Phase2 Level-0 Calo Trigger ● Phase 2 Overview: L0 and L1 ● L0Calo Functionality ● Interfaces to calo RODs ● Interfaces to L0Topo Murrough Landon 27 June.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Digital Filtering Performance in the ATLAS Level-1 Calorimeter Trigger David Hadley on behalf of the ATLAS Collaboration.
Advertisements

JFEX Uli Schäfer 1 Uli Intro / overview / issues Draft, will change !!!! Some questions flagged.
The First-Level Trigger of ATLAS Johannes Haller (CERN) on behalf of the ATLAS First-Level Trigger Groups International Europhysics Conference on High.
Phase-0 Topological Processor Uli Schäfer Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz Uli Schäfer 1.
L1Calo – towards phase II Mainz upgraders : B.Bauss, V.Büscher, R.Degele, A.Ebling, W.Ji, C.Meyer, S.Moritz, U.Schäfer, C.Schröder, E.Simioni, S.Tapprogge.
ATLAS L1 Calorimeter Trigger Upgrade - Uli Schäfer, MZ -
Phase-0 topological processor Uli Schäfer Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz Uli Schäfer 1.
Level-1 Topology Processor for Phase 0/1 - Hardware Studies and Plans - Uli Schäfer Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz Uli Schäfer 1.
Uli Schäfer 1 S-L1Calo upstream links architecture -- interfaces -- technology.
Uli Schäfer 1 (Not just) Backplane transmission options.
S. Silverstein For ATLAS TDAQ Level-1 Trigger updates for Phase 1.
Samuel Silverstein Stockholm University L1Calo upgrade hardware planning + Overview of current concept + Recent work, results.
Uli Schäfer 1 (Not just) Backplane transmission options Uli, Sam, Yuri.
The ATLAS trigger Ricardo Gonçalo Royal Holloway University of London.
Uli Schäfer 1 (Not just) Backplane transmission options.
Samuel Silverstein Stockholm University L1Calo upgrade discussion Overview Issues  Latency  Rates  Schedule Proposed upgrade strategy R&D.
February 19th 2009AlbaNova Instrumentation Seminar1 Christian Bohm Instrumentation Physics, SU Upgrading the ATLAS detector Overview Motivation The current.
FEX Uli Schäfer, Mainz 1 L1Calo For more eFEX details see indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?contribId=73&sessionId=51&resId=0&materialId=slides&confId=
Uli Intro / overview / issues
Copyright © 2000 OPNET Technologies, Inc. Title – 1 Distributed Trigger System for the LHC experiments Krzysztof Korcyl ATLAS experiment laboratory H.
Topology System Uli Schäfer 1 B.Bauß, V.Büscher, W.Ji, U.Schäfer, A.Reiß, E.Simioni, S.Tapprogge, V.Wenzel.
1 1 Rapid recent developments in Phase I L1Calo Weakly 25 Jul 2011 Norman Gee.
L1Calo Intro Cambridge Group, Dec 2008 Norman Gee.
JFEX baseline Uli Schäfer 1 Uli. Intro: L1Calo Phase-1 System / Jets Uli Schäfer 2 CPM JEM CMX Hub L1Topo ROD JMM PPR From Digital Processing System CPM.
April CMS Trigger Upgrade Workshop - Paris1 Christian Bohm, Stockholm University for the L1 calorimeter collaboration The ATLAS Trigger Upgrade.
S. Rave, U. Schäfer For L1Calo Mainz
Ideas about Tests and Sequencing C.N.P.Gee Rutherford Appleton Laboratory 3rd March 2001.
ATLAS Trigger / current L1Calo Uli Schäfer 1 Jet/Energy module calo µ CTP L1.
SL1Calo Input Signal-Handling Requirements Joint Calorimeter – L1 Trigger Workshop November 2008 Norman Gee.
JFEX Uli Schäfer 1. Constraints & Numerology Assumption: one crate, several modules. Each module covers full phi, limited eta range Data sharing with.
JFEX Uli Schäfer 1 Mainz. L1Calo Phase-1 System Uli Schäfer 2 CPM JEM CMX Hub L1Topo ROD JMM PPR From Digital Processing System CPM JEM CMX Hub L1Topo.
Mark Thomson University of Cambridge WP6: L1Calo Upgrade.
JFEX Uli Schäfer 1 Mainz. L1Calo Phase-1 System Uli Schäfer 2 CPM JEM CMX Hub L1Topo ROD JMM PPR From Digital Processing System CPM JEM CMX Hub L1Topo.
Calorimeter Digitisation Prototype (Material from A Straessner, C Bohm et al) L1Calo Collaboration Meeting Cambridge 23-Mar-2011 Norman Gee.
ATLAS and the Trigger System The ATLAS (A Toroidal LHC ApparatuS) Experiment is one of the four major experiments operating at the Large Hadron Collider.
16 February 2011Ian Brawn1 The High Speed Demonstrator and Slice Demonstrator Programme The Proposed High-Speed Demonstrator –Overview –Design Methodology.
Hardeep Bansil (University of Birmingham) on behalf of L1Calo collaboration ATLAS UK Meeting, Royal Holloway January 2011 Argonne Birmingham Cambridge.
L1Calo Installation Status Murrough Landon, QMUL Level-1 Calorimeter Trigger (University of Birmingham, University of Heidelberg, University of Mainz,
ATLAS and the Trigger System The ATLAS (A Toroidal LHC ApparatuS) Experiment [1] is one of the four major experiments operating at the Large Hadron Collider.
August 24, 2011IDAP Kick-off meeting - TileCal ATLAS TileCal Upgrade LHC and ATLAS current status LHC designed for cm -2 s 7+7 TeV Limited to.
Samuel Silverstein, SYSF ATLAS calorimeter trigger upgrade work Overview Upgrade to PreProcessor MCM Topological trigger.
Uli Schäfer 1 Mainz R&D activities. Uli Schäfer 2 MZ R&D BLT has been built and tested (backplane transmission only). A few minor issues were found. Possible.
Upgrade Intro 10 Jan 2010 Norman Gee. N. Gee – Upgrade Introduction 2 LHC Peak Luminosity Lumi curve from F.Zimmermann : Nov Upgrade Week ? ?
Introduction to L1Calo Upgrade L1Calo Collaboration Meeting Cambridge 23-Mar-2011 Norman Gee.
Samuel Silverstein, Stockholm University For the ATLAS TDAQ collaboration The Digital Algorithm Processors for the ATLAS Level-1 Calorimeter Trigger.
Schedule ● External Links ● Calorimeter Signals ● Internal Tests ● System Tests ● Combined Runs ● Schedule Murrough Landon 19 April 2007 A brief update.
EPS HEP 2007 Manchester -- Thilo Pauly July The ATLAS Level-1 Trigger Overview and Status Report including Cosmic-Ray Commissioning Thilo.
Phases: to be 2 or to be B? The question of new timescales ● L1Calo phase 2 → phases B and C? ● Implications for design ● Example timescales ● Organising.
L1 Technical Proposal: Phase 2 ● Slow progress on writing TP phase 2 – Distractions with beam and calibration – Also some things are still unclear ● Hence.
L1Calo Upgrade Phase 2 ● Phase 2 Functional Blocks? – Thoughts on L1 “refinement” of L0 ● Simulation framework ● Phase 1 Online SW Murrough Landon 2 February.
Phase 2 L1Calo/Calo Interface ● Introduction ● Calo RODs ● Granularity and algorithms ● Calo-L1Calo links ● L1Calo design? ● Summary Murrough Landon 9.
Rainer Stamen, Norman Gee
ATLAS calorimeter and topological trigger upgrades for Phase 1
L1Calo Upgrade Phase 2 Introduction and timescales
L1Calo Requirements on the DPS
Demonstrator Slice Possibilities and Timetable
L1Calo Phase-1 architechure
L1Calo upgrade discussion
ATLAS L1Calo Phase2 Upgrade
Online Software Status
Cabling Lengths and Timing
Possibilities for CPM firmware upgrade
Run-2  Phase-1  Phase-2 Uli / Mainz
The First-Level Trigger of ATLAS
Level-1 Calo Monitoring
ATLAS: Level-1 Calorimeter Trigger
Commissioning of the ALICE-PHOS trigger
(Not just) Backplane transmission options
U. Marconi, D. Breton, S. Luitz
TTC setup at MSU 6U VME-64 TTC Crate: TTC clock signal is
Presentation transcript:

Phase2 Level-0 Calo Trigger ● Phase 2 Overview: L0 and L1 ● L0Calo Functionality ● Interfaces to calo RODs ● Interfaces to L0Topo Murrough Landon 27 June 2011

, QMUL 2 Stockholm Baseline Phase 2 L1Calo Architecture

, QMUL 3 Stockholm L0Calo Functionality ● Real time algorithms: – Find EM clusters, Tau/hadrons ● Use fine granularity as much as possible to discriminate against QCD – Find jets ● Ideally on the same module, but separate jet system is an option ● Possibly larger size than at present, eg 1.2*1.2 in eta*phi? – Sum E, Et and missing Et components per L0Calo module ● Transmit results – EM/Tau/Jet RoIs and energy sums in real time to L0Topo ● On L0A also send them to L1Track and L1Calo ● Readout – Buffer results for eventual L1A ● Also send L0 readout to RODs for monitoring at L0?

, QMUL 4 Stockholm L0Calo Algorithms ● Sliding windows, now with finer granularity – Limitations will be fanout and number of inputs per FPGA ● Expect O(50) 10 Gb/s links into Virtex 7 ● Adopt L2 EM/Tau ideas – L2 “R core”: ratio of 3*7 to 7*7 LAr middle layer cells ● L0Calo bandwidth might require middle layer cells summed in pairs ● NB initial simulation results are disappointing for calo only trigger ● Investigating benefits of larger jet environment... – Present 0.8*0.8 eta*phi jets use 0.4*0.4 RoI maximum ● Better to know if 0.8*0.8 area is a maximum within its environment ● Problem: much larger fanout and more fibres per FPGA ● Larger environment with 0.1 granularity may need separate jet system ● Needs some simulation work...

, QMUL 5 Stockholm L0Calo Components (1) ● Optical fanout and patch network – Fibres from calo RODs need to be duplicated/reorganised ● Fanout across crate boundaries ● Regroup fibres for optimum layout of L0Calo modules? – Merge EM and hadronic fibres in same eta*phi area to minimise crossing tracks ● Separate L0 and L1 fibres from the same ROD ● May need active components if passive fanout is not good enough – Significant component which needs some R&D work

, QMUL 6 Stockholm L0Calo Components (2) ● Rear transition modules – Optical receivers and fanout to adjacent L0Calo modules ● Possible alternative: more optical and less electrical fanout ● Custom ATCA backplane – Transmission from RTMs to modules in same/next slots

, QMUL 7 Stockholm L0Calo Components (3) ● L0Calo module (Sam) – Cover 0.4*1.6 eta*phi ● Unless 0.8*0.8 shape better for fat jets? – Inputs via backplane – Find EM/Tau and Jet on same module ● In separate FPGAs ● Jet FPGAs resolve EM/Tau overlaps ● Transmit combined RoIs to L0Topo – Four full ATCA crates ● Or 8 for 0.8*0.8 option?

, QMUL 8 Stockholm L0Calo Components (4) ● Auxiliary modules – Clock/trigger distribution (“TCM”) ● But may not be room for a dedicated module per crate ● Distribute GBT signals directly to each module? ● Readout – L0 ROD to gather data for L0 accepted events – Local L0 event building to monitor trigger performance at L0? – Buffer data for readout to DAQ on L1A

, QMUL 9 Stockholm L0Calo System ● Four full ATCA crates (14 or maybe 16 slots) – Each crate processes one quadrant in phi – Alternative with 0.8*0.8 modules uses 8 partly full crates ● Two (or four) racks – Plus same again for fibre empire?

, QMUL 10 Stockholm Calo ROD – L0Calo Interface ● Calo Readout Driver (ROD) functions for L0Calo: – Derive calibrated Et from digitised pulses ● No issues with analogue saturation – Assign Et to correct bunch crossing – Provide quality flags from optimal filter (pile up, etc) – Form sums of calorimeters cells into “mini towers” ● Definition of mini towers (or “L0 primitives”) to be defined ● EM layer: both fine and coarse sums (for EM/Tau & Jet triggers) – Possibly run algorithms on cells within one ROD FPGA ● Eg pi0 rejection using LAr EM strips – Transmit mini towers to L0Calo – Pipeline full data (for every cell) for use by L1 stage (& DAQ)

, QMUL 11 Stockholm Calo ROD – L0Calo Links ● Baseline: 10 Gb/s links => 200 bits per bunch crossing – Assumes 25ns bunch crossings: half for 50ns LHC? ● Hadronic layer (and coarse EM sums for jet trigger): – One 10 Gb/s fibre link per 0.4*0.2 (or 0.2*0.4) in eta*phi ● Can have finer eta*phi and depth granularity than now for jets ● EM layer fine granularity for EM/Tau algorithms: – One 10 Gb/s fibre link per 0.1*0.1 tower ● 200 bits: more detail on eta, phi and depth ● Concentrate bandwidth on middle layer? – Contains most of the energy – Heavily sum the strips layer ● Links to L1Calo – Originally said 1 fibre per 0.4*0.2 (LAr): but may need more!

, QMUL 12 Stockholm L0Calo Inputs to L0Topo ● One (or two) fibre(s) per L0Calo module – 200 (or 400) bits per 25ns bunch crossing – Perhaps bits for Et, Ex, Ey, E – Leaves 120 (or 320) bits for RoI objects in 0.4*1.6 area – 25 bits per object => ~five (or twelve) RoIs per L0Calo module ● Five RoIs may be a bit tight, twelve seems luxurious ● 64 (or 128) inputs per L0Topo FPGA might be OK (or is too much) ● Suggestion: separate objects from sums – One (underused) fibre for Et, Ex, Ey, E ● Processed in dedicated L0Topo FPGA – Second fibre for about eight EM/Tau/Jet RoIs

, QMUL 13 Stockholm L0Topo Implementation & Algorithms ● Implementation much like phase 1 proposals? – Few modules in (part of) one ATCA crate – All (or most) fibres duplicated to each module ● But different modules may run different sets of algorithms ● All energy sum fibres to one module? Results via backplane ● 64 L0Calo RoI fibres plus muon fibres may be too much for one FPGA ● Algorithms – Also similar to phase 1 ● Benefitting from greater precision in eta, phi and Et ● Though EM/Tau overlaps with Jets hopefully removed at L0Calo ● Scope for additional algorithms... – Possible benefit in having total E for use in missing Et algorithms?

, QMUL 14 Stockholm R&D Work ● Already designing ATCA demonstrators for phase 1 ● More demonstrators being planned – Study PCB simulation: really understand high speed links – Tests needed for optical fanout and patching ● Medium term: build up “slice” of full phase 2 system L0A L0 Muon L0 Calo FEX L0 Topo (global) L0 CTP L1 Topo (global) L1Calo FEX L1 CTP Calo ROD mini towers full granularity calo data

, QMUL 15 Stockholm Points of Attention ● Calo ROD – L0Calo links: bandwidth and organisation – Changes have major impact on ROD and L0Calo organisation – Status of LAr LOCs6? – Impact of increasing eta*phi space of “jet” fibres – What if (when?) LHC irrevocably decides for 50ns bunches – Need to recheck required bandwidth to L1Calo ● Usefulness (or not) of fine granularity – More simulation and/or new algorithm ideas ● Keep high granularity L0Calo as preferred option in case of surprises ● Implications of larger jets ● R&D programme, timescale, division of labour...