|
|
|
SPring-8 User Trend Survey 2012 by SPRUC
The SPRUC is a user organization formed by SPring-8 users. In close cooperation with the Registered Institution for Facilities Use Promotion (JASRI) and the facility owner (RIKEN), the SPRUC aims to facilitate the sophistication and optimization of the facility use and the development of science and technology by building bridges between the SPring-8 and academia/industry. Interaction between members is expected to ensure the development and expansion of SR science and quantum beam science. With a view to achieving the above goal, the SPRUC makes report of SPring-8 user trends survey and submits to JASRI every year. The SPRUC is inviting to submit public comment on all following draft topics via the e-mail address below. (e-mail: users@spring8.or.jp) Topics (February 22 – 28, 2013) 1. Comment on SPring-8 Upgrade Plan Preliminary Report 1.1. Comment on SPring-8 Upgrade Opinions regarding the upgrade of the light source were largely positive. Many users consider the developmental modification of SPring-8 as favorable and are in favor of the upgrade. Behind the trend is the fact that the facility is appreciated for its motivation to keep its standing as the front-runner of synchrotron radiation facilities and that it is understood that the upgrade is necessary for Japan to maintain a certain level of science and technology. Many of the research groups considered the draft upgrade plan to have unique characteristics based on the current situation. There was even a research group offering an opinion from the perspective of accelerator technology that the facility should push forward the upgrade of accelerator technology because otherwise next generation technology cannot be nurtured. The SPRUC hopes that many of the research groups will benefit from the implementation of the draft upgrade plan in improving the quality of research in their areas. 1.2. Comment on the Report The SPRUC pays respect to the facility for compiling such a comprehensive report in English. At the same time, the SPRUC asks the facility to provide a summary report, preferably both in English and Japanese, that is explained in simple terms and comprehensible to people who are not experts of synchrotron radiation in order to put together opinions from a wide variety of fields that SPring-8 covers. This is because while research groups that the light source parameters have a direct impact on research results expressed a number of opinions, other research groups submitted their questions or requested to explain the content of the report instead. 1.3. Comment on the Light Source As for the light source, core of the upgrade plan, a number of opinions, requests and questions were submitted, which is because in research studies conduced by SPRUC research groups there are areas of experiment that meet the conditions stated in the report and areas of research whose conditions are substantially different from the ones stated in the report. The SPRUC requests the facility to use the requests from users to work out the design of the upgrade light source to the extent possible and also respond to users questions as soon as possible. The SPRUC also requests the facility to make a table showing the current performance each BL (e.g. beam size and flux) and the performance stated in the upgrade plan if possible since users' primary concern is the BL that they use and the facility will be able to answer many of users' questions and requests with the table. It is hoped that some of the questions and requests will be substantiated as problems to be solved for the implementation of the upgrade plan. Overall opinion about the light source, requests and questions, and what is expected of the upgrade light source in each respective area are described below. 1.4. Comment on the Experimental Station, and Detector The SPRUC received some overall opinions about the experimental hutches and detectors that users use. The SPRUC requests the facility to understand that users' interest could extend as far as this topic. Some research groups offered opinions regarding what users and the facility should do to go ahead with the upgrade. The SPRUC agrees with most of the points put forward by them. 1.5. Comment on the Future Scientific Plan at SPring-8 Each research group requested the facility to consider research that will be made feasible once the upgrade plan is implemented. The SPRUC hopes that the facility will accept the wide-ranging opinions of users to work out the upgrade plan covering the end stations. In other words, the SPRUC expects the facility to consider ways to improve the quality of research results of existing users as a whole instead of selecting the proposals suitable for the upgrade plan from among those submitted by so many SPring-8 users. 1.6. Other Comments (Timing and Period of Upgrade, etc.) Many research groups expressed opinions regarding the period of upgrade. There were a handful of negative comments against "one-year shut down"; rather, many of them demanded the facility clarify "when" and "how long it will take before users can carry out experiments." The SPRUC supports "one-year shut down" and requests the facility to clarify "when" and "how long" as soon as possible. 2. Comment on Current SPring-8 2.1. Comment on Scrap and Build of Beamline, Experimental Station, and Station Equipment As for the scrap and build of beamlines, there were overall opinions positioning it as something comprehensive covering the entire SPring-8, wide-ranging research areas, industrial fields and the upgrade plan as well as specific requests from individual beamlines and research groups. The SPRUC believes the scrap and build of beamlines should be considered from a broad perspective based on the upgrade plan taking into account the roles played by SPring-8 and other facilities, collaboration with various key projects of Japan, and overall needs in disregard of individual research. Concerning the station equipment, the SPRUC should make a request to the facility for some equipment, and each research group should make a request to an individual BL scientist or group for other equipment. 2.2. Comment on Information about SPring-8 from JASRI About half the respondents said that they were satisfied. Some of the research groups, however, called for the improvement in the way information was provided, especially the update of information. The SPRUC urges the facility to come up with better ways of updating the website information, which seems very important among others, and to enhance the levels of the lecture meetings intended for those in the academic fields and the coordinators supporting experiments. 2.3. Comments on the Complementary Use of SPring-8 and Other Quantum Beam Facilities As for the collaboration with other facilities, opinions relating to various facilities were offered. The SPRUC requests the facility to make positive efforts for the sophistication of SPring-8 use such as the use of multiple beamlines for one research theme within SPring-8 as stated in the overall opinion. 2.4. Comments on User Support of JASRI While many research groups responded that they were satisfied they pointed out the shortage of staff in support services. In many cases, they seem to suggest not only the increase in the number of staff but also the personnel training. The SPRUC urges the facility to increase and train the staff for support services in a balanced manner. The research groups that have much experience using overseas facilities suggested increasing the staff based on the comparison with overseas facilities. 2.5. Comments on Research Proposal including Beamtime Allocation We have received some opinions about call for proposals, proposal selection, the timing of inviting proposals, and research period. We ask the facility to use these opinions to provide better services in the future. 2.6. Other Comments There were some opinions about the guesthouse and meals which reflects the fact that it has become difficult to secure accommodation due to the increase of users. The SPRUC also seek an improvement in this area as soon as possible. |
|
|
| Feedback |