1. Fabrication Process Options Gary Varner Specification Details are often Application Specific Is IBM 130nm always the best choice? 1 6-OCT-2010 Electronics GPC Review

2. 2 An example app: single  timing Belle II imaging TOP (PID upgrade)

3. 3 Photo-detector: Hamamatsu SL-10 Approximate 1” x 1” 4 x 4 multi-anode Interesting mechanical challenges (case at HV) Lifetime protection

4. Gain Needed What gain needed? –At 10 6 gain, each p.e. = 160 fC –At 2 x 10 5 gain (better for aging), each p.e. = 32 fC –In typical ~5ns pulse, Vpeak = dQ/dt * R = 32uA * R = 32mV * R [k  ] (6.4mV) Amplifiers dominate board space Readout ASIC pair

5. 5 Highly integrated readout electronics 100mm high 147mm long front-end module

6. 6 SL-10 Timing Performance Nagoya Hawai’i σ ~ 38.37 Nagoya = constant fraction discriminator + CAMAC ADC/TDC Hawai’i = waveform sampling + feature extraction

7. Updated results – single  7  Relaxes needed bandwidth: 400-500 MHz looks adequate

8. 8 ASIC options ASICABW [GHz] Sampling [Gsa/s] # of Channels Amp G [dB] SCA depth Fab vendor Size [nm] PSEC3~2?~1040256IBM130 DRS4~1~58Ext.1kIBM250 BLAB3~0.2~482732kTSMC250 BLAB3A~0.7~483632kTSMC250 IRS1.04/88/4032kTSMC250 IRS2*1.54/8/12/16/3 2 8/4/3/2/1032kTSMC250 STURM2~310-100804x8TSMC250 TARGET2*~0.50.5-2163016kTSMC250 TARGET2B*1.00.5 - 416016kTSMC250

9. 9 About 1 submission every 3 months

10. 10

11. 11

12. 12 Project about 1 submission every 3 months

13. 13 About 1-2 submissions/month foreseen

14. 14 Discussion: Is IBM 130nm always best choice? CERN is certainly committed to the process Fewer fab options, process requirements fussier Many more designs in the 0.25um process: 2.5V VDD vs. 1.2V fA vs. pA leakage currents Other techniques to get same performance results? Do plan to submit further CSA design (later)

15. Backup Slides Some background context… 15

16. 16 Example  PDFs at 3 GeV/c e-e- e+e+ 40° 90° 120°

17. 17 Buffered LABRADOR (BLAB1) ASIC 10 real bits of dynamic range, single-shot Target few $$/channel Low power Measured Noise 1.45mV 1.8V dynamic range -3dB ~300MHz 6GSa/s 150MHz sine wave -- Pre-calibration

18. 18 CFD Test Conditions a)Fermilab test beam (120 GeV/c proton) b)Laser test setup c)Electronics calibration setup Test beam data raw (left) and time walk corrected (right). Laser results comparable.

19. 19 Constant Fraction Algorithm Relatively simple, but still some knobs to tune… – Between waveform points, is it better to use linear interpolation or something else (e.g., spline). – Which fraction optimizes timing resolution? 6/11/201019Nishimura - LAPPD Collaboration Meeting

20. 20