GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 1 GLAST Large Area Telescope: Face to Face Managers Meeting LAT Integration & Test April 13, :00 PM Integration and Test 2 towers and next six month Elliott Bloom I&T Manager Ken Fouts I&T Engineering Manager SLAC Eduardo do Couto e Silva SVAC Manager Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 2 Last Month's Accomplishments (1 of 2) Management –Tracking hardware shortages for LAT integration. –Supported Environmental Test Planning at NRL –Procedure Status –65 of 69 released or submitted for sign-off IFCT –Validated EGSE in the grid with EM TEM’s prior to connection to flight HW. –Developed and demonstrated with the 1x4 a process for TPS replacement in the grid. –Installed Kapton tape on TKR cables. –Two tower tests underway (ECD 5/11)

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 3 Online –Beyond 2 towers –Housekeeping multi-pen strip chart GUI –Parallelizing INT scripts –Trying to move some LATTE 5 features into production earlier (e.g., HSK, LATc) –E-logbook –Added ability to search shift logbook with Google Desktop –Implementing requested improvements –Continued supported of CAL, TKR, INT and test suites. –Supported data taking, trigger and E2E script development. –Problem assessment and fixes a large part of online workload –NCRs, support for clean room operations, support of subsystems scripts. –CCB activity and JIRA maintenance Last Month's Accomplishments (2 of 2)

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 4 I&T MGSE/Grid Activities Tower A & B in the Grid Mass simulators installed EM PDU and GASU EGSE shelf and cable service loop EGSE harness routing Harness service loop

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 5 Procedure Status 69 documents total 65 latest versions submitted for sign-off 59 are released

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 6 Procedure Status (1 of 6) – Management

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 7 Procedure Status (4 of 6) – IFCT Electrical

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 8 Procedure Status (6 of 6) – Particle & SVAC

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 9 I&T NCRs by Month Open/Closed Status Month NCR Opened Current Status As of May 10th Last Month

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 10 Online progress LATTE –CCB JIRA number 34 GPIB support for Agilent power supply (Brian) RS-485 support for BPU Simpson meters (Brian) ACD GASU problem (Jim provided work-around and a fix for LATTE) LTE-254: SW verification passes, but in elog, the SW shows red. Fix this inconsistency (Brian) LTE-251: If rcReport generation fails, wrong rcReport line is extracted from rcReport.out during export LTE-257: Message logger does not launch

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 11 LATTE 5 overview (updated) LATTE 4-5 S/C VSC Flight Software (Vx Works) Commanding Science Data Monitoring CMD Raw Arch Run Control Loading of Scripts C&T database Mnemonics CCSDS CMD Raw Arch CMD UN-CCSDS Analysis HSK Raw Arch Science Data UN-CCSDS UNCOMPRESS LDF MySQL Script XML Schema Config LATc file Consumer Etc Raw Arch SC/Tlm ? PPS Discretes GPS Display Client Reset

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 12 Two Tower Test Status as of 5/11/05

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 13 I&T Detail Schedule (1 of 2)

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 14 I&T Detail Schedule (2 of 2)

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 15 Issues & Concerns ISSUES Availability of flight assembly hardware. –Shortages identified by I&T and being worked with Subsystems. TEM/TPS Deliveries Flight Cables CONCERNS Continued support from subsystems for NCR closure. TPS rework and replacement, availability for future tower installations. Need firm delivery dates for third layer ELX boxes LATTE 5.0 ready Oct. 1 for use in LAT Functional testing due to start 10/14. E2E tests start 11/1.

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 16 SVAC –Successful turn around for calibration of two tower data –ready before data taking started ! –Joint effort TKR/CAL/SAS/SVAC –Offline data processing system under CCB and working well –Thanks to Richard Dubois –So far no major problems seen with single tower data –See next slide Last Month's Accomplishments

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 17 “Issues” for single tower tests: offline analysis “Issues” for single tower tests: offline analysis CAL_HI and CAL_LO fired without any crystal hits –Most likely due to direct deposition in diodes CAL_HI trigger fired without high energy deposition – Most likely due to direct deposition in diodes Discrepancy between TKR occupancy on top GTRC’s between DATA and MC in electronics space (generated STRXX) –Most likely due to the differences in particle composition between DATA and MC –Maybe a small fraction could be from CC FIFO buffers filled up in data (this is a feature not a bug) Discrepancy between Data and MC for TKR dead channel list –Partially disconnected channels are not simulated Discrepancy calculated and measured event size (generated STR3) –Miscalculations based on wrong assumptions for event multiplicities Discrepancy between GEM and TriggerAlg for trigger types –Analysis software (TriggeAlg) is not a realistic representation of GEM since it does not address threshold/calibration differences Discrepancy in trigger rates for 1,5,10 and 20 KHz runs, underestimated for low rates and overestimated for high rates at a few % level –Rates from generator were not known to better than a few %, so it is consistent with measurements –overestimation had to do with deadtime since some events did not make into the stream Compared events that triggered BOTH the TKR and EXT pulse generator running at 20KHz with events that trigger TKR only, former had lower hit multiplicity (generated STR8) –Reason was that when a trigger window was opened (on raising edge) by EXT the TKR signal was already on for some time which means some of the hits already died away by the time we looked at. Expect this to be more frequent a higher rates Distribution for TKR trigger arrival times was not flat –Needed to select EXT trigger to open the window and then make the same plot and naturally the spike disappears There is consistently 10-15% more triggers seen during the 5 and 10kHz runs than expected as measured by the exponential fit to the delta event time register of the GEM. TKR only triggers is around 85% (TBR) of the time when the muon telescope triggers Under investigation Investigation has not started Closed

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 18 The Oscar goes to…

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 19 …Anders Borgland !

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 20 Two Tower Tests Baseline Run : Flight Configuration There are triggers There are 0 events with Trigger Parity errors There are 0 events with Packet errors There are 20 events with TEM errors Time of first trigger: Thu May 5 20:48: (GMT) Time of last trigger: Thu May 5 21:48: (GMT) Duration: 3601 seconds Rate: 82 hz Reconstructed positions 79% single track events 14% two-track events Calibrated Energy Spectrum Expected to peak at 100 MeV

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 21 Two Tower Tests Baseline Run : Flight Configuration Average TKR multiplicity per plane ~ 2 Average CAL multiplicity per layer ~ 1.4 Average CAL Energy/layer ~ MeV Multiplicities are consistent with expectations

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 22 Time Between Events: Baseline Run

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 23 Time Between Events: Non-Zero Suppr.

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 24 Two Tower Tests Baseline Run : Reconstructed Z Direction Tracks passing through 1 tower only Tracks passing through both towers Tracks coming from top of the tower Cos  = -1 Maximum trigger acceptance is reduced and is consistent with expectations based on geometrical calculations Selection cuts: Single track events Ratio between predicted and measured MIP > 0.7 and < 1.3 From Anders…

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 25 Two Tower Tests Baseline Run : Sum of Crystal Energies in the CAL Tracks passing through 1 tower only Tracks passing through both towers Energy calibrations work within a tower and across towers Energy in MeV Selection cuts: Single track events Ratio between predicted and measured MIP > 0.7 and < 1.3

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 26 Two Tower Tests Baseline Run : Total Radiation Length Selection cuts: Single track events Ratio between predicted and measured MIP > 0.7 and < 1.3 Number of Radiation Lengths Tracks passing through 1 tower only Tracks passing through both towers Expect 10 radiation lengths!

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 27 Selection cuts 1 track Difference in predicted track precision and measured CAL position < 20 mm in x and y Two Tower Tests Baseline Run : CAL Energy per Layer From Dave…

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 28 Two Tower Tests Baseline Run : MC vs DATA Tower 0 Tower 4

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 29 Science Data vs. Housekeeping Data Tower 0, bottom layer Tower 0, top layer Tower 4, bottom layer Tower 4, top layer Time Temperature Hit multiplicity From Xin…

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 30 Priorities for Data Analysis for 2 towers We proposed to the Collaboration to analyze these runs first –We are identifying names to be attached to the list below –1/1 – baseline –Check trigger types and rates, event sizes, raw and recon distributions for tracks within one tower and across towers –Monte Carlo comparison –2/1,2/2 – baseline and change PDU PS values –First time we have a Power Distribution Unit. Could it be a source of noise? If so, can the raw distributions tells us? –2/6, 2/7 – read TKR from Left or Right only –Cable lengths are different between odd and even numbered towers, but the DAQ takes that into account. Let’s check it by comparing raw and recon distributions from both towers. Select events that triggered at the center and at the edges –4/1 to 4/4 – baseline with pulse 1,5,10,20 kHz –Muon distributions should not be affected by high rates from pulse generator –Do we understand the deadtime? –B2 – nominal settings TEM diagnostics enabled –It is just like 1/1 but with TEM diagnostics ON –B10 – CAL HE muon gain, 4 range readout, TEM diagnostics enabled –Calibrate TOT –measure dead strips –Calibrate edges of crystals –B13 – CAL HE muon gain, 4 range readout, Zero Suppression disabled –Check pedestals in the CAL –Trend pedestals, muon peaks, log ratios, what else?

GLAST LAT Project Managers F2F 5/11/ Integration and Test 31 Wrapping up… Single tower data analysis –No show stoppers yet –Generated few special test requests Good start with two tower data –Runs finished this morning –Will distribute data to Collaboration today More to come… –Join us in the Instrument Analysis Weekly Meetings –Friday 8 am PDT (VRVS) –Still looking for more people… –Our web site glast.slac.stanford.edu/IntegrationTest/SVAC/Instrument_Analysi s/Instrument_Analysis.html