1. Some thoughts on the New Small Wheel Trigger Issues V. Polychronakos, BNL 10 May, 2011 1

2. The Problem with High pT Triggers ProposedTrigger  Provide vector A at Small Wheel  Powerful constraint for real tracks  With pointing resolution of 1 mrad it will also improve pT resolution  Currently 96% of High pT triggers have no track associated with them Current Endcap Trigger  Only a vector BC at the Big Wheels is measured  Momentum defined by implicit assumption that track originated at IP  Random background tracks can easily fake this 2

3. 3

4. Toy Monte Carlo  Generate track at a given angle  Track crosses a strip at a random position  Generate primary ionization clusters Poisson distributed  Generate number of electrons for each cluster  Take strip with earliest time and charge over a certain threshold as the track’s coordinate Strip pitch = 0.5 mm Reconstruct track and compare slope with the generated one No transverse diffusion considered but effect is negligible for the first arriving cluster 4

5. Sanity Check Distributions of MC generated Events 10 o tracks Earliest arrival 10 o tracks 5

6.  Average spatial resolution below 0.5 mm for all angles in Small Wheel acceptance  Time of first cluster above threshold mostly below 25 nsec  Requiring, e.g, 3 out of 4 detectors to be within a BC should result in ~100% efficiency  Address of strips can be directly used in a lookup table (e.g. Content addressable memories similar to FTK 40 deg 30 deg 20 deg 10 deg 40 deg 10 deg 30 deg 20 deg Position and Timing Resolution as a function of incidence angle 6

7. Slope Resolution L= 10 cm L= 20 cm L= 25 cm 7

8. Trigger/DAQ Block Diagram 8

9. Block Diagram of the IC being designed For TGC there will be fewer (16 or 32) channels with LVDS outputs of individual discriminators All other features remain the same To SRS 9

10. Timing Diagram 40 MHz BC clock convenient for LHC but any clock can be used to related hit with trigger accept Fine Time to next BC 10

11. Small Wheel Counting Rates in kHz/cm2 Radiation flux maps from GCALOR (M.Shupe) 750.0 760.0 90.0 100.0 0.676965 750.0 760.0 100.0 110.0 0.531924 750.0 760.0 110.0 120.0 0.462974 750.0 760.0 120.0 130.0 0.428746 750.0 760.0 130.0 140.0 0.372947 750.0 760.0 140.0 150.0 0.353284 750.0 760.0 150.0 160.0 0.293642 750.0 760.0 160.0 170.0 0.262680 750.0 760.0 170.0 180.0 0.226831 750.0 760.0 180.0 190.0 0.188895 750.0 760.0 190.0 200.0 0.186949 750.0 760.0 200.0 210.0 0.185153 750.0 760.0 210.0 220.0 0.158295 750.0 760.0 220.0 230.0 0.134239 750.0 760.0 230.0 240.0 0.128854 750.0 760.0 240.0 250.0 0.113969 750.0 760.0 250.0 260.0 0.103517 750.0 760.0 260.0 270.0 0.102746 750.0 760.0 270.0 280.0 0.100118 750.0 760.0 280.0 290.0 0.840098E-01 750.0 760.0 290.0 300.0 0.954108E-01 750.0 760.0 300.0 310.0 0.861459E-01 750.0 760.0 310.0 320.0 0.870514E-01 750.0 760.0 320.0 330.0 0.797542E-01 750.0 760.0 330.0 340.0 0.706889E-01 750.0 760.0 340.0 350.0 0.703702E-01 750.0 760.0 350.0 360.0 0.565054E-01 750.0 760.0 360.0 370.0 0.543138E-01 750.0 760.0 370.0 380.0 0.434476E-01 750.0 760.0 380.0 390.0 0.457534E-01 750.0 760.0 390.0 400.0 0.433348E-01 750.0 760.0 400.0 410.0 0.469865E-01 750.0 760.0 410.0 420.0 0.401987E-01 750.0 760.0 420.0 430.0 0.341343E-01 750.0 760.0 430.0 440.0 0.326369E-01 750.0 760.0 440.0 450.0 0.302566E-01 750.0 760.0 450.0 460.0 0.287393E-01 750.0 760.0 460.0 470.0 0.285842E-01 750.0 760.0 470.0 480.0 0.278045E-01 750.0 760.0 480.0 490.0 0.206697E-01 750.0 760.0 490.0 500.0 0.187729E-01 750.0 760.0 500.0 510.0 0.245147E-01 Z1 Z2 R1 R2 Rate Z1 Z2 R1 R2 Rate EIL0 (CSC) EIL1 EIL2 EIL3 Trigger 11

12. Taking ONLY the first arriving hit per 64-Channel IC reduces the number of Channels used for Trigger from 2M  ~30,000, while maintaining spatial resolution <0.5 mm But are we paying a price for this? i.e. efficiency loss? Consider worst case at  = 2.4: Rate r = 10 kHz/cm 2, strip length l = 50 cm, strip width w = 0.5 mm Occupancy/BC = rlwt = 6.25x10 -4 Probability per Front End IC [%] Probability per Chip per Bunch Crossing Probability per Chip per 3 Bunch Crossings Probability per Chip per 5 Bunch Crossings # Hits 096.188.781.9 13.810.616.5 >=20.10.61.6 12

13. 13

14. Can transfer 2 addresses in 1 BC If 2 parallel paths each handling 16 chips then 4 hits can be moved in 1 BC Is 200 MHz clock too aggressive? (long ~0.5 m connections) Develop custom digital ASIC? 14

15. GBTx (Gigabit tranceiver) Chipset, being developed at CERN Will combine bidirectional data transfer, TTC, and DCS 4.8 Gbps (2.56 Gbps data, 160 Mbps DCS, 640 MBps TTC), + (1.28 Gbps FEC, 160 Mbps Header) First generation prototypes exist, a clock driver error resulted inreduced bandwidth Production estimated by the end of 2012 15

16. 16

17. An Example 17

18. Existing chip developed by the CDF Pisa group 18

19. Time Required (BC) Muon TOF 1 Detector Response (drift time) 1 Front End Response (peaking time) 2 -- 3 Front End to GBTx 2 To USA15 (80 m fiber) 15 GBTx FPGA to CAM (up to 5 addresses per BCID) 1 – 2 CAM Read (160 MHz clock) 2 – 3 To Sector Logic1 – 5* Total 25 – 32 * Assumes that existing sector logic clocked @ 40 MHz 19

20. Summary/Work needed Readout and Trigger concept that seems feasible MOST of the electronics processing is for the trigger Concept reduces the 2M channels to ~30,000 – eliminates argument that Mmegas will be much more expensive because of channel cnt. One optical fiber per layer (GBTx assumed) Need development of one or two digital custom Ics Probably can piggy-back on front end development Need extensive electronics engineering effort (U. Az already on board, Saclay is very much interested Need extensive simulation work Need demonstration prototype with existing CDF CAM or FPGAs asap hopefully by October test beam? 20

21. Additional Slides 21

22. status / notes Analog section completed Peak/time detection in progress Common circuitry in progress Digital sections Physical layout Fabrication 1 st prototype CMOS 130nm, 1.2V, MPW, by Summer 2011 Q max = 330 fC ENC (e - ) C IN [pF] 200ns Charge Resolution 5k 2000 0 peaktime 25ns 50ns 100ns 1.2 time [ns] 0 Amplitude [V] 0 150 Pulse Response Q in = 300 fC Analog section: transistor-level simulations power ≈ 4 mW VMM1 IC Schedule and Status 22

23. TTC Specs # specificationmintypmaxunitnote Number of outputs8 Frequencies40, 80 and 160MHzindividually programmable per output, set by control word Freq[1:0] Phase resolution50psSet by Delay[8:0] DNL20%LSB (50ps) INL30%LSB (50ps) Jitter RMS5ps Jitter P-P30ps Temperature coefficient 5ps/deg Supply coefficient50ps/V Logic levelsProgrammable: CMOS/LVDS Synchronized with the 40Mhz main clock