Strip Tracker Costing Analysis Status Carl Haber July 25, 2011

Overview Can mainly derive a costing framework here Only consider CORE Will depend upon eventual layout, and CHF/item Seek a framework which can be easily adapted to layout variations and new assumptions Key inputs include costs and yield estimates – Yields based upon SCT/Pixel experience – Yields based upon present R&D experience – Yields based upon cost = specifications Other options – Industrialization – Number of sites/task: efficiency vs. activity

Costing History See USG 6/2011 presentation from Phil – A.Clark: attempt at bottom-up for Utopia – M. Tyndel: parametric based upon SCT – S.McMahon: rationalized MT analysis – But all were influenced by SCT experience Itemized comparison not possible in general due to differing methodology Similar conclusions for total cost based upon very different internal assumptions

Are there important differences as compared to SCT? ASICs will have (at least) 256 channels and are smaller Much less internal cabling, buses for TTC and power No TPG heat spreaders Hybrids will be panelized for mass production, assembly, and test Barrel support structures will be simpler since we do not need to mount modules nor dress cooling and cables There will be no discs upon which modules are mounted, only support rings/struts for petals Overall cost may dictate that work is broken down by item rather than site – economy of scale advantages (?)

Previous Costings (Core) SCT: 45 MCH M. Tyndel SCT scaled: 150 MCHF S. McMahon: rationalized: 80 MCHF A. Clark analysis: 70 MCHF – Most detailed, but a bit hard to follow – Expresses total module cost rather than breaking out items as they will be procured – ASICs types and counts need to be updated – Mechanical support, stave core not handled

Comparisons from Prior Work Mike T. SCT CoreFactor Cost scale Steve AC Barrel AC Discs Sensors ASICs Modules Opto LMT Offdet LV power HV power Cables DCS Engineering Total SCT

Components Stave Core – Facings: bulk material, cut to shape – Foam: critical patterning and gluing operation – Pipe assembly: forming and pressure certification – Edges: machining? – Bus tapes: commercial order, critical QA aspect to maintain yield of stave Module – Sensor: pre-spec’d from vendor, loss due to handling damage – Hybrid Substrate: commercial mfg, loss in parts mount, test ABCn130 HCC/DCS PPC Discretes End-of-Stave: critical reliability aspect – Substrate: commercial mfg, loss in parts mount, test – ASICS – Discretes – Connectors/cables: potential high cost, critical reliability aspect

chips discrt Complete staves Cores ready to load facings foam pipes edges Bus tapes modules ready for staves sensors hybrids EOS

Inputs Sensor costs (N.Unno): – Strip: 70 KCHF per wafer type and 1100 CHF per piece/wafer Strip ASIC {note: chip numbers in USG 6/11 not correct) (ABCn130) costs (P. Farthouat): 163K good die: 440 wafers = 1.55MUSD, NRE = 0.5 MUSD = 1.64 MCHF = 10 CHF/good ABCn130 (Prototype cost : 2 times NRE = 1 MUSD) HCC, PPC, GBT Hybrids Stave cores and tapes

Stave/Petal Core Mechanical/Tapes CF facing material – K13D2U, 65 grams/m 2., 52 KCHF/22 Kg = 2.36 KCHF/Kg – 1 stave requires 6 x m x 1.3 m x 1.5 (excess) = 1.4m 2 x 65 =.091 Kg – 2.36 x = 215 CHF/stave Foam – 960 CHF ($1200) per 1’x1’x1” block = 2400 cm 3 – X2 loss factor – 1 stave = 714 cm 3 : x 2 = 1430; (1430/2400)*960= 572 CHF Pipe: 3 m/stave Stainless steel negligable Titanium: 61 CHF/m: 184 CHF/stave Edge tube/C-channels: negligable Bus tapes: CHF each = 640 CHF/stave Total: = 1611 CHF/stave 521 staves * 1611 = 840 KCH Petal system area is about 40% of barrel: ~350 KCH

Utopia Barrel

Example Estimate Barrel stave Core only No setup costs, tooling, NRE No engineering, prototyping, pre-production No assembly, inspection, QA, or test equipment

Barrel Staves only, CORE, yield based, preliminary

Global Supports Comments Not included in estimate presented here, but, Barrels for staves, frames for petals Barrel is conceptually similar to SCT so OK to cost by scaling and inflation, but much simpler since no dressing – BNL analysis: 1.8 MCHF – A.Clark analysis: 3 MCHF Forward disc substrate is now gone and replaced by – Petal cores, now costed as part of cores – Support rings/frames, in principle (?) a more complicated fabrication than a thin barrel (?) not clear how to cost this – A. Clark analysis: 4.6 MCHF, seems too high… Parametric (S.M./M.T.) analysis based on SCT concluded that these supports would total 21 MCH! Clearly too large.

Comments Any new numbers presented here are preliminary and need to be checked further Fairly transparent structure for costing in an itemized and yield based manner Will extend to the disc system Need to look critically at the off stave cable and interconnect costs, off detector electronics Mechanical engineering aspects, outside the stave, are clearly a key area for study