1. CMS Week, 3-7 November 20031 CSC Trigger Test Beam Report Cast of many

2. CMS Week, 3-7 November 20032 Beam Test of 2 CSC’s at X5a // Goals: 1) Verify that the peripheral crate electronics (mainly DMB/TMB) are ready for production 2) Complete an electronic chain test of data transmission from CSC front-end electronics to counting-room trigger electronics, all operating synchronously with the 40 MHz structured beam 3) Test new XDAQ-based software

3. CMS Week, 3-7 November 20033 Beam Test Setup Peripheral Crate 2 DMB, 2 TMB 1 CCB, 1 MPC FED crate 1 DDU PC TTC crate DAQ Data Trigger primitives S1 S2 S3 beam CSC 1 CSC 2 Track Finder Crate TRIDAS 2 CSC’s, all on-chamber boards Up to 80K events read out in 2.6s spill

4. CMS Week, 3-7 November 20034 Typical Muon Event (CSC1 tilted)

5. CMS Week, 3-7 November 20035 CSC Peripheral Crate From front-end cards 2 Trigger Motherboards (TMBs) for trigger primitive generation, and 2 DAQ Motherboards (DMBs) for chamber read out Muon Port Card (MPC), which sends trigger primitives on optical links DDU, interface to DAQ Clock & Control Board (CCB) with TTCRx

6. CMS Week, 3-7 November 20036 CSC Track-Finder Crate Sector Processor, receives optical data CCB with TTCRx MPC, for in-crate tests

7. CMS Week, 3-7 November 20037 2003 Test Beam Chronology Phase I – structured beam May 23-June 1 ALCT timing tests CLCT and TMB studies High-rate tests Phase II – unstructured beam June 13-28 CLCT and TMB studies Low-rate and high-rate tests Phase III – additional structured beam September 18-22 Trigger optical link data transmission tests (MPC to SP) from peripheral electronics to counting room electronics ALCT = anode pattern logic & BX assign CLCT = cathode pattern logic

8. CMS Week, 3-7 November 20038 Phase I Results Optimal timing found Fairly high efficiency (~98-99%) achieved Peripheral crate system basically working as desired Chamber angle, HV, threshold scans

9. CMS Week, 3-7 November 20039 Structure repeats during 2.6 s spill length 48 bunches 25 ns bunch spacing bunch width 3-5 ns SPS orbit period 1.2  s 23  s 2003 Synchronous Beam Structure

10. CMS Week, 3-7 November 200310 Bunch Structure, ALCT Delay Tuning BX efficiency vs. ALCT delay setting 0-31 ns Chamber 1Chamber 2 Expect muons in 48 out of 924 bx verified by CLCT BXN from data

11. CMS Week, 3-7 November 200311 BX Distributions With Optimal Anode Delays Note logarithmic scale Cathodes: Data mostly in 3 BX (no fine time- adjustment possible) Anodes: Data 98.7% in 1 BX (after fine time- adjustment) Chamber 1 Chamber 2

12. CMS Week, 3-7 November 200312 CLCT Positions Relative position of key half-strip from CLCTs from Chamber 2 vs. Chamber 1 Note: Chamber 1 is vertically higher than Chamber 2 (thus the offset in position). Zoom

13. CMS Week, 3-7 November 200313 Correlated LCT Efficiency The efficiency to identify a correlated LCT (ALCT+CLCT) in csc #3 in a straight line path from an LCT found in csc #8 (within a  2.5 half-strip and  2.5 WG tolerance) is: 98.6% in one BX 99.5% in two BX (correct BX or one after) 99.7% in three BX (correct BX  1) (as determined from Track-Finder data from Phase 3) abs(wg3-wg8) abs(strip3-strip8)

14. CMS Week, 3-7 November 200314 Trigger Rate Tests Expected LCT rate at LHC < 25 KHz (ME1/1) data consistent with dead-time = 225 ns Chamber #1 CLCT 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 05001,0001,5002,0002,5003,000 Beam Intensity (KHz) CLCT Rate (KHz) SLHC (10xLHC)

15. CMS Week, 3-7 November 200315 Test Beam, Phases 2 & 3 Timing-in procedures improved & documented Very high efficiencies achieved Highest trigger efficiency of 99.9% required low rate (few kHz) 2-chamber “excellent event” (CFEB, CLCT, ALCT) efficiency limited to 99% due to CFEB timing Improved scans taken: Angle scan HV scan Comparator threshold scan Pattern requirements scan Logic scope read out on most data True time history of LCTs logged by Track-Finder QPLL tested

16. CMS Week, 3-7 November 200316 CSC Track-Finder Trigger Test 3 × 1.6 Gb/s optical link connections from CSC electronics Uses TLK2501 chipset from TI Requires very stable reference clock for error- free operation Failed during May tests without PLL Home-built VCXO & PLL clock patch added to clean incoming TTC clock for links, but TTC QPLL also tested

17. CMS Week, 3-7 November 200317 TTC QPLL Mezzanine card Three made available to CSC group for testing during Sept.03 structured beam test Provides stable clock signals at 40, 80, and 160 MHz at correct LHC frequency Installed on Clock and Control Board (CCB) with 40 MHz clean clock sent to backplane and 80 MHz clock sent by twisted pair to SP and MPC Noticed that CCB commands have 1 BX extra latency with TTCRq TTCRq

18. CMS Week, 3-7 November 200318 PLL Results Using either the home-built VCXO+PLL solution or the CERN QPLL solution for the 80 MHz reference clock to TLK2501 receivers: PLL locks to incoming machine clock Measured frequency: 40.078893(1) MHz No errors on optical links reported over many hours of PRBS and data tests Data successfully logged by both CSC DAQ and CSC Track-Finder readout SP data FIFO synchronized to L1A

19. CMS Week, 3-7 November 200319 TTCRq (QPLL) Test Results QPLL 80 MHz clock directly to MPC transmitters & home-built VCXO+PLL for SP receivers: No link errors for 20 minute PRBS test QPLL 80 MHz clock directly to SP receivers and MPC uses default clock multiplier: No link errors for 15 minute PRBS test Successfully logged data for 10K events (run 5151) QPLL 40 MHz clock on TF crate backplane and SP uses DLL in FPGA for clock multiplier: Solution tried for Phase 1 (May) structured beam running Link errors observed in PRBS test TTCRq on CCB in peripheral crate Able to take data with same trigger efficiency (i.e. TTCRq works for peripheral crate electronics as well and is compatible with TTCRm)

20. CMS Week, 3-7 November 200320 Data-taking Mode, Phase 3 Most data logged using two independent DAQ systems: “CFEB Control” for DDU data (same as Phases 1&2) “SP DAQ” for Track-Finder data (standalone SP readout) SP records 5 BX of input data for each L1A, with most trigger data arriving on central BX Allows study of time-dependence of trigger data XDAQ-based event builder also able to log data Underlying SP code the same as for standalone DAQ since it was written using XDAQ All analysis of SP and DDU data from either DAQ system is done using the XDAQ-based software

21. CMS Week, 3-7 November 200321 Data Comparison CSC Track-Finder Data CSC Data from DAQ CSC 2CSC 1

22. CMS Week, 3-7 November 200322 Detailed TMB–SP Comparison Run TMB data through MPC simulation to compare with SP MPC is not directly read out Use BXN reported by TMB for each LCT Preliminary comparison between SP and TMB for all 5 BX read out by SP for every L1A match: 98% agreement for ~70K events Mismatches between TMB and SP data are in BX assignment only, not in LCT frames

23. CMS Week, 3-7 November 200323 SP – TMB Mismatches Nearly all of the mismatches involve differing BX assignment for LCTs from the TMB for csc#8 Data frames are in agreement, however Excluding csc#8 in these cases and comparing TMB and SP for csc#3  near perfect agreement Just 32 discrepancies from an analysis of 60K events, where BX assignment of TMB for csc#3 differs For these mismatches, the SP usually has the LCTs on the central BX in the SP read-out So trigger data appears to be good! Conclusion for DAQ readout of TMB data: TMB #8 has BX error 2% of time TMB #3 has BX error 5×10 -4 of time Will re-do analysis using BXN reported by ALCT