STFC conducted a review to provide information on the breadth and scope of the STFC’s current UK accelerator science programme and to underpin the development of STFC’s accelerator strategy. The review reported to Science Board (SB) in December 2014 for comment and development of a high-level accelerator strategy. The Accelerator Strategy Board (ASB) will now establish a more detailed accelerator strategy and prioritised roadmap based on the findings in the review report and high-level strategic guidance from Science Board. The terms of reference for the review are available below.
The panel requested input to the review from the following:
|Professor Dan Tovey, Chair||University of Sheffield|
|Dr Rob Appleby||University of Manchester, CI|
|Dr Riccardo Bartolini||JAI, Diamond Light Source|
|Dr Oliver Bruning||Accelerators and Beam Physics Group, CERN|
|Professor Jim Clarke||ASTeC|
|Mr Jonathan Flint||Oxford Instruments, Chief Executive|
|Professor Sue Kilcoyne||University of Huddersfield|
|Dr John Thomason||STFC, ISIS Accelerator Group|
|Ms Charlotte Jamieson||STFC, Accelerators Programme Manager|
All panel members had been appointed ad personam and were not to act as advocates for any particular science area or facilities. The information gathering was conducted during the period 9th April to 2nd June 2014. The panel reported to Science Board in December 2014.
The Panel met four times during the course of 2014 as set out in the Terms of Reference. The first meeting focused on outlining the report layout and methodology. By the second meeting the panel had received the submissions and the meeting was dedicated to evaluating this input and identifying gaps in the programme, highlighting areas that the panel might wish to include and comment upon in the final report. Each panel member reviewed the entirety of the information provided and all the supporting data before focusing effort on their given area. At the third meeting the rapporteurs presented their areas for discussion by the panel and following this produced their section. The final meeting brought all the components of the review together to finalise the report for consideration by SB at its meeting in December 2014.
If you have any queries regarding the review contact Anthony Davenport.
In 2010 the STFC recognised the strategic importance of accelerator technology as a key enabler across a large fraction of its research portfolio. As a result, the Accelerator Strategy Board (ASB) was established to understand the accelerator landscape and establish a strategy for future engagement.
Science Board (SB) endorsed a review of the accelerator programme to provide information on the breadth and scope of the STFC’s current UK accelerator science programme to underpin the development of STFC’s accelerator strategy. The review report will go to SB for comment and development of a high-level accelerator strategy, taking into account information from parallel reviews on neutron and photon activities. The ASB will then establish a more detailed accelerator strategy and prioritised roadmap based on the findings in the review report and high-level strategic direction from SB.
This review seeks to provide a narrative and commentary on the following aspects of the accelerator programme:
The review will not seek to construct a detailed, budgeted programme but will examine all accelerator R&D activities that receive STFC funding. These are:
The review will also consider experimental and R&D activities of the operating national laboratories:
In order to provide some context to the programme under review, input from accelerator-related areas that are not currently directly funded by STFC, such as laser-plasma acceleration and accelerators for medicine, will also be invited.
Professor Dan Tovey (University of Sheffield), a core member of SB, will chair the panel, which will comprise ~8 members, including at least one member from each of the following:
The review will take place in 2014, with the first meeting in February at which the following will be provided:
Figure 1 provides a flow diagram illustrating the review process.