PHENIX Barrel Vertex Tracker (VTX) Front End Electronics for the Strip Layers Vince Cianciolo, Oak Ridge National Lab Project Readiness Review 01/19/2005.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Hybrid pixel: pilot and bus K. Tanida (RIKEN) 06/09/03 Si upgrade workshop Outline Overview on ALICE pilot and bus Requirements Pilot options Bus options.
Advertisements

H1 SILICON DETECTORS PRESENT STATUS By Wolfgang Lange, DESY Zeuthen.
MICE Tracker Front End Progress Tracker Data Readout Basics Progress in Increasing Fraction of Muons Tracker Can Record Determination of Recordable Muons.
RPC Electronics Status Overall system TDC –Digitizing frequency issue (determine the bin size of the TDC value) Discriminator test result Trigger module.
28 August 2002Paul Dauncey1 Readout electronics for the CALICE ECAL and tile HCAL Paul Dauncey Imperial College, University of London, UK For the CALICE-UK.
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.
PHENIX Vertex Tracker Atsushi Taketani for PHENIX collaboration RIKEN Nishina Center RIKEN Brookhaven Research Center 1.Over view of Vertex detector 2.Physics.
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.
November Vertex 2002 Kazu Hanagaki1 Layer 0 in D0 Silicon Tracker for run2b Kazu Hanagaki / Fermilab for D0 run2b Silicon Tracker group Motivation.
Performance of the DZero Layer 0 Detector Marvin Johnson For the DZero Silicon Group.
VELO upgrade electronics – HYBRIDS Tony Smith University of Liverpool.
SVX4 chip 4 SVX4 chips hybrid 4 chips hybridSilicon sensors Front side Back side Hybrid data with calibration charge injection for some channels IEEE Nuclear.
RC chip Junji Tojo RIKEN VTX Meeting February 9 th, 2005.
Development of Readout ASIC for FPCCD Vertex Detector 01 October 2009 Kennosuke.Itagaki Tohoku University.
Takeyasu Ito University of Tennessee EDM Collaboration meeting December, 2004 Cost and Schedule Estimate WBS 2.5- Neutron beam polarizer/splitter for SNS.
NEDM Construction Project Cost & Schedule Philosophy Vince Cianciolo, ORNL Physics Division Internal Cost & Schedule Review 02/11/2005.
Gunther Haller SiD LOI Meeting March 2, LOI Content: Electronics and DAQ Gunther Haller Research Engineering Group.
David M. Lee Forward Vertex Detector Cost, Schedule, and Management Plan Participating Institutions Organizational plan Cost Basis R&D Costs.
U N C L A S S I F I E D FVTX Detector Readout Concept S. Butsyk For LANL P-25 group.
Leo Greiner IPHC meeting HFT PIXEL DAQ Prototype Testing.
1 DAQ for FVTX detector Implementation Mark Prokop Los Alamos National Laboratory.
M. Lo Vetere 1,2, S. Minutoli 1, E. Robutti 1 1 I.N.F.N Genova, via Dodecaneso, GENOVA (Italy); 2 University of GENOVA (Italy) The TOTEM T1.
Columbia University IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ROC3' / preproduction ROC Design Status E.J. Mannel StriPixel Review October 1, 2008.
Pixel hybrid status & issues Outline Pixel hybrid overview ALICE1 readout chip Readout options at PHENIX Other issues Plans and activities K. Tanida (RIKEN)
11th March 2008AIDA FEE Report1 AIDA Front end electronics Report February 2008.
SVX4 and PHENIX Vince Cianciolo (ORNL) Ken Read (ORNL/ UT) 9 June 2003.
PXL Cable Options LG 1HFT Hardware Meeting 02/11/2010.
8/9/2000T.Matsumoto RICH Front End RICH FEE Overview PMT to FEE signal connection Trigger Tile Summation of Current RICH LVL-1 Trigger Module1,2 What is.
Fine Pixel CCD for ILC Vertex Detector ‘08 7/31 Y. Takubo (Tohoku U.) for ILC-FPCCD vertex group ILC vertex detector Fine Pixel CCD (FPCCD) Test-sample.
Swadhin Taneja Stony Brook University On behalf of Vertex detector team at PHENIX Collaboration 112/2/2015S. Taneja -- DNP Conference, Santa Fe Nov 1-6.
Vertex Detector Options and R&D Requirements Upgrade DC Meeting December 11, 2002 Yuji Goto (RIKEN/RBRC) for the Silicon USG.
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.
March 9, 2005 HBD CDR Review 1 HBD Electronics Preamp/cable driver on the detector. –Specification –Schematics –Test result Rest of the electronics chain.
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.
Solid State Detectors for Upgraded PHENIX Detector at RHIC.
Sensor testing and validation plans for Phase-1 and Ultimate IPHC_HFT 06/15/ LG1.
CERN, 18 december 2003Coincidence Matrix ASIC PRR Coincidence ASIC modifications E.Petrolo, R.Vari, S.Veneziano INFN-Rome.
AFE Meeting June 5, 2001 SIFT UPGRADE Marvin Johnson.
FVTX Electronics (WBS 1.5.2, 1.5.3) Sergey Butsyk University of New Mexico Sergey Butsyk DOE FVTX review
1 FVTX Monthly/Quarterly Report January 2009 Cost Summary Schedule Summary Current technical status of each WBS item.
HBD/TPC Electronics Status Works done to for a)Prototype detector readout b)Understand packing density and heat loading issues c)Address the overall system.
D. M. Lee, LANL 1 07/10/07 Forward Vertex Detector Overview Technical Design Overview Design status.
Craig Ogilvie Strip FEE electronics that are common between stripixel or conventional sensor choice Stripixel tests/plans to establish manufacturability.
Readout Architecture for MuCh Introduction of MuCh Layout of Much ( proposed several schemes) Read ASIC’s Key features Basic Readout chain ROC Block Diagram.
NA62 straw readout Characterization and qualification of the frontend electronics Detector and interface to frontend Small readout system Plans Expected.
B.Satyanarayana Department of High Energy Physics Tata Institute of Fundamental Research Homi Bhabha Road, Colaba, Mumbai,
PHENIX Vertex Detector with Conventional Strip Sensors Abhay Deshpande Stony Brook University.
TPC electronics Status, Plans, Needs Marcus Larwill April
HBD/TPC Electronics Status Works done to for a)Prototype detector readout b)Understand packing density and heat loading issues c)Address the overall system.
Pixel Atsushi Taketani RIKEN RIKEN Brookhaven Research Center 1.Overview of Pixel subsystem 2.Test beam 3.Each Components 4.Schedule 5.Summary.
David M. Lee Forward Vertex Detector Cost, Schedule, and Management Plan Participating Institutions Organizational plan Cost Basis R&D Costs.
Status of MAPMT FEE Electronics Boards Connector board – have 5 boards, 1 assembled Readout board (“MUX” board) – layout completed 12/2, but unfortunately.
September 7, 2004Si VTX Strip Overview1 Overview of VTX Strip Group Activities Abhay Deshpande SUNY-SB For Si Strip Group.
Status of Stripixel Sensor + SVX4 Test Junji Tojo RIKEN VTX Meeting June 1 st, 2004.
Silicon strip detector R&D issues –readout chip decision –interface with PHENIX –ladder Technical options –SVX4 or MVD-TGV+AMU/ADC recut –other sensors.
Module Radiation Length. Goals Estimate the expected radiation length of a module, based on the design and measurements on as-built modules Determine.
Columbia University IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK VTX Electronics Integration E.J. Mannel Columbia University DOE Review June 2-3, 2009.
Upgrade with Silicon Vertex Tracker Rachid Nouicer Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) For the PHENIX Collaboration Stripixel VTX Review October 1, 2008.
DAQ 1000 Tonko Ljubicic, Mike LeVine, Bob Scheetz, John Hammond, Danny Padrazo, Fred Bieser, Jeff Landgraf.
B => J/     Gerd J. Kunde PHENIX Silicon Endcap  Mini-strips (50um*2mm – 50um*11mm)  Will not use ALICE chip  Instead custom design based on.
H. Krüger, , DEPFET Workshop, Heidelberg1 System and DHP Development Module overview Data rates DHP function blocks Module layout Ideas & open questions.
Si Strip FEE Vince Cianciolo VTX Group Meeting 01 June 2004.
Week 22: Schematic Week 23-Week 27: Routing Gerber files have been available since 9th July 1st prototype: – PCB manufacturer: supervised by KIT – Cabling:
Silicon Pixel Detector for the PHENIX experiment at the BNL RHIC
RPC Front End Electronics
SVT detector electronics
PHENIX forward trigger review
The LHCb Front-end Electronics System Status and Future Development
Presentation transcript:

PHENIX Barrel Vertex Tracker (VTX) Front End Electronics for the Strip Layers Vince Cianciolo, Oak Ridge National Lab Project Readiness Review 01/19/2005

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE2 Outline System Overview –Readout Cards (ROCs) –Front End Modules (FEMs) Some Details –SVX4 –ROC Control Chip (RCC) –Space/Trace Analysis –Thickness Considerations –Bandwidth Considerations Current R&D Status Cost & Schedule Determination

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE3 Readout Cards (ROCs) Each 3x6cm sensor has 1536 channels, 1 ROC. –Implemented as a small aluminum/kapton flex cable. –Each requires 12 SVX4 chips and 1 ROC Control Chip (RCC, details later).

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE4 Ladders Signal traces and power layers (already inherent in ROC) connected at ROC edges to form one signal and power bus per ladder w/o extra material. 5 or 6 ROCs per ladder forms one detector azimuthal segment.

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE5 Front End Modules RCCs drive/receive LVDS signals across a bus out of the active area (few meters) to a rack of Front End Modules (FEMs). FEMs are the interface to the PHENIX DAQ: –Clock and Fast Control. –Data Collection Modules. –Slow Controls. FEM Rack

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE6 A Different System View

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE7 Some Numbers Strip LayersLayer 3Layer 4Sum Ladders Sensors/Ladder56 Sensors, ROCs, RCCs SVX4s1,0801,8722,952 Channels138,240239,616377,856

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE8 SVX4 128 channel chip tested chips being purchased by RIKEN from FNAL µm TSMC process (inherently rad hard). Compatible with PHENIX DAQ: –Sufficient L1 latency (w/ analog pipeline). –Multi-event buffering (4 events). –Simultaneous digitization/readout and acquisition. –106 ns RHIC clock sufficiently close to 132 ns Tevatron clock. Designed for C detector = 10-35pF: –Noise fC –S/N for 625µm sensors Power consumption ~ 3mW/channel. Designed for AC-coupled sensors: –Strip-pixel sensors are DC-coupled. –Dark current considerations strongly suggest using RC-chips (Hamamatsu) to provide AC coupling. Provide selectable on-chip 0-suppression w/ robust common-mode noise rejection: –Double correlated sampling (store difference between samples separated by ¾ of a clock cycle). –Write-amplifier pedestal subtraction. –Dynamical pedestal subtraction (if there’s an offset present on a majority of channels due to common mode noise, this can be subtracted before 0-suppression). Latch-up probability greatly reduced (requires 200 mA) due to SVX4 epitaxial layer/low- resistance substrate fabrication process.

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE9 ROC Control Chips (RCCs) RCC functionality: –State machine to direct serial control and data transfer. –Dual FIFO to allow simultaneous conversion (digitization + SVX4 readout) and data transfer to FEM, each in < 40 µsec. –Reduces # clock lines on bus. –Isolates effects of single-point failures. –Simplicity allows full FPGA prototyping, postponement of technology decision. ASIC vs. FPGA choice driven by: –Radiation tolerance. –Size, thickness.

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE10 Is There Room? Control signal daisy-chain Data signal daisy-chain Power daisy-chain Control signal daisy-chain Data signal daisy-chain Control signal ladder bus into RCC Data signal ladder bus into RCC SVX4 to RCC bus Vertical Trace Layer Horizontal Trace Layer Control Signal Bus Data Signal Bus RCC/SVX4 Bus ROC trace count almost entirely accounted for in connections from the RCC to/from the ladder bus and the SVX4s. –This number is reasonably well fixed by the SVX4. Figures to the right show a sketch of a possible trace layout to scale (100µm space/trace) showing that two trace layers is likely sufficient. Sufficient space also exists for edge connections.

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE11 How Thick Is It? Assumed bus structure shown at right. ATLAS-style (conductor/polyimide) ROC much thinner than CDF-style (BeO). –Crucial for PHENIX because ROCs cover entire area of strip layers. Material summary shown below. Reductions from proposal: –Eliminate substrate (small cards self-supporting). –Cu  Al (hope to capitalize on pixel-layer R&D). 24 um aluminum ground plane 16 um polyimide 24 um aluminum power plane 16 um polyimide 12 um aluminum signal plane 16 um polyimide 12 um aluminum signal plane 16 um polyimide 0.2 um gold flash + 4 um nickel plating ComponentMaterial X0 (mm) Length (mm) Width (mm) Scale Factor Height (um)Qty%X0 Ground/Power planesAl Capacitors, resistors, epoxy, wire-bond encapsulationEstimate based on CDF hybrid0.147 SVX4Silicon Throughhole platingAl Trace planesAl Polyimide Adhesive RCCSilicon Gold flashGold Nickel platingNickel Photoresist Total 0.411

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE12 Front End Modules (FEMs) FEM serves as interface between RCC and the PHENIX DAQ (GTM, DCM, Serial Control). –Functionally similar to PHENIX FEMs developed at ORNL. –Different physical interfaces. Testbench designed to incorporate much of the required FPGA code but with USB/PC interface. RCC FEM FPGA GTM DCM Serial Control PC Testbench Control Card

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE13 Data Format Data format not important at this point except as a demonstration that testbench development should be directly portable to the FEMs. Data Sent by RCC to FEM Word TypeBits 15-8Bits 7-0Note 01000, 4-bit RCC Address0Once per ROC 1BCLK 15-8BCLK 7-0Once per ROC (value sampled on receipt of LVL1) 21001, 4-bit SVX4 AddressL1 SampleOnce per SVX4 30, 7-bit Channel AddressADCPotentially multiple values per SVX4 4FF If this is missing there is a conversion error: a) PRI_OUT is high when ENDDAT_FEM arrives, b) Data exceeds RCC FIFO depth. Data Sent by FEM to DCM Word TypeBits 16-0Note 0FFFFDCM-required header word 1Strip Barrel IDFixed # unique to strips. 2Event # 3Module IDA unique # for each ladder 4Flag Word0-suppression on/off 5FEM BCLK Value DataCopies of RCC/FEM word types 0-3 (drop empty SVX4, RCC addresses) 10Error WordBit 15: 5th Level-1, Bits 13-8 RCC/FEM BCLK match (1 bit per RCC), Bit 7: Data Transmission incomplete, Bits 5:0 Conversion Errors 11FEM Serial #Hard-coded on FEM Boards 12 FEM Firmware Version #Encoded in FEM FPGAs 13Parity WordBit-wise XOR of word types DCM-required trailer word

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE14 Current R&D Status ROC implemented as four “hybrid boards” plus one “RCC board”. –Large form factor allows for easier probing and debugging. Boards fabbed. Firmware and control GUI far along: –Correct signal pattern for serial control, digitization, readout seen at hybrid header (as determined by previous work w/ CDF hybrid). Goal is to complete debugging and start testing with sensors in March.

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE15 Budget Estimation Procedure Different components broken out into four categories. –R&D –Design –Prototype –Fab Further subdivided to give WBS elements which are defined by: –WBS dictionary page –Systematic contingency calculation –Cost sheet

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE16 Strip ROC Budget

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE17 Strip FEM Budget

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE18 Key Budget Assumptions Prototyping rounds: –ROC: four (including two at nominal size, thickness). –FEM: two (doesn’t take credit for testbench control card development). –RCC: one (as an ASIC, after thorough debugging as an FPGA). Spares: –Require 10% *working* spares. –Assume 80% ROC yield, 90% FEM yield. Estimate total 3000 engineering hours. Physicist hours not included in project costs. All institutional overheads included.

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE19 Sample Dictionary Page

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE20 Contingency Calculation Technical, cost, and schedule risk weights TechnicalCostScheduleRisk weight Material cost OR labor rateSame for all1 Design OR manufacturingMaterial cost AND labor rate2 Design AND manufacturing4 Technical, cost, and schedule risk factors TechnicalCostScheduleRisk factor Existing design and off-the-shelf hardwareOff-the-shelf or catalog item1% Minor modifications to an existing designVendor quote from established drawingsNo schedule impact on any other item2% Extensive modifications to an existing designVendor quote with some design sketches3% New design, nothing exoticIn-house estimate based on previous similar experienceDelays completion of non-critical path subsystem item 4% New design, different from established designs or existing technology In-house estimate for item with minimal experience but related to existing capabilities 6% New design, requires some R&D but does not advance the state-of-the-art In-house estimate for item with minimal experience and minimal in-house capability Delays completion of critical path subsystem item 8% New design, development of new technology which advances state-of-the-art Top-down estimate from analogous programs10% New design, way beyond the current state-of-the-artEngineering judgment15% Each item in the WBS is assigned three risk factors (F) and three risk weights (W). –State of design –Basis of cost estimate –Schedule criticality C = F i W i, where repeated indices imply summation. C = 4x6% + 2x15%+ 1x8% = 62%

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE21 Sample Cost Sheet

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE22 Strip ROC Electrical equivalent (no thinning) Thinned, nominal form factor Pre-production Production

V. Cianciolo, Si Strip FEE23 Si Strip FEE Team ORNL –Physics: VC (Subsystem Manager), K. Read, D. Silvermyr, C. Zhang, S. Batsouli. Experience with PHENIX FEE, DAQ and testbench development (MuID, Pad Chamber) and with project management. –EE: M. Bobrek (Lead Engineer), K. Castleberry, B. Bryan, U. Jagadish, C. Britton. Both digital and analog expertise. Specific experience with many PHENIX subsystems. ISU –Physics C. Ogilvie, J. Lajoie, postdocs TBD. Experience with PHENIX L1 trigger. –EE G. Sleege Experience with PHENIX L1 trigger.