RICH Data Flow Jianchun Wang. 2 HPD Readout Electronics 944 HPDs 163 channels / HPD 1 FE Hybrid / HPD ~160 FEMs 6 FE Hybrids / FEM 1-13 Cables / FEM 20.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
6 Mar 2002Readout electronics1 Back to the drawing board Paul Dauncey Imperial College Outline: Real system New VFE chip A simple system Some questions.
Advertisements

Tests of CAEN 1190 Multi-hit TDCs Simona Malace Brad Sawatzky and Brian Moffit JLab Hall C Summer Workshop Aug , JLab.
28 February 2003Paul Dauncey - HCAL Readout1 HCAL Readout and DAQ using the ECAL Readout Boards Paul Dauncey Imperial College London, UK.
Terra-Pixel APS for CALICE Progress meeting 10 th Nov 2005 Jamie Crooks, Microelectronics/RAL.
July 10, 2008 PHENIX RPC review C.Y. Chi 1 RPC Front End Electronics On chamber discriminator  The strips  The CMS discriminator chips  The discriminator.
[M2] Traffic Control Group 2 Chun Han Chen Timothy Kwan Tom Bolds Shang Yi Lin Manager Randal Hong Wed. Oct. 27 Overall Project Objective : Dynamic Control.
The first testing of the CERC and PCB Version II with cosmic rays Catherine Fry Imperial College London CALICE Meeting, CERN 28 th – 29 th June 2004 Prototype.
Development of novel R/O electronics for LAr detectors Max Hess Controller ADC Data Reduction Ethernet 10/100Mbit Host Detector typical block.
BTeV Trigger Architecture Vertex 2002, Nov. 4-8 Michael Wang, Fermilab (for the BTeV collaboration)
Responsibility on Next Beam Test Jianchun Wang Syracuse University BTeV meeting 06/27/01.
Jianchun Wang Syracuse University 10/16/99 CLEO Meeting Outline DAQ problems solved Recent results Status of DAQ Work to be done.
David Nelson STAVE Test Electronics July 1, ATLAS STAVE Test Electronics Preliminary V3 Presented by David Nelson.
Various Topics Related to FEB Liang Han, Ge Jin University of Science and Technology of China Dec.21,2013.
Final Year Project A CMOS imager with compact digital pixel sensor (BA1-08) Supervisor: Dr. Amine Bermak Group Members: Chang Kwok Hung
Preliminary Design of Calorimeter Electronics Shudi Gu June 2002.
MB, 9/8/041 Introduction to TDC-II and Address Map Mircea Bogdan (UC)
U N C L A S S I F I E D FVTX Detector Readout Concept S. Butsyk For LANL P-25 group.
PicoTDC Features of the picoTDC (operating at 1280 MHz with 64 delay cells) Focus of the unit on very small time bins, 12ps basic, 3ps interpolation Interpolation.
Understanding Data Acquisition System for N- XYTER.
PHENIX upgrade DAQ Status/ HBD FEM experience (so far) The thoughts on the PHENIX DAQ upgrade –Slow download HBD test experience so far –GTM –FEM readout.
September 8-14, th Workshop on Electronics for LHC1 Channel Control ASIC for the CMS Hadron Calorimeter Front End Readout Module Ray Yarema, Alan.
HBD FEM the block diagram preamp – FEM cable Status Stuffs need to be decided….
LANL FEM design proposal S. Butsyk For LANL P-25 group.
FADC progress in Vienna Reported by H.Ishino for Vienna FADC group M.Pernicka and H.Steininger.
11th March 2008AIDA FEE Report1 AIDA Front end electronics Report February 2008.
HBD FEM Overall block diagram Individual building blocks Outlook ¼ detector build.
Development of an ASIC for reading out CCDS at the vertex detector of the International Linear Collider Presenter: Peter Murray ASIC Design Group Science.
RICH Beam Test 05. Cable Connection MAPMT CN1 CN2 11 J3 J4 11 J2 J1 11 MUX J2J1J4J5 Feed Through J2J1J4J5 Feed Through J19,BJ18,A.
First ideas for the Argontube electronics Shaper, simulations Block Diagram for analog path Delta Code Data Reduction Bus system, Controller Max.
Leo Greiner PIXEL Hardware meeting HFT PIXEL detector LVDS Data Path Testing.
HBD FEE test result summary + production schedule 16mv test pulse result –5X attenuator + 20:1 resistor divider at input (to reduce the noise on the test.
Xiangming Sun1PXL Sensor and RDO review – 06/23/2010 STAR XIANGMING SUN LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LAB Firmware and Software Architecture for PIXEL L.
NUMI Off Axis NUMI Off Axis Workshop Workshop Argonne Meeting Electronics for RPCs Gary Drake, Charlie Nelson Apr. 25, 2003 p. 1.
1 The PHENIX Muon Identifier Front End Electronics Andrew Glenn (University of Tennessee), for the PHENIX collaboration Andrew Glenn 5/1/01 April APS Meeting.
FPGA firmware of DC5 FEE. Outline List of issue Data loss issue Command error issue (DCM to FEM) Command lost issue (PC with USB connection to GANDALF)
March 9, 2005 HBD CDR Review 1 HBD Electronics Preamp/cable driver on the detector. –Specification –Schematics –Test result Rest of the electronics chain.
December 14, 2006Anuj K. Purwar1 Design proposal for Read Out Card (ROC) Anuj K. Purwar December 14, 2006 Nevis Meeting.
LHCb front-end electronics and its interface to the DAQ.
1 07/10/07 Forward Vertex Detector Technical Design – Electronics DAQ Readout electronics split into two parts – Near the detector (ROC) – Compresses and.
Transfering Trigger Data to USA15 V. Polychonakos, BNL.
DEPT OF MODERN PHYSICS, USTC Electronics System of MC IHEP, Beijing ___________________________________________ Muon Group, USTC, Hefei.
1 CSCI 2510 Computer Organization Memory System II Cache In Action.
KLM Trigger Status Barrel KLM RPC Front-End Brandon Kunkler, Gerard Visser Belle II Trigger and Data Acquistion Workshop January 17, 2012.
BTeV in PHENIX: Pixel Readout Chip Basics David Christian Fermilab December 5, 2005.
B. Hall 17 Aug 2000BTeV Front End Readout & LinksPage 1 BTeV Front End Readout & Links.
Peter LICHARD CERN (NA62)1 NA62 Straw tracker electronics Study of different readout schemes Readout electronics frontend backend Plans.
BER-tester for GEB board. Main components&restrictions TLK2501 serializer/deserializer/pseudo random generator Genesys FPGA development board Multiplexer.
Terra-Pixel APS for CALICE Progress meeting 10 th Nov 2005 Jamie Crooks, Microelectronics/RAL.
.1PXL READOUT STAR PXL READOUT requirement and one solution Xiangming Sun.
LHCb upgrade Workshop, Oxford, Xavier Gremaud (EPFL, Switzerland)
Juin 1st 2010 Christophe Beigbeder PID meeting1 PID meeting Electronics Integration.
1 Timing of the calorimeter monitoring signals 1.Introduction 2.LED trigger signal timing * propagation delay of the broadcast calibration command * calibration.
Electronic System Design GroupInstrumentation DepartmentRob Halsall et al.Rutherford Appleton Laboratory18 July 2001 CMS Tracker FED CMS Tracker Two Weekly.
Mu3e Data Acquisition Ideas Dirk Wiedner July /5/20121Dirk Wiedner Mu3e meeting Zurich.
10/3/2003Andreas Jansson - Tevatron IPM review1 Tevatron IPM Proposed design.
V.Duk, INFN Perugia1 CHOD TDAQ status and rates Viacheslav Duk, INFN Perugia On behalf of the CHOD working group.
21 November 2003Jacques Lefrancois1 HOSTING ELECTRONICS AND CONNECTIVITY Role of calorimeter system: Level 0 trigger +  reconstruction +e/  id. Level.
Configuration and local monitoring
Work on Muon System TDR - in progress Word -> Latex ?
Modeling event building architecture for the triggerless data acquisition system for PANDA experiment at the HESR facility at FAIR/GSI Krzysztof Korcyl.
14-BIT Custom ADC Board Rev. B
Digital readout architecture for Velopix
Connection btw FE and Merger
FIT Front End Electronics & Readout
VELO readout On detector electronics Off detector electronics to DAQ
LHCb Electronics Brainstorm
New DCM, FEMDCM DCM jobs DCM upgrade path
PID meeting Mechanical implementation Electronics architecture
RPC Electronics Overall system diagram Current status At detector
Preliminary design of the behavior level model of the chip
Presentation transcript:

RICH Data Flow Jianchun Wang

2 HPD Readout Electronics 944 HPDs 163 channels / HPD 1 FE Hybrid / HPD ~160 FEMs 6 FE Hybrids / FEM 1-13 Cables / FEM DCBs ~8 FEMs / DCB Event Data Timing and Control Data

3 Serial Line Cables  Timing and control link(tcdat) at 151 MHz (20  refclk), 16-bit T/C word per BCO. Reference: BTeV-doc-1920 by Walter Stuermer  Moving information between HPD multiplexers (MUX, FEM) and data combiner boards (DCB).  One or more cables per multiplexer board.  Each cable has 4 point-to-point serial lines, each with a differentially driven twisted pair (e.g. Category 6 cable).  All data is encoded in 8B10B format.  Reference clock link(refclk) at 7.6 MHz (132 ns BCO).  Event data links(evdat0, evdat1) at 640 MHz (7  12  refclk), 2  67.2 bits data per BCO, or 2  63.6 Mbyte/s.

4 The HPD Occupancy  BTeV GEANT simulation with 2 interactions per bunch crossing.  Total about 14,000 events simulated (thanks to Raja).  Columns with odd ID are shifted down by a half HPD size.  Simplified row ID.  Electronic noise is not included in this plot.

5 Occupancy of The Hottest HPD  2 interactions per bunch crossing ( 132 ns ) are simulated.  Electronic noise is not included in the plot.  The hottest HPD has 19.9 hits per event, or 17.2 per bunch crossing.  There are 1.26 hits/event averaged over 944 HPDs.

6 Occupancy of The Hottest HPD  6 interactions per bunch crossing ( 396 ns ) are simulated.  Electronic noise is not included in the plot.  The hottest HPD has 52.6 hits per event, or 52.5 per bunch crossing.  There are ~3.7 hits/event averaged over 944 HPDs.

7 HPD Grouping  HPDs are grouped into 6-HPD modules. Each module is connected to 1 FEM board.  Some modules at the edge of HPD arrays contain less number of HPDs.  Only one of two HPD arrays is shown in the plot.  The last columns in both arrays are not grouped, and probable will be skipped.  There are 150 groups in total.

8 Occupancy of HPD Groups 2 Interaction per bunch crossing, no electronic noise. The hottest group: 57 hits / bunch crossing.

9 Occupancy of HPD Groups 6 Interactions per bunch crossing, no electronic noise. The hottest group: 180 hits / bunch crossing.

10 How Many Cables Needed?  The hottest HPD group with 2 interactions per bunch crossing:  Occupancy: 57.0 hits / bunch crossing  Noise level:  1%  Total occupancy:  hits / bunch crossing  Address length: 18 bits/hit (10 bits for 944 HPD, 8 bit for 163 channels)  Data moving: bits / bunch crossing (132 ns)  Cables needed: (  cables  + 20% overhead:  (  cables   Total number of cables for 2 interactions per bunch crossing, 1% noise and 20% overhead: 458 cables.  With 6 interactions per bunch crossing, there are more physics hits (~ factor of 3) per bunch crossing, save level of noise, but more time to move data (factor of 3). In total 324 cables are needed.

11 Effect of Noise 2 interactions/bunch crossing (132 ns)6 interactions/bunch crossing (396 ns) No overhead, with 1% noise or no noise

12 Proposed Number of Cables 2 int 2 interactions/bunch crossing Number of cables: interactions/bunch crossing Number of cables: 324 Including1% noise, 20% overhead

13 Data Flow Structure  This is just a guess. I am not quite sure how several lines will share the load, rotating to serve events or splitting an event. Currently I assume there is no time wasted.  128K FIFO is quite small. For the simulation it is big enough, and can save more than 100 bunch crossings for the hottest group. FPGA 128K FIFO 8B10B encoder buffer

14 Data Flow Simulation  For each bunch crossing, the elastic and inelastic collisions are fully simulated with BTeV GEANT with average 2 interactions per bunch crossing. The channels with no physics signal are simulated individually to have 1% change of noise hits. Note that 13.5% of the bunch crossing, there is no interaction but noise only.  For each bunch crossing a block of event data is generated, with 18-bit word for each hit. And two 18-bit words as event header: an event tag (3FFFF) and a BCO.  For each bunch crossing, the event data block is saved to FIFO first. Then part or all of the data saved in FIFO is transferred to outside via 8B10B encoder and cables within the bunch crossing time (132 ns).  If the buffer overflows, then only three 18-bit words are stored and transferred, with the extra word indicating the overflow status.  It is impossible to generate millions of events using BTeV GEANT. Instead, 14,000 events with 2 interactions per bunch crossing are fully simulated. The simulation then randomly pick events from this pool.

15 The FIFO Occupancy  The highest occupied FIFO happens to be of the hottest group.  With 4 million bunch crossings simulated, the maximum occupancy, ~30 Kbits is much smaller than FIFO capacity, 128 Kbits picked for this simulation. 2 interactions/bunch crossing6 interactions/bunch crossing

16 Summary  This study is to roughly estimate what we need to move data out from front end electronics.  With noise level of 1% and 20% overhead, we need 458 cables to move the data from FEM to DCB at 2 interactions per bunch crossing and BCO time of 132 ns.  We need 324 cables at 6 interactions per bunch crossing and bunch crossing time of 396 ns.  The simulation shows that the FIFO occupancy reaches 26Kbits. A FIFO size of 128 Kbits is big enough.

17 Occupancy of The Hottest HPD Group  2 interactions per bunch crossing ( 132 ns ) are simulated.  Electronic noise is not included in the plot.  The hottest HPD group has 66.2 hits per event, or 57.0 per bunch crossing.  There are 7.9 hits/event averaged over all HPD groups.

18 Occupancy of The Hottest HPD Group  6 interactions per bunch crossing ( 396 ns ) are simulated.  Electronic noise is not included in the plot.  The hottest HPD group has180.2 hits per event, or per bunch crossing.  There are 23.1 hits/event averaged over all HPD groups.

19 HPD Occupancy 2 interactions / bunch crossing, no electronic noise The hottest HPD: 19.9 hits/event, 17.2 hits/bunch crossing

20 HPD Occupancy 6 interactions / bunch crossing, no electronic noise The hottest HPD: 52.6 hits/event, 52.5 hits/bunch crossing

21 Row ID by Tomasz

22 The FIFO Occupancy  With 4 million bunch crossings simulated, the maximum occupancy, ~30 Kbits is much smaller than FIFO capacity, 128 Kbits picked for this simulation. 2 interactions/bunch crossing6 interactions/bunch crossing

23 Summary of Numbers 43DCBs 58 (100)52 (92)Cables (data lines) 24 FE Modules PMT 3633DCBs 682 (1135)659 (1056)Cables (data lines) 332 FE Modules MAPMT 30 DCBs 517 (951)498 (940)Cables (data lines) 200 FE Modules HPD 16-bit format (4 extra words) 18-bit format (2 extra words)