Department of Energy (DOE) research laboratory, operated under DOE contract by Universities Research Association (URA).

•Abstract
In March 2000, ICFA set up a Task Force to study theproposal by Albrecht Wagner (DESY) for a Global
Accelerator Network (GAN).
This is a globalcollaboration to construct, commission and operate alarge new accelerator facility, based on the experience ofcurrent large detector collaborations. The multiple tasks
involved are carried out at the home institutions of thecollaboration members; this allows active remoteparticipation from laboratories dispersed around the world
and maintains accelerator expertise and involvement in allof the collaborating institutions.

INTRODUCTION
The future large accelerators of the world will be too
costly for any single nation to build. A consortium ofnations will build future accelerators. One of the technicalproblems is how to build major components on one
continent and still have access to experts from anothercontinent. Do we have accelerator studies andcommissioning only at the main site or can we do studies
remotely across continents.
What is the feasibility and logic of actually operating
the site by switching daily operations to remote sites?
In September of 2002 at Shelter Island, New York agroup of 57 people including Operations personnel met todiscuss such questions. This paper is a report on thismeeting, on the operations experts’ response to suchquestions, and to open a dialog for members of theWAO03 meeting with the hope of gaining further insight,
expertise, feed back, and comments.

FUTURE ACCELERATOR
If it’s true that future accelerators will be too large andcostly for any one nation to build and operate, how will
they be built? How would the international organizationthat controls and operates the large machine be set up?
And how would nations be convinced to buy into such alarge and costly project?

Why would any Nation want to get involved?
Here are only a few of the problems.
• How would governments convince their
population to support sending large amounts ofmoney and resources to another nation?

•What about the loss of prestige for the countries
not having their own projects?
What about the loss of national control for theseprojects?

The nation hosting project site would not have any of
the above problems. This could prevent other nations
from wanting to join the collaboration. How might thisadvantage be minimized? The obvious answer would be
to minimize their power and authority.

The perceived answer is to give all partners
equal status.
••
•
•
•
•

An equal share in building the accelerator
An equal share in commissioning the accelerator
An equal responsibility in conducting studiesAn equal responsibility in operations
An equal responsibility in maintenanceAn equal responsibility in trouble shooting

WHAT IS REMOTE OPERATION?
•The ability to commission an accelerator from any
place or continent.
• The ability to conduct accelerator studies from any
place or continent.
• The ability to switch control of the accelerator at
any time to different places or continents. Here arethree possibilities:
a. Switch operations every eight hours.
b. Switch operations every week.
c. Switch operations every month.
The idea is to weaken the local site authority and thenspread the authority to all the participating nations. Thereis a feeling that unless this type of equality is built in to
the accelerator operation, the next large accelerator will
not be built.

TECHNOLOGYThe Fermilab accelerator can be operated from outsideof the Main Control Room (MCR), but it is allowed tooccur only from on site locations.
MCR Operations allows people to examine computerparameters from off site.
Fermilab has chosen not to allow remote operations, but
has the ability to do so.
Many telescopes are already operated remotely.

REMOTE OPERATIONS
The following information is either directly extracted orsummarised from the published workshop reports.

HISTORYIn March 2000, ICFA set up a Task Force to study theproposal by Albrecht Wagner (DESY) for a Global
Accelerator Network (GAN). This is a global
collaboration to construct, commission and operate alarge new accelerator facility, based on the experience of
current large detector collaborations. The multiple tasks
involved are carried out at the home institutions of thecollaboration members; this allows active remoteparticipation from laboratories dispersed around the worldand maintains accelerator expertise and involvement in allof the collaborating institutions.
The Task Force had two Subgroups. Subgroup 1 was
led by A. Astbury (TRIUMF) and studied generalconsiderations of implementing a GAN, including:
1. How to maintain active interest and participationin the project in all member institutions.
2. Identify areas to be developed.
3. Work out mechanisms for cooperation, decision
taking, project management, communication,
sharing of responsibility
4. Develop an organizational framework for thenew accelerator facility
Subgroup 1 met on two occasions, at CERN on 13thJune 2001, and at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
on 27th October 2001.
Subgroup 2 was led by F. Willeke (DESY) and studied
the technical considerations and influence on the designand cost of the accelerator.

THE FIRST WORKSHOPS
The first workshop was held in March, 2002. "Enabling
the Global Accelerator Network", at Cornell University
was attended by 44 participants. The workshop issummarized in a FINAL REPORT. The Cornell
workshop laid out the basic concepts of the role that
Remote Operations play in the achievement of a GlobalAccelerator Network.
Another closely related one day workshop on thisspecialized topic, the Collaboration Tools for the Global
Accelerator Network, was held at LBL on August 26,
2002. Deb Agarwal organized this workshop. The
purpose of the Berkeley meeting was to focus oncollaborative tools for the GAN and to provide input
regarding reasonable collaborative environments to theRemote Operations Workshop at Shelter Island. The
intent of the meeting was to explore the requirements, usecases, and collaborative tools available for use in theGAN environment. The meeting also developed a"strawman" proposal for the GAN collaborative tools

environment. The final report from this workshop isavailable in PDF and DOC formats.
Mike Stanek from SLAC Operations gave a talk at thissession.

THE SECOND REMOTE OPERATIONSWORKSHOPThis workshop was held September 17-20, 2002, at thePridwin Hotel on Shelter Island.
There were 57
participants. It was the second workshop in a seriessponsored jointly by BNL, Cornell, and DESY, exploring
the Global Accelerator Network (GAN). The generic
GAN concept, as originally discussed in two ICFA Task
Force Reports (December 2001), applies to any
accelerator project that involves multiple laboratories.

THREE WORKING GROUP CHARGES
Group 1: Experimental and Accelerator
Demonstrations
Group 1 discussed and evaluated concrete examples ofremote operations, demonstration projects for accelerators,and experiments. They were to imagine how to remotely
operate an accelerator and experiment not located at theirlaboratory. What tools would be needed to do this andwhat are the communication challenges?
The accelerators and experimental facilities with active
remote operation projects include:• CMS experiment (CERN)• FNPL accelerator (FNAL)• RHIC operations (BNL)• SNS accelerator (ORNL)• TTF accelerator (DESY)
In addition to these there are numerous astronomicaland industrial projects of direct value.

Group 2: Communication and Operations
Communities
Group 2 brought together an eclectic mix of experts andskills from information technology, experimental physics,
accelerator technology, and commercial enterprise(building on the success of the Cornell workshop), to
explore the scope of remote operations solutions, as wellas the social and collaborative aspects. Included with thisthey considered the perspective of accelerator control
groups.
Operations people were part of Group 2. A summary of
their activities is at the end of this paper.

Group 3: Engineering Designs for RemoteOperations
Group 3 examined in detail the remote operation ofaccelerator hardware subsystems in both commissioning
and routine operations. They tried to answer the following
questions:•••

How would the presently designed hardware,such as power supplies and Klystrons, perform
without experts on site?
What additional design features need to bebuilt in to these types of devices?
What level of engineering expertise isnecessary on site to assure effective operationof the facility?

A GROUP 2 WORKSHOP SUMMARY
Tuesday Morning
On Tuesday morning the three groups got together anddiscussed the following items:• What people do in control rooms• Security issues• Social issues
a. Privacy, trust, team buildingb. Training• Compare the different operating modes from
FNAL, SLAC, KEK, DESY

Thursday Morning
On Thursday morning all three groups reconvened tohear and discuss the Operations group report. It was avery interesting discussion.

Thursday Afternoon
Group 2 discussed the following topics:• Social Issues
o Reciprocity
o Trusto Ease of useo Agreed rules of the roado Cultureo Adoptiono Trainingo Informal meetingso A video wall?
o Parties
o Visiting other sites• Security

Other Topics

Tuesday Afternoon•The Operation people from Group 2 meet bythemselves to discuss operational issues. Peter InGrassia
will give a report on this at WAO03.

••

Wednesday Morning
The three groups discussed the following items:• Access grida. Video and Audiob. White boards and smart boards• Collaboration tools• VRVS demonstration• E-logs
a. Work flowb. Security

Wednesday Afternoon
On Wednesday afternoon the groups met individuallyfor discussions.

••How many laboratories have remote (off site)
read and control capabilities?
What are your experiences?
Do you have any experience using cameras tomonitor control rooms and operators?
What are some of your questions about such amode of operation?
If GAN can be made to work, Bob Mau wants
to enter the next phase of discussed: How tomove all accelerator operations to Tahiti.

REFERENCES
Remote Operations Workshops:
http://www.agsrhichome.bnl.gov/RemOp/docs/icfa_tforce_reports.html