C. F. Bedoya

C. F. Bedoya May 13th, * The goal was to establish a baseline plan for DT in Phase 2, (although some aspects of phase 1 also needed discussion) * It was a very effective meeting, we managed to discuss many different topics in this two days. * Very little disagreement in general, DT community shares a very similar view on the steps to take. Phase 2 : Running until 2030 (20 years operation) 3000 fb -1 by 2030 Instantaneous Luminosity of cm -2 s -1 After LS3 (2022) Level1 trigger 1 MHz rate and 20 us latency ? What we need to change? How much it will cost? When we are doing it? -Aging -Radiation tolerance -Readout speed -Trigger rates

C. F. Bedoya May 13th, Aging: Decrease of efficiency, resolution degradation, increase of noise... - Polymerization (Silicone): deposits in the anode wires - In our case: gas free of hydrocarbons, no Si in o-ring, high quality glue, etc - No indications of particular worries for the chambers so far - Plan: collect various information from the construction times and from chambers aging literature. - We will revisit the situation after the outcome from LS1 maintenance interventions and with VDC information. - With this in hand, we could plan specific tests (GIF, etc) - Strategy for now is to enlarge chamber longevity by taking preventive actions, such as lowering the High Voltage working point - We decided to perform a study of efficiency and time resolution vs HV with cosmics during LS1 - We also encourage performing simulation studies either in physic channels or at detector and trigger performance levels about the degradation obtained by loss of detector parts.

C. F. Bedoya May 13th, A complete summary of tests performed in FE electronics was shown: - Radiation tests until HL-LHC levels are positive, as well as aging tests - No wear-out information can be extracted so far. - LS1 maintenance could give more light but only 4 FEBs failed. - Base plan for now is to extend their longevity by taking preventive actions, such as lowering the High Voltage in the chambers and lowering if possible the cooling temperature (reduce Minicrate power consumption) - IF any FE part needs replacement, we agreed the only reasonable way is to replace a full chamber.

C. F. Bedoya May 13th, Possibility of replacement of one ore two complete Barrel stations (from 24 up to 120 chambers) with a different detector type is not discarded as a measure to obtain a safe scenario independent from aging issues, but no concrete plans to go into this direction are drawn yet. Also, replacement of one station in YB0 is considered extremely difficult, in particular, under the solenoid. - Presentation also about studies done by Matching DT+Tracker (only Long Barrel available). Important requirements are inferred in case of a new type of detector to substitute DTs. - Good angular and position resolution, also momentum measurement - Both station 1 and 2 would be needed. - Particularly important to reduce number of ghosts and to increase theta resolution. - Best non expensive candidates seem to be drift/proportional tubes with cathode readout, even new RPCs with strips along the Y axis could be useful. MB1+MB2?

C. F. Bedoya May 13th, * Burn-in, lifetime tests and P5 experience: not enough information * Radiation tests: - Altera FPGAs and UARTs show that they may not survive HL-LHC, therefore, most if not all of the CCB and SB will need to be rebuilt. - ROB radiation tests have been performed only up to half of HL-LHC doses - ROBs can stand 20 us latency but they will not work beyond kHz L1A * Outcome: replacing a fraction of the boards inside the Minicrates is extremely unsafe and time consuming. Accordingly, we decided that we have to perform a full box Minicrate replacement * With a scaffolding this operation can be relatively fast and allow also simultaneous working inside the solenoid to Tracker and ECAL. * Time estimated for Minicrate replacement is approximately 1.5 years plus commissioning, i.e., we need a 2 years shutdown.

C. F. Bedoya May 13th, Muon rates vs beam energy Estimated occupancy region

C. F. Bedoya May 13th, Unique board type, aprox 6 boards/Minicrate - Time digitization of all incoming hits followed by direct data forwarding (exploit full resolution) - Targeting an Actel chip: 1 ns resolution based on quadrature method - GBT system for readout, TTC and slow control fibers/Minicrate - Lower power consumption - Event matching (readout) and Trigger algorithms performed in USC electronics - Developing the Trigger algorithms is a very major task - Latency required is an important outcome (more likely to be in 6 us than in 3.8 us) A mixed scenario with old type and new type of Minicrate does not look feasible at this point => full Minicrate replacement needs to happen during a unique long shut down (LS3). A working group for R&D on the new Minicrate has been created:

C. F. Bedoya May 13th, SUMMARY So far we believe chambers and internal FE electronics will survive HL-LHC. If they do not, we will think about replacing one full station instead of individual parts. Minicrates will not survive most likely at HL-LHC independent of L1A parameters R&D has started for a new type of Minicrate + new trigger primitives algorithm Aim: replace all of the Minicrates in one goal in LS3 Time estimated for the replacement aprox years With scaffolding, it can be compatible with ECAL and Tracker work New system is most likely incompatible with present one. New system will be simpler at detector level. Complexity is brought to USC Required latency needs to be studied when we advance with the algorithm development (quite complex part). For the moment we can just hope it will not go beyond 6 us. DTs rough estimated cost ~7 MCHF for Phase 2

C. F. Bedoya May 13th, * Tests performed reading trigger signals with Avago+FPGA show no major stopper for the OFCU-TRG production. * TwinMux architecture and production plans were presented. Schedule is pretty aggressive: 2015 – validation on a slice 2016 – full deployment * Possibility to include HO outputs as if they were RPC inputs to the Twin Mux was risen; investigate. * Requirements for the new ROS and for the Twin Mux are the same except for the inner functionality of the firmware (number of input and output links, TTC information, link to the AMC13, etc). * Accordingly it was decided to use the same hardware of the Twin Mux for the new ROS. * Main doubt at present is if the budget of the new ROS (that is foreseen for later) can follow the early expected production of the Twin Mux

C. F. Bedoya May 13th, * A working group has been formed to perform studies that will merge DT+RPC information in order to improve triggering before Phase 2. * At present focus is on chamber primitives improvement * Ultimate goal would be to obtain improved algorithms also at track finder level. * Status so far is working on setting up the machinery and explore playground

Big constraint: large time needed to perform any intervention in our detector. Very unlikely that we get access time for all of our needs: LS1.5?: new pixel LS2: HCAL, GEMs?, GRPC? LS3: New Tracker, New ECAL FE Whatever we invent, will likely need to coexist with present electronics but at the same time, the architecture could be completely different if 20 us latency is granted... C. F. Bedoya May 6th,

C. F. Bedoya May 13th,