1. LHC Collimators Motor Drive control & Position Readout and survey AB/ATB/LPE 8/11/2006

2. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 2/37 OUTLINE Collimators’ requirements  Motor movements  Position Readout and Survey PXI and Alternatives  Motor Drive Control  Position Readout Conclusions

3. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 3/37 The Collimator Control Architecture

4. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 4/37 OUTLINE Collimators’ requirements  Motor movements  Position Readout and Survey PXI and Alternatives  Motor Drive Control  Position Readout Conclusions

5. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 5/37 Collimators’ requirements Motor Drive Control  The jaws of the collimators are moved by stepping motors, to ensure repeatability of the movement within the uncertainty defined by the mechanical play.  Mechanical play has been measured to be below 30 µm on all the collimators received so far.  Cumulated error due to mech. play to be compensated by either re-alignment to position sensor reading or by step-counter reset on home position (mechanical end-stop)

6. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 6/37 Collimators’ requirements Motor Drive Control  Each jaw is moved by two motors.  The two jaw supporting shafts are rigidly connected to the jaw.  Skew movements are executed by (slightly) deforming the structure of the jaw.  It is recommendable (for a number of reasons) to synchronize as much as possible the two axes.  Qualitatively we verified a very different vibration regime from no synchronisation (> msec: lot of noise) to good synchronisation (~0.1 msec: no noise at all)  1 st requirement  1 st requirement: synchronisation of two motors of the same jaw better than 1 msec

7. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 7/37 Collimators’ requirements Motor Drive Control  Jaws’ positions need to be controlled at 20 µm level (if possible)  At 2 mm/sec, 20 µm  10 msec.  Synchronisation across the different collimators is implemented by CSS, that sends triggers to each MDC (no CERN timing card required in low- level).  Local or external accurate clock is required to keep the jaws synchronised in between two triggers.

8. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 8/37 Collimators’ requirements Motor Drive Control Trigger delay Start jitter Profile duration Stop jitter Trigger delay: <1ms Start jitter: <1ms Stop jitter: <10ms Profile duration: ~15÷30 minutes Provided by CSS and daisy chained on different LLFE (jitter < 1 µsec) Determined by platform chosen. Determined by local clock

9. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 9/37 Collimators’ requirements Motor Drive Control: additional feature  Movement during phases of acceleration will be driven through functions sent by the CSS  The MDC will have to be able to execute profiles of movement with a duration up to 30 minutes (max delay between two successive triggers sent to CSS).  The MDC shall be able to download a new profile from the CSS while still executing another profile

10. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 10/37 Collimators’ requirements

11. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 11/37 Collimators’ requirements Motor Drive Control : Summary  Synchronisation within same jaw: <1 msec  Synchronisation from jaw to jaw, all along the movement function: < 10 msec  The MDC shall be able to download a new profile from the CSS while still executing another profile

12. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 12/37 OUTLINE Collimators’ requirements  Motor movements  Position Readout and Survey PXI and Alternatives  Motor Drive Control  Position Readout Conclusions

13. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 13/37 Collimators’ requirements Position Readout and Survey  It is required to read and transmit the position of each position sensor (LVDT) at a rate of 50 Hz (minimum) or 100 Hz (wish).  The function of position sensors is SAFETY. The PRS will raise an interlock in case the collimator position goes too far for example during automatic Beam based alignment.  Position to be compared with Limit Function managed through MCS  That gives 10 ms to read the signals, clean them from noise, calculate the position, compare it with the limit function and raise the interlock.

14. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 14/37 Collimators’ requirements Acquisition speed:  At 250 kS/sec (16 bits), and 1000 point acquired, reading 1 channel takes 4 msec.  Each PRS has a minimum of 28 channels to read (for LVDTs).  Simultaneous sampling (no MUX) is therefore mandatory to keep 100 Hz (or even 50)!!!

15. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 15/37 Collimators’ requirements Position Readout and Survey  Summary  ~250 kS/sec (16 bits)  Simultaneous sampling

16. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 16/37 OUTLINE Collimators’ requirements  Motor movements  Position Readout and Survey PXI and Alternatives  Motor Drive Control  Position Readout Conclusions

17. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 17/37 PXI and Alternatives PXI  OPEN Industrial standard governed by a consortium of ~70 companies, lead by National Instruments but including bigs like Keithley, Rohde & Schwarz, Agilent.  Countless applications in Industry, Scientific institutions (NASA, ESA, ESO…), Military (control of helicopters), and for control of Nuclear plants.  Used at CERN for Magnet testing (SM18), no use (to my knowledge) for accelerator controls

18. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 18/37 PXI and Alternatives PXI

19. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 19/37 PXI and Alternatives PXI  Triggering with 1 ns skew  Internal clock (10 MHz) stability down to 45 ppb  High data rate: 132 MB/s, we need less than 1  High reliability backplane connectors (Compact PCI).  Compatibility with new PCI Express standard (giving up to 6 GB/s data rate and high frequency clocks > 20 MHz).

20. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 20/37 PXI and Alternatives PXI : Generic configuration  2 x 8 slot chassis for 1 (few cases), 2 (90% of the installation) or 3 collimators (point 3).  3 collimators x chassis is going to be very challenging because of the reduced space in the available racks. Even if investment cost would be lower, maintenance would be a nightmare.  PXI n. 1 : Motor Drive Controls:  Motor control, resolvers, end stroke switches, interlocks, trigger  PXI n. 2: Position Readout and Survey  LVDTs, Interlocks, trigger.

21. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 21/37 PXI and Alternatives PXI : Motor Drive control  Based on FPGA.  1 FPGA x collimator (Motor and resolver). Very practical to port the configuration among 1, 2 or 3 collimators per chassis.  FPGA provides speed (reacts and executes commands within 80 µsec) and reliability. Should we need further functionalities in the future we just reprogram it.

22. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 22/37 PXI and Alternatives PXI : Position readout and Survey  Generation of sinusoids at different frequency.  Probably based on FPGA (if not, standard DAQ, which absorbs more CPU resources)  LVDT reading  ADC, algorithm and comparison to limit function in the CPU.

23. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 23/37 PXI and Alternatives PXI : CPU  Based on 2 GHz INTEL Core DUO T2500 Dual core processor  2 Gbytes RAM  1 Gbyte Solid State disk (instead of hard disk)  Possibility of remote software reboot.  OS: Pharlap  Language: Labview RT

24. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 24/37 PXI and Alternatives

25. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 25/37 PXI and Alternatives MTBF

26. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 26/37 PXI and Alternatives PXI : FESA  No solution available to run it on Pharlap.  With the help of Clara Gaspar (PH) and the support of National Instruments we succeeded to compile DIM under Pharlap and LynxOs.  DIM Server runs on PXI, Client on LynxOs.  IT/CO supports DIM for the experiments.  National Instruments agreed to support DIM under Pharlap (or any future OS) for 20 years.  NI solution (“shared variable”) to publish data under Linux to be available in March 2007. If fast enough we can get rid of DIM. FESA Gateway (and CSS) will have to run under Linux.

27. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 27/37 PXI and Alternatives PXI : FESA Latency: ~6 ms PXI MDC or PRS (Labview RT) DIM Server PC Gateway: Linux or LynxOS CSSDIM Client FESA Server

28. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 28/37 PXI and Alternatives PXI : FESA Latency : ? (to be measured in March) PXI MDC or PRS (Labview RT) Shared Variable Server PC Gateway: Linux CSS Shared Variable client FESA Server

29. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 29/37 PXI and Alternatives VME : FESA Latency : ~ 6 ms PXI MDC or PRS (Labview RT) FESA Server PC Gateway: Linux or LynxOs CSS FESA Client

30. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 30/37 PXI and Alternatives VME:  Motor controller:  Delta-τau (USA): up to 16 axes  Analog Input:  ICS (USA): 32 channels, 24 bits at 100kS/S simultaneous sampling.  Proof of principle done (it works).  It’s more expensive, less flexible (we cannot re- program the motor controller if needed)  Slower ( no 100 Hz).  Implies manpower from CO (Drivers).

31. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 31/37 VME: Measured Performance Stepping motor Controller 12 axis Trigger delay0.44 ms Start Jitter0.44 ms Stop Jitter0.44 ms an external 100 kHz reference clock is needed (to be provided by CSS). Clock integrity in daisy chain? CPU RIO 3Positioning monitor frequency50 Hz with 14 LVDTs (2 collimators) FESACommands transfer rate~6 ms average updating time (to be confirmed) Data Acquisition transfer rate(under measurement) PXI and Alternatives

32. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 32/37 PXI: Measured Performances FPGA cardTrigger delay80 us Start JitterFew us Stop Jitter30 us after 20 minutes profile CPU PIV 2.0 Ghz Positioning monitor frequencyAt least 100 Hz with 14 LVDTs (2 collimators) and with the LVDT signals processing in the system DIM-FESA gateway Commands transfer rate6 ms average updating time with 100 bytes command Data Acquisition transfer rate2 ms average updating time with 1000 bytes data block PXI and Alternatives

33. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 33/37 PXI and Alternatives NameFeaturesPrice [EUR] Crate (x2) ELMA, System 11, 7U19” x 7U x 290mm, 12 slots 6’150.- CPU (x2)CES, RIO3 Low-costPowerPC8’900.- AIICS-110BL-3232ch x 108kHz10’470.- AOICS-115-1616ch x 100kHz8’290.- Controller Delta Tau, Turbo PMAC2 12 Axis Trigger delay = 0.44ms 6’430.- Total46’670.- Eur/CHF: 1.56  Total = 72’805 CHF x 2 coll. Phase 1 = 54 systems: 3.93 MCHF Problem 14U !!!!

34. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 34/37 PXI and Alternatives PXI : For 54 systems (2 PXI x 2 Collimators) cost is ~2.5 MCHF (~41000 CHF x 2 coll.) Cost is therefore 63% of VME This price includes also cables, Patch panels and optocoupled fan-outs (not included in VME slides)

35. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 35/37 Collimators’ requirements PXI : Drawbacks PROBLEMStrategy Not a standard AB/CO hardware Long term (20 years) support negotiated with NI. Open standard. Backward compatibility of new NI hardware. OS update not more than once / ~5 years No AB/CO supported solution to install FESA on Pharlap DIM Shared variable

36. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 36/37 PXI SolutionVME Solution Motion Synchronization Few tens us <1 ms Motion Trigger Delay 84 us0.44 ms Tuning: motion commands updating time 10÷20 ms5 ÷10 ms Position survey frequency > 100 Hz> 50 Hz ReliabilityNo experience New cards used Space requirements Very compact solutionWe have to buy special VME crate 400 mm deep Drawbacks Not supported by AB/CO New cards not supported by AB/CO Price for 2 coll. ~ 45000 CHF >72000 CHF Purchasing time Approved by Finance Committee market survey PXI and Alternatives

37. R. Losito, AB/ATB - Collimators Controls Review, 18/12/2006 37/37 Conclusions Specificity of the LL control system is a direct consequence of tight specifications (high accuracy, high speed, synchronisation). PXI flexible, cheap and reliable No known experience in accelerator operation. Known problems identified and solved. SPS test confirmed robustness of the system VME alternative solution exist, but 40% more expensive.