NHMFL User Services

Electronic Frontier Foundation

MAY 19-21, 1994

The Users' Committee of the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory met at the NHMFL Pulsed Magnetic Field Facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory on May 19-21, 1994.

Users' Committee members present were D. Awschalom, G. Boebinger, J. Brooks, E. Jones, M. Maley, M. Naughton and S. Tozer. Users' Committee members absent were B. McCombe and H. Stormer.

A preliminary report was written and presented to the NHMFL Executive Committee at the end of the Users' meeting at LANL. This report is reprinted below.

Preliminary Report:

The priorities the committee assigned to several magnet development projects for the present contract period are based on the core requirements of the original NSF charge . They are:
1. the first two of the three 27-T resistive magnets: completely operational on time as per the present schedule and with proven reliability;
2. equal priority is given to two projects: the 21-T (900 MHz) NMR magnet, and the 45-T hybrid magnet;
3. the 60-T "long pulse" motor-generator magnet.
4. the third 27-T (30-T) resistive magnet.

The Committee felt that the additional magnet design possibilities suggested at the meeting (specifically, the 2-power supply, 25T, 50 mm bore magnet, the 4-power supply, 24 (32) MW, 20 (40) T, 200 (32) mm magnet) should be delayed until ALL four of the above are successfully on line.

In addition, the situation with the hybrid insert concerns us. There are problems involved with the present joint development of this very complex magnet. We suggest the NHMFL assume complete responsibility for the design and manufacture of the insert. While we understand that this could lead to, among other unpleasantries, additional delays in the final start- up of the hybrid magnet, we feel that having complete in-house control at NHMFL would lead to a more reliable and less costly hybrid magnet in the end. We realize further that this action would impact on the timing of item number (2) in the priorities above, and would warrant an acceleration of the NHMFL in-house resistive insert program.

NHMFL @ FSU: reasonable plan in place for Scholar/Scientist program, but we urge the Laboratory to aggressively fill the 4-6 available positions.
NHMFL @ UF: no vehicle in place for "user" aspect. Who will make this available as a user facility? What is the time scale?
NHMFL @ LANL: serious deficiency in terms of supporting present staff. In our estimation, in spite of the herculean efforts of the highly competent and strongly motivated individuals there, the present situation compromises experiments by outside users of the pulsed field and superconducting magnet facilities at LANL. The Committee has serious concerns about the complementary level (or lack thereof) of support provided to the NHMFL @ LANL by the DOE.

Much discussion centered on the need for graduate student involvement at all three NHMFL sites, but especially at Los Alamos. We realize that there may be programmatic difficulties with bringing in graduate students, but a solution should be sought, on both the short term and in the upcoming 5-year plan. At a minimum, travel and lodging for extended stays should be provided.

Other items deemed important include the need for a quiet sample preparation room, with microscope, ultrasonic cleaner, evaporation/sputter system, solvents, light source, etc.

The Committee feels that it needs more time to reflect on the outline presented at this meeting.

It was proposed that the Users' Committee expand in number to include individuals in the various resonance fields (NMR, ICR, ESR, ...). The Committee suggests that three new members be sought from these areas. The initial appointments will be one person each for 1 year, 2 year and 3 year terms. Subsequent appointments will be for 3-year terms, as per the rest of the Committee. The NHMFL will solicit the magnetic resonance community for nominations, etc.

There was discussion on the potential use of the NHMFL by materials processing researchers (which could include physicists, chemists, materials scientist, biologists). This could include crystal growth, magnetic alignment, electrochemistry, catalysis, etc. Some of this was covered in the NAS and the Seitz-Richardson reports. Perhaps a workshop should be organized at the NHMFL aroundthis theme, to determine the extent of interest in such endeavors.

We applaud the emerging collaboration between the NHMFL and LANSCE of combining pulsed neutron diffraction with pulsed magnetic fields. This is an exciting possibility for future research opportunities, and we look forward to its success.

The Committee brought up the fact that the concept of magnetic flux concentration has not been sufficiently addressed. This technique could easily become a routine component of nearly all magnet systems, adding at least 3 T, and perhaps twice that, at negligible cost.

Return to NHMFL Home Page
Return to NHMFL Operations Home Page
Mac Made! Valid HTML 4.01! Valid CSS! Powered By OSX
Curator: Scott Hannahs <sth@magnet.fsu.edu>
Last Updated: