C:\backup 2000\My Documents\HCL History Board\History pg2.doc
September 14, 1945
Professor JeanGeorges Peter Department of Architectural Sciences Harvard University
Cambridge 38, Massachusetts
Dear Georges,
I would appreciate your help in getting approximate costs of construction in the Cambridge area for buildings for scientific work.
The Harvard cyclotron used to be in the Gordon McKay Engineering Laboratory which had been a hangar erected about 1917 and will probably be abandoned because of the high upkeep costs. If the Harvard cyclotron is returned from Los Alamos or another one is constructed, we shall need a main building approximately 75 x 50 feet which could have one line of pillars to aid in supporting the roof but the center for a radius of 20 feet should not have any supports. This would be a one story building. The vertical clearance for the central section should not be less than 15 feet. The floor could be 4 to 6 inches of concrete except at the very center where a 6 x 12 reinforced slab would be required to take approximately 90 tons.
An additional 1500 square feet area with office rooms would be located approximately 100 feet away outside wall separation. A single story building would be satisfactory here.
I have suggested two locations for these two buildings. One is in the quadrangle between Langdell and Pierce Halls, the Rotch building and the Physics Laboratories. This will probably mean a howl from the University, but anyhow it is first choice. The second choice for possible location of the cyclotron would be due east of the northeast corner of Conant Hall, about 200 feet north of the Museum of Comparative Zoology.
If the building is placed in the first location, I suppose it would have to be faced to look very pretty and the expense would go up. From your experience in construction of buildings for the Radiation Laboratory I hope you can give me a fair estimate of the cost of the buildings described. The wiring and water services would be no worse than for the Radiation Laboratory, and the costly plumbing and wiring is pretty closely associated with the cyclotron and would not come under the building cost proper. If the building were in the second location a construction of the type used in Building 24 might be satisfactory. I believe that that is reinforced concrete with brick facing.
If there is a very considerable difference in cost and if there is a protest from the University planning authorities concerning location No. 1, then certainly the second choice will have to be it. It would be a help also to know if the construction of such a building is handled by outside contractors or by the University.
I may be east on the 25th. If you could give me an answer before that time, could you send the original here and a copy to the department, requesting them to hold it until my arrival? My plans are so uncertain that I am not sure that I will be east at that time but do wish to be sure that I get your answer wherever I may be.
With all thanks for your aid, I am
Sincerely yours,
KTB/bsa
C:\backup 2000\My Documents\HCL History Board\History pg2.doc
November 1 1945
SPACE NEEDS FOR NUCLEAR PHYSICS
I. General statement
The recent visit to Cambridge of Professors K. T. Bainbridge and R. R. Wilson, now on leave at the Los Alamos Laboratory, provided an opportunity for appraising the housing needs of nuclear physics and related research.
In essence the project known as Manhattan District, carried out under the general direction of Major General L. R. Groves, has served to delineate, purely on the basis of relative hazard, and danger, two types of nuclear research tools. One of these includes such devices as cyclotrons, van der Graaf generators, and other types of equipment for accelerating atomic particles to directlycontrolled high velocities. The other involves the selfreacting uranium pile. The first type of device has existed in some form for nearly twentyfive years, and it involves only the dangers of high voltage and the hazard of relatively small amounts of gamma and neutron radiation. The second is a product of the war era and produces exceedingly intense neutron radiation, as well as being inherently capable of atomic runaway if uncontrolled.
In each case shielding and spacing the experimental equipment from living organisms reduces the hazards and dangers. The space required to reduce the hazards to the same tolerable level differs widely in the two cases. For accelerator type equipment, distances of one hundred feet may be more than adequate; for uranium piles twentyfive times this distance may be required to provide similar levels of safety. If we are to avoid the stigma of being out of date and of using only obsolete equipment, our program of research must include a selfreacting uranium pile.
It is therefore believed that it is not feasible to conduct all of a well-rounded nuclear research program within the University environs in Cambridge. The space problem will be considered in two parts, namely, the intown and the outoftown aspects.
InTown Aspects
In keeping with the recent appointment to Associate Professorships of two outstanding men in the field of nuclear physics and the appropriation of $400,000 for afiveyear research program, it becomes necessary to provide suitable space to house experimental equipment. Part of the broad program of nuclear research will include an expansion of the prewar program of nuclear investigation using controlled beams of high velocity atomic particles. It is expected that the cyclotron originally installed in the Gordon McKay Laboratory will be returned. This instrument is the chief asset of the University for work of this sort. Its proper housing must be given immediate attention, since Professors Bainbridge and Wilson believe it may reach Cambridge by February 1.
The selection of a suitable site for the cyclotron has been considered by the nuclear group. As a result of the atomic bomb and the newspaper publicity daily accorded to nuclear physics, any site chosen will receive undue scrutiny by members of the University as well as the general public. It must be emphasized that the cyclotron is not an inherently dangerous device, and that the atomic bomb has in no way altered this situation. High voltage and relatively small amounts of gamma and neutron radiation will still be associated with cyclotrons. Effective
shielding and spacing has been used in the past and there is no reason why it cannot be used in the future. The cyclotron is no more dangerous now, than when installed in the Gordon McKay E Laboratory a number of years ago. Many institutions have them and even house them in their physics laboratories, where lectures and the normal educational functions go on daily.
It is, however, imperative that the University hold an unassailable position with respect to taking all known necessary steps to prevent injury by radiation from the instrument. If its actual location is well within University property lines and suitably spaced with respect to its buildings, it is believed that radiation levels within buildings or on property not controlled by the University may be kept definitely below the established safe dosage tolerance. Monitoring equipment could be provided to furnish objective evidence of this fact if it seemed desirable.
The nuclear group has given careful consideration to the whole problem and has chosen the intown site for the following reasons:
1. It will make much more efficient use of staff time.
2. It will permit graduate students to have a much fuller participation in the work.
3. More effective use can be made of the departmental machine shops.
4. It should reduce the cost of the overall nuclear program.
a) This follows since the reduction of radiation at the control room area, though well within the safe dosage tolerance, will not be low enough to carry out certain
experiments requiring the most sensitive radiation detectors. experiments requiring the most sensitive radiation detectors. This necessitates good experimental facilities at a third location further removed from the cyclotron. Facilities now existing in the Research Laboratory of Physics or Mallinckrodt would thus not need to be duplicated.
b) Power, water, and heat services might be considerably more expensive out of town than in the University where they are already available.
Consideration has been given to the possible use of "Beranek's box". Professors Wilson and Bainbridge felt that it was (1) too close to Cruft Laboratory and the street; (2) too small in floor area; (3) not properly proportioned to make efficient use of the space; and (4) wanted by Professor E. L. Chaffee in connection with his Navy Research program. Some consideration was given to the quadrangle between Pierce and Langdell Halls, but it was believed more feasible to consider a site within the area bounded by Oxford, Hammond, Gorham and Museum Streets, the Andover Theological Building, and the Biological Laboratories and the University Museum. This is shown on the attached print.(SiteI on the map) From the point of view of the nuclear group, it is believed this general location (1) provides the most suitable University space available in Cambridge; (2) interferes least with known longrange University planning; (3) provides for keeping the source of radiation will removed from University buildings and public property. It is proposed to construct a single-story fireproof structure approximately in the position shown at Site I to house the cyclotron itself. A covered wooden passageway approximately 100' in length would connect this structure with another small building which would house the control room and provide space for a small research shop, electronic instrumentation's rooms, and some general research rooms for nuclear physics. This second building would also be of fireproof construction, and it is hoped two stories in height. Rough estimates have been secured through Mr. Parkhurst's office:
Cyclotron building, 50' x 75', one story,
concrete, brick faced$52,000
Control room building, 50' x 40', two stories,
concrete, brick faced40,000
Covered corridor of wood4,500
$96,500
Some air conditioning should be included, but no reliable estimate can be given until additional specifications are received from Professors Bainbridge and Wilson. They are now working on the detailed planning of the building, within the broad framework of size and relative spacing indicated above......