layout of the tof wall

15
K.Wisniewski Uni.Heidelberg CBM Meeting 04.2010, GSI 1/14 Layout of the TOF Wall Basic requirements and boundaries Modular design Hit rates Read-out chain Radiation Placement of the electronics Summary

Upload: david-wilcox

Post on 03-Jan-2016

28 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Layout of the TOF Wall. Basic requirements and boundaries Modular design Hit rates Read-out chain Radiation Placement of the electronics Summary. Basic requirements. Full system resolution : s T ~ 80 ps , distance to targ. ~ 10 m, area ~ 150 m 2 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Layout of the TOF Wall

K.Wisniewski Uni.Heidelberg CBM Meeting 04.2010, GSI 1/14

Layout of the TOF Wall

• Basic requirements and boundaries

• Modular design

• Hit rates

• Read-out chain

• Radiation

• Placement of the electronics

• Summary

Page 2: Layout of the TOF Wall

K.Wisniewski Uni.Heidelberg CBM Meeting 04.2010, GSI 2/14

Basic requirements

• Full system resolution : T ~ 80 ps , distance to targ. ~ 10 m, area ~ 150 m2

• Eff. > 95 % , acceptable cross-talk, charge-sharing and space resolution

• Rate capability ~ 20 kHz/cm2

• Occupancy < 5 % => pile-up, double hit < 5%

• Low power electronics (~75.000 channels), free running, ~30 ps

Page 3: Layout of the TOF Wall

K.Wisniewski Uni.Heidelberg CBM Meeting 04.2010, GSI 3/14

1,5m

Layout of the TOF Wall

1m

Pad/narrow strip region: 2.5 x 2,5 cm2 (rate: 20 - 8 kHz/cm2 , area: 12 m2 , #SM: 8) Strip/narrow strip region: 25 x 1 cm2 (rate: 8 - 3.5 kHz/cm2 , area: 24 m2 , #SM: 16) Strip region: 50 x 1 cm2 (rate: 3.5 – 1.5 kHz/cm2, area: 36 m2 , #SM: 24) Strip region: 50 x 1 cm2 (rate: 1.5 – 0.5 kHz/cm2 , area: 48 m2 , #SM: 32)

Questions to be answered : rate/resolution capability, granularity

In order to accommodate the different granularities as a function of the polar angle, four different regions were defined:

Page 4: Layout of the TOF Wall

K.Wisniewski Uni.Heidelberg CBM Meeting 04.2010, GSI 4/14

Modular design

1 SM with 120 pad RPC

active area is not overlaped

active area: 5 x 25 cm2 (~5 cm2 / ch)

read out: single ended

channels: 120 x 20 = 2400 / SM

glass: low resistive / ceramics

1 SM with 20 strip RPC

active area slightly overlaped

active area: 32 x 25 cm2 (~25 cm2 / ch)

read out: both sides

channels: 20 x 32 x 2 = 1280 / SM

glass: low resistive

1 SM with 10 strip RPC

active area slightly overlaped

active area: 32 x 50 cm2 (~50 cm2 / ch)

read out: both sides

channels: 10 x 32 x 2 = 640 / SM

glass: low resistive

1 SM with 10 strip RPC

active area slightly overlaped

active area: 32 x 50 cm2 (~50 cm2 / ch)

read out: both sides

channels: 10 x 32 x 2 = 640 / SM

glass: float (+ warming up)

In total ~ 75000 channels

Page 5: Layout of the TOF Wall

K.Wisniewski Uni.Heidelberg CBM Meeting 04.2010, GSI 5/14

Example pad / strip for the hottest part

Pad MRPC developed at Tsinghua

13 cm

Pad:2 cm x 2 cm

Pad structure of the pickup electrode

Ceramics RPC developed at Rosendorf

Page 6: Layout of the TOF Wall

K.Wisniewski Uni.Heidelberg CBM Meeting 04.2010, GSI 6/14

Mean hit rate / channel

MinBias Au+Au @ 25 AGeV, 10 MHz interaction rate10-2 hits / event /channel => double hit ~ 1%

Page 7: Layout of the TOF Wall

K.Wisniewski Uni.Heidelberg CBM Meeting 04.2010, GSI 7/14

FrontEnd configuration

FEET-PADI FEET-TDC R2F ROC

Central (8SM) 300 300 43 22

Middle 1 (16SM) 160 160 23 12

Middle 2 (24SM) 80 80 12 6

Outer (32SM) 80 80 12 6

In total ~ 700 ROCs

PADI x 8 chan.

FEET

SYSCORE

Page 8: Layout of the TOF Wall

K.Wisniewski Uni.Heidelberg CBM Meeting 04.2010, GSI 8/14

Data rate / GET4

GET4 message size : 25 bits/hit, other message (epoch): ~40 kHz

Page 9: Layout of the TOF Wall

K.Wisniewski Uni.Heidelberg CBM Meeting 04.2010, GSI 9/14

Data rate / ROC

2 R2F connectors / ROC => 2x4 x 2x7 = 112 channels / ROC (2x14 GET4/ROC)ROC message size : 50 bits / hit20% overhead More GET4 / ROC is possible & necessary

2.5 Gbit/s output of the opt. link

Page 10: Layout of the TOF Wall

K.Wisniewski Uni.Heidelberg CBM Meeting 04.2010, GSI 10/14

Radiation – CMB Year

WFJ. Müller

Page 11: Layout of the TOF Wall

K.Wisniewski Uni.Heidelberg CBM Meeting 04.2010, GSI 11/14

Total Integrated Dose @ TOF

FLUKA simulations

PADI will get a few kRad / yIs not be a problem even for FPGA

Tested (KIP) up to 700 kRadEffects partially anneal with time

Page 12: Layout of the TOF Wall

K.Wisniewski Uni.Heidelberg CBM Meeting 04.2010, GSI 12/14

Single-Event Upsets – FPGA scrubbing

• Realistic scrubb. speed : 1 bit / 2 ns (~12ms / ~80Hz )

• Tests (KIP) show that only ~1/3 of all SEUs actually affect the running design

• Redundancy implementation can handle at least 1 functional error per scrubbing cycle

→ 3 SEUs per scrubbing cycle (12ms) affordable

→ max. SEU-Rate: 3/12ms = 250/s

• Cross section for proton SEUs: < 5*10-13 cm²/bit

• SEU-Rate = #(bits) * (cross-section) * (flux)

#(bits for Virt4-FX20) ~6*106 bit

↔ max. flux ~ O(107) protons/(cm²*s)

• Heavy ion cross section significantly higher

(up to ~10-8 cm²/bit)

• Larger FPGA => longer scrubb. cycles

Page 13: Layout of the TOF Wall

K.Wisniewski Uni.Heidelberg CBM Meeting 04.2010, GSI 13/14

Placement of the read-out electronics

808080808080808080

808080808080808080

80801601601601601608080

80801603003003001608080

8080160300 3001608080

80801603003003001608080

80801601601601601608080

808080808080808080

808080808080808080

808080 + 8080 + 8080 + 8080 + 8080 + 808080

80801601601601601608080

80 + 8016015015015015015016080 + 80

80 + 80160150   15016080 + 80

80 + 80160150   15016080 + 80

80 + 80160150   15016080 + 80

80 + 8016015015015015015016080 + 80

80801601601601601608080

808080 + 8080 + 8080 + 8080 + 8080 + 808080

FEET-PADI on the detector

FEET-TDC may be shifted

ROC more outside, but cabling can be an issue

Page 14: Layout of the TOF Wall

K.Wisniewski Uni.Heidelberg CBM Meeting 04.2010, GSI 14/14

Summary

• Areas of different requirements defined

• Modular design, different granuralieties, technologies

• Double hit, occupancy not an issue

• Rate capability/resolution of the existing RPC- prototypes not obvious

• Read-out chain being prototyped KIP and tested KIP,GSI ; final design not there yet

• Data rates under control

• Radiation on the electronics can be coped with, proper/redundand design necessary

• Placement of the electronics dependant rather on cabling/cost/in-beam material budget

Page 15: Layout of the TOF Wall

K.Wisniewski Uni.Heidelberg CBM Meeting 04.2010, GSI 15/14

Layout of the TOF Wall