1. 15 Sept 2009G. Rakness (UCLA)1 Paper progress On the Analysis Review Committee for the paper: “Performance of the CMS Cathode Strip Chambers with Cosmic Rays” –Ugo Gasparini (chair) –Alberto Benvenuti –Greg Rakness Each member independently read the paper and sent comments to the committee –Many of the comments were common across ARC members –Today agreed on the set of comments to send to editors  comments to go out tomorrow…

2. 15 Sept 2009G. Rakness (UCLA)2 New xml parameters added or moved Moved the following xml communication parameters within TMB code… alct_[rx,tx]_clock_delay, cfeb[0-4]delay –moved from DDD chip channels to phase shifter registers alct_posneg (this is functionally alct_rx_posneg) –moved from alct_stat_adr to phase shifter register Added the following parameters to the xml file… communication parameters: –alct_tx_posneg –cfeb[0-4]_rx_posneg TOF delay parameters –alct_tof_delay –cfeb_tof_delay –cfeb[0-4]_tof_delay Verified that they all get set at hard reset…

3. 15 Sept 2009G. Rakness (UCLA)3 CFEB rx delay with new firmware Setting cfeb[0-4]_rx_posneg=0, cfeb_tof_delay=0 TimeDelay 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 CFEB Id=0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CFEB Id=1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CFEB Id=2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CFEB Id=3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 CFEB Id=4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Best value is cfeb0delay = 12 Best value is cfeb1delay = 11 Best value is cfeb2delay = 12 Best value is cfeb3delay = 13 Best value is cfeb4delay = 11 Good window width = 11nsec It works with CFEB pulsing

4. 15 Sept 2009G. Rakness (UCLA)4 cfeb_tof_delay to cfeb[0-4]delay cfeb_tof_delay -------------- ---------------- 0 ddd_steps 12 nsec 2 16 4 21 6 0 8 3 10 7 12 10 Relationship 2 ddd_steps ~ 4 nanoseconds, as expected...

5. 15 Sept 2009G. Rakness (UCLA)5 Relation of cfeb[0-4]_tof_delay to cfeb[0-4]delay Now set... cfeb_tof_delay = 0 cfeb0_tof_delay = 0 cfeb1_tof_delay = 2 cfeb2_tof_delay = 5 cfeb3_tof_delay = 8 cfeb4_tof_delay = 11 Get best values of… cfeb0delay = 12  12 (TOF=0 value) + 0 nsec, as expected cfeb1delay = 15  11 + 4 nsec, as expected cfeb2delay = 22  is 12 + 10 nsec, as expected cfeb3delay = 3  expected (13 + 8*4) % 25 = 10.. hmm, not quite. cfeb4delay = 8  is 11 - 3 nsec, as expected

6. 15 Sept 2009G. Rakness (UCLA)6 Relation of alct_tof_delay to alct_[rx/tx]_clock_delay Setting (alct_rx_posneg/alct_tx_posneg) = (0,0) alct_tof_delay alct_rx_clock_delay alct_tx_clock_delay -------------- ------------------- ------------------- 0 ddd_steps 3 nsec 18 nsec 2 7 22 4 11 24 6 15 6 8 17 8 10 0 12 12 2 16 Looks like the expected slope of 2 steps in alct_tof_delay ~ step of 4 nanoseconds... except for from alct_tof_delay 4  10. Are we running into funny business with the posneg here? There are some oddities about the looks of these windows.

7. 15 Sept 2009G. Rakness (UCLA)7 Summary of communication windows vs. alct_tof_delay For the same cable length, different values of alct_tof_delay requires different combinations of (alct_rx_posneg,alct_tx_posneg) to get a large communication window (~90 spots). The value of pipe_depth where the data is OK depends on these posneg values. I would like to break apart the dependency of BC0 return on posnegs and the tof_delay.

8. 15 Sept 2009G. Rakness (UCLA)8 Plan to check dependency on (rx,tx) posnegs… If the BC0 return delay is correlated to the value of pipe_depth (where the data is correctly looped back from the ALCT)… At 904: if we use tof_delay=0 and look at different combinations of (rx,tx) posnegs, the value of pipe_depth goes from 11 to 13. (2bx difference)  Should be visible in the bc0 delay…

9. 15 Sept 2009G. Rakness (UCLA)9 Dependency on TOF… How about (rx_posneg,tx_posneg)=(1,0)? Let's see if we can measure rx,tx with a decent window size for all tof values... alct_tof rx tx pipe_depth window_size (rx x tx) -------- ---- ---- ----------- -------------------- 0 2 19 12 7 x 9 1 3 20 12 5 x 8 2 4 22 12 3 x 8 3 12 23 13 3 x 6 4 13 4 12 5 x 3 5 14 5 12 7 x 5 6 15 6 12 9 x 7 7 17 7 12 9 x 9 8 19 8 12 9 x 6 9 21 10 12 9 x 9 10 21 13 12 9 x 9 11 24 14 12 9 x 9 12 2 16 12 8 x 9 Big enough size, but not much difference in pipe_depth… 

10. 15 Sept 2009G. Rakness (UCLA)10 To do Dependency of BC0 delay on previous two slides… Write DPF contribution RPC efficiency in RAT …

11. 15 Sept 2009G. Rakness (UCLA)11 Backup slide (scans with old firmware) Using... 29 May 2009 ALCT firmware 4 June 2009 TMB firmware

12. 15 Sept 2009G. Rakness (UCLA)12 ALCT rx/tx scan Result (tx vs. rx) tx ----> 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== rx = 0 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 0 0 250 rx = 1 0 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 0 0 0 rx = 2 0 249 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 0 0 0 rx = 3 0 0 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 0 0 0 rx = 4 0 0 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 0 0 rx = 5 0 0 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 70 rx = 6 198 0 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 rx = 7 250 7 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 rx = 8 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 rx = 9 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 rx =10 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 rx =11 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 0 250 250 rx =12 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 0 0 250 Best value is alct_rx_clock_delay = 2 Best value is alct_tx_clock_delay = 12 Best value is alct_posneg = 0

13. 15 Sept 2009G. Rakness (UCLA)13 CFEB delay scan *************************** Find cfeb[0-4]delay: *************************** TimeDelay 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 CFEB Id=0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 CFEB Id=1 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 CFEB Id=2 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 CFEB Id=3 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 CFEB Id=4 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 Best value is cfeb0delay = 6 Best value is cfeb1delay = 7 Best value is cfeb2delay = 7 Best value is cfeb3delay = 7 Best value is cfeb4delay = 8