IBL Status, TDR & MoU G. Darbo – INFN / Genova ATLAS Week, 26 February 2010 o IBL Status, TDR & MOU ATLAS Week CERN, February 26, 2010 G. Darbo - INFN

IBL Status, TDR & MoUG. Darbo – INFN / Genova ATLAS Week, 26 February 2010o

IBL Status, TDR & MOU

IBL Status, TDR & MOU

ATLAS Week

CERN, February 26, 2010

G. Darbo - INFN / Genova

Indico agenda page:

IBL Status, TDR & MoUG. Darbo – INFN / Genova ATLAS Week, 26 February 20102

Talk OverviewTalk OverviewUpdate on technical progress in the IBL

• FE-I4: November readiness review, next submission.

• Stave: December review, baseline

• Sensor prototype program

• R/O: towards a baseline

Schedule• Chamonix impact on schedule

TDR and interim-MoU


Project GoalsProject Goals Improve Physics performance of the present Pixel Detector:

Reduce material budget to an “aggressive” 50% of B-Layer, i.e. <1.5 X/X0 at η=0

Have low R/O inefficiencies at LHC ultimate luminosity and above (2.3x1034 ÷ 3x1034 cm-2s-1)

Increase radiation hardness by a factor five: 5x1015 1MeV neutrons/cm2

Back-up existing tracking system in case of serious failure of the B-layer

Keep installation schedule for end of 2015• Insurance for hard failures of existing B-Layer and Pixel system

• Need a long LHC shutdown (8 months): no long term plans after 2012, but machine needs many shutdowns for the long list of upgrades to bring to the nominal and ultimate luminosity (phase I).

Work for a safe procedure to extract beam-pipe and insert IBL:• Damage could result in a downgrade more than an upgrade!

Let’s go through the major

IBL Technical progresses


Sensors - ConvergenceSensors - Convergence3 sensor technologies considered for IBL

• Planar, 3D and Diamonds

• Full scale prototypes with FE-I4 – Decision on spring 2010

Common agreed specifications:• Max fluence > 5 x 1015 1MeV neutrons / cm2

• Max power after full life dose < 200 mW/cm2

• Low dead area in Z: slim or active edge

• Maximum bias voltage (system issue) : 1000 V

Planar promising slim edge• Hamamatsu has shown <500µm edge can stand ~1000 V (on b-type at moment) – one

or two guard-rings

Diamonds: new producer – very promising results.• “II-IV Incorporated”: measured very promising Charge Collection Distance (CCD) of

230 µm @ 0.7 V/µm (not saturated) on 4 FE-I4 size sensors from a 1.5 mm thick wafer (standard production, not designed for HEP).

II-IV Incorporated4 FE-I4 size sensors

Ref: M. Mikuž– IBL GM 12/2/2010


3D Sensor – Common Floorplan

3D Sensor – Common Floorplan

The 4 producer facilities work on a common floorplan for FE-I4:• 150 wafers (same raw material bought in common), double side and single side (active

edge). Sharing process steps (wafer bonding, poly-silicon column filling).

• Processing runs starting now, expected (plenty of) sensors by summer.

Producers

8 x FE-I4

Ref: C. Da Vià – IBL GM 12/2/2010


FE-I3 FE-I4FE-I3 FE-I4FE-I4 Collaboration:Bonn: D. Arutinov, M. Barbero, T. Hemperek, A. Kruth, M. Karagounis.CPPM: D. Fougeron, M. Menouni. Genova: R. Beccherle, G. Darbo.LBNL: S. Dube, D. Elledge, M. Garcia- Sciveres, D. Gnani, A. Mekkaoui.Nikhef: V. Gromov, R. Kluit, J.D. Schipper

The first version of full FE-I4 chip will be submitted by end of March 2010

~70 million transistors, 0.13 µm CMOS technology6 Cu and 2 Al routing layers.

7.6mm

8mm active

2.8mm

FE-I3 74%

20.2mm

active16.8mm

~2mm

~200μm

FE-I4 ~89%

Ch

art

ere

d r

eti

cu

le (

24 x

32)

IBM

reti

cu

le

~19 mm

FE-I3 FE-I4Pixel size [µm2] 50x400 50x250

Pixel array 18x160 80x336

Chip size [mm2] 7.6x10.8 20.2x19.0

Active fraction 74% 89%

Analog current [µA/pix] 26 10

Digital current [µA/pix] 17 10

Analog Voltage [V] 1.6 1.5

Digital Voltage [V] 2.0 1.2

Pseudo-LVDS out [Mb/s] 40 160


FE-I4: Submission StatusFE-I4: Submission StatusSecond FE-I4 review (Nov 3÷4)

• Review board: F. Anghinolfi/CERN, R. Van Berg/U Penn, K. Einsweiler/LBNL, Ph. Farthouat/CERN, A. Grillo/UCSC, K. Kloukinas/CERN. X. Llopart/CERN, M. Newcomer/U Penn. I. Peric/Heidelberg. N. Spencer/UCSC.

• The review agenda with documentation and reviewer’s report (ATU-TC-MR-0002) are available at:

http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=72160

• Report Summary:

The second design review of the FEI4 was held on 3 and 4 November 2009. This report gives remarks and recommendations to the design team. Progress is excellent, but it is recommended to hold a brief final design review before the actual submission takes place.

Next steps:• March 17 (or 16 or 18 still TBD):

sign off meeting with review committee

• March 24: Final meeting – Probably engineer’s final sign-off.

• March 29:submission


BOC/RODBOC/RODConvergence in the VME BOC/ROD to a common design (Bologna, Genova, Göttingen, LBNL, Heidelberg, Wuppertal): workshop at CERN in Feb.

• Reduce overall design to 3 FPGA: one with a PowerPC core to replace master DSP functionality.

• Move functionality from the 4 slave DSP (for parameter fitting made during calibration) to external (standard) PCs: transfer raw histograms by Gbit ethernet for fittings in the PCs: a today PC core has an equivalent processing power of ~10 DSP of the existing ROD.

• The modernized VME system has advantage in performance (speed and double channel density) and simplified design (less components and unique software framework to design FPGA with embedded PowerPC)

• Already some work done in porting DSP code to standard PC and compiling the multi FPGA VHDL code into a single device.

Alternative option (SLAC) considers ACTA (Advanced Computer Telecommunication Architecture) technology (SLAC. Stony Brook)

• Use the ACTA standard instead of VME

• Other components in the standard ATLAS TDAQ need to be modified in hardware and software (no TIM, no SBC).

• Development system in place at CERN with a prototype board to read FE-I3 module.


Stave: Review and BaselineStave: Review and BaselineStave review hold on Dec.17:

• Reviewers: F. Cadoux, A. Catinaccio, M. Gilchriese, T. Jones, G. Viehhauser

Two main recommendations: Coolant and cooling pipe/fittings• Coolant: “Adopt CO2 cooling as the baseline for the IBL. The cooling plant should be a

copy of the LHCb VELO plant, with minimal modifications to adapt the system to the ATLAS geometry.”

• Pipe: Adopt metal cooling pipes as the baseline for the IBL. Significant efforts have already been invested in Titanium pipes, but more R&D is required for this technology (bending, connections etc.).

Decision from IBL Management and TC• IBL management and Institutes (D, F, I, CERN) participating in the Stave project fully

support the two recommendations. R&D and prototyping on C3F8 and Carbon Fiber pipes continue, but priority is given to baseline: CO2 and titanium pipes.

• From ATLAS TC side CO2 cooling plant and services are accepted. For maintenance and operation the IBL CO2 plant can be incorporated in the ATLAS cooling (similar to the other plants that exist already). There is no obvious show stopper to the installation of plant and services. There are no safety concerns given the very small number of pipes and very small quantity of CO2 (20g/s).


Stave Prototype OptionsStave Prototype OptionsSTAVE CARACTERISTICS SIMULATION RESULTS

Pipe ID/OD[mm]

Omega Thickness

[µm]

Foam Density[g/cm3]

Coolant X/X0 [%] Thermal Figure of Merit (Γ)

[ºC•cm2/W]Bare

Stave with Coolant

Full layer (+ Module

+ Flex)

CF pipe, heavy foam 2.4 / 3.0 150 0.55 C3F8 0.48 1.056 17.25

CF pipe, light foam 2.4 / 3.0 150 0.25 CO2 0.36 0.956 18.56

Ti 3mm pipe, light foam 2.8 / 3.0 300 0.25 C3F8 0.66 1.276 2.79

Ti 2mm pipe, light foam 2.0 / 2.2 300 0.25 CO2 0.57 1/166 3.22

Module parameters•Sensor thickness = 250 µm•FE-I4 thickness = 90 µm•Flex Hybrid (η = 0) = 0.18 % of X0

Additional technical requirements & prototype work:

• Max pressure of cooling pipe: 100 bar.

• Gravitational / thermal deformation < 150 µm.

• Develop pipe joints and fittings.

• Isolation of the carbon foam from sensor high voltage.

• Mock-up for thermal measurements.

Carbon Foam 0.25g/cm3

Carbon Foam 0.25g/cm3


IBL LayoutIBL LayoutBaseline layout decided

• 14 Staves, “reverse turbine” (there were two main options in Barcelona)

Beam-pipe reduction:• Inner R: 29 25 mm

Very tight clearance:• “Hermetic” to straight tracks in

Φ (1.8º overlap)

• No overlap in Z: minimize gap between sensor active area.

Layout parameters:• IBL envelope: 9 mm in R

• 14 staves.

• <R> = 33 mm.

• Z = 60 cm (active length).

• η = 2.5 coverage.


Extraction/InsertionExtraction/InsertionProgresses on many areas:

• Installation mock-up (Geneva) in bld 180

• Extraction/Insertion “table” (CERN/LPSC Grenoble)

• Guiding tube (Brandeis)

• Beam-pipe flanges

• IBL Envelopes

• ALARA

InstallationMock-up in bld.180


Guiding TubeGuiding Tube

To extract beam pipe and insert IBL use a “Guiding Tube”• Gravity sag of a simple unloaded 7 m-long tube (40 mm) is not acceptable

Working Model of the Long Guide Tube (Brandeis Un.) – Used by the muons• Extruded tube with hole for tension rod and guide for RASNIK inserts.

• Preformed so that it “falls” into a straight tube when unloaded.

• Additional instrumentation: temperature sensors and load cells.

• Control system to adjusted tensions based on RASNIK readings as load changes.

Internal sensors include 4 overlapping RASNIKs and temperature sensor.

Ref: J. Bensinger – IBL GM 12/2/2010


Other Areas of ActivityOther Areas of ActivityMost of the project is covered and many design, prototype work ongoing

FE-I4 single module test system (Bonn, Göttingen)

Bump-bonding (Barcelona, Bonn, Milano) • Prototyping with dummies at IZM and Selex

Flex-hybrid: (Bonn, Genova)• Multi-layer Cu/Al and stackable single layer/single module technology test

prototypes.

Internal services and data transmission (SLAC)

Opto-link, opto-boxes (Ohio SU, Oklahoma and Oklahoma SU)

LV PP2 (Milano), DCS (Wuppertal)

Module loading (Geneva, Marseille)

Test beam, telescope,…


Software SimulationSoftware SimulationSoftware simulation work ongoing:

• IBL Geometry implemented in the ATLAS ATHENA/GEANT4 framework

• Digitization for planar and 3D sensors

• Preliminary results with single track

• ttbar (and other physics) benchmark results ready (in discussion)

In a few week expected to have results of physics performance.

ATLAS no IBL

d0 for 1GeV muons z0 for 1GeV muons

ATLAS no IBL

ATLAS with IBL ATLAS with IBL

Disclaimer: plot below to show that the full machinery works… under discussion - need to be validated!

Ref: D. Tsybychev et al.


IBL Schedule & MilestonesIBL Schedule & MilestonesMajor milestones:

• FE-I4.v1 submission: end of March 2010

• Dummy-sensor bump-bonding prototyping: from now to ~Nov 2010

• Start bump bonding 1st batch of sensors & chips: August 2010

• First modules available: October 2010

• Sensor decision: in Jan 2011 or May 2011

• Submission of FE-I4.v2: March 2010: (is optimistic?! given the complexity of the chip and the measurements on version 1)

• Sign-off on stave design and release production: Oct 2011

• Loaded Staves completed: end 2013

• Service installation in the pit 2012

• Integration first half 2014

• Installation earliest: end 2014

Ref: H. Pernegger – IBL GM 12/2/2010


IBL Technical Design ReportIBL Technical Design Report

Editors: M.Capeans (CERN), K. Einsweiler (LBNL)

Chapter Editors: G.Darbo, T.Flick, M.Garcia-Sciveres, C.Gemme, H.Pernegger, O.Rohne, R.Vuillermetand quite many Contributors to different chapters: A.Andreazza, O.Beltramello, A.Catinaccio, I.Dawson,

D.Ferrere, KK.Gan, D.Giugni, Y.Gousakov, N.Hartman, I.Hinchliffe, F. Huegging, S.Kersten, N.Massol, P.Morettini, D.Muenstermann, L.Nicolas, M.Raymond, S.Rozanov, D.Su, W.Trischuk, C.da Via, E.Vigeolas and S.Wenig

Chapters’ Structure:Overview – IBL history, lifetime and failure issues, requirements, physicsModules – sensors (3 technologies), FE electronics, integration (bump-bonding, “mini- Flex”)Staves - mechanical concept for the stave, module loading, cooling and thermal issues, electrical integration, internal servicesIntegration - mounting staves with beampipe, services integration, final surface testingControl, Readout, and Integration - power supplies, opto-links, off-detector readout electronics, external services, cooling plant, DCS, integration with the present detector DAQ/DCSInstallation – beampipe extraction, mock-up, IBL transport and installation, connection and testingCommissioning – calibration, early data-taking plan with random triggers, charge injection, cosmic ray data-takingPrototyping, Production Testing, System Testing Critical Integration Issues – cooling, bakeout, powering, material budget…Project Management and Organization

© M.Capeans, K.Einsweiler – Feb 2010

IBL Status, TDR & MoUG. Darbo – INFN / Genova ATLAS Week, 26 February 201018M.Capeans, K.Einsweiler - Feb 2010

© M.Capeans, K.Einsweiler


IBL TDR, Status and OutlookIBL TDR, Status and Outlook

Excellent technical progress in the project overall

Fairly complete internal draft ready• About 160 pages available at https

://edms.cern.ch/document/1011962

Reviewed by a team of experts till March 21st: A.Andreazza, A.Catinaccio, A.Clarck, N.Hessey, L.Rossi, S.Stapnes, G.Viehhauser, N.Wermes

Expect to distribute a complete first draft to the IBL collaboration by end of April 2010; two iterations foreseen

This could allow submission of the IBL TDR to the LHCC in June 2010

© M.Capeans, K.Einsweiler – Feb 2010


Memorandum of Understanding

Memorandum of Understanding

IBL MoU:• Between The ATLAS COLLABORATION, and Funding Agency/Institution of

the ATLAS Collaboration (for the ATLAS construction was between Institutes and CERN)

Decided to go to an interim-MoU:• Decision on sensor technology (early 2011)

• Consolidate interest of Institutes and availability of funds

Draft i-MoU• Document body: “Political & Binding rules”

• In discussion with NCP’s

• “Annexes”:

• Project divided into “11 MoU Items”: share of contribution in cost and manpower/responsibilities.

• Table filled following “item by item” discussion with interested institutes (Institute Leaders or their Proxies)

• Common discussion in the Pixel Extended IB on March 1st …


i-MoU Annex 1: Items (Sensor Example)

i-MoU Annex 1: Items (Sensor Example)


Annex 4: Tentative Contribution to IBL

Annex 4: Tentative Contribution to IBL

Note: the numbers in the table "are not final, nor are the suggested financial contributions yet firm, but are meant for a common overall discussion.”

Technology options refer to supplementary costs that are sensor technology specific and will be known before the definite MoU takes effect.


ConclusionConclusionIBL Project well advancing

• Most of it covered with design and prototype work

TDR• Big progress, little delay (~2 months)

Memorandum of Understanding• In discussion, first Pixel Extended IB next Monday to discuss MoU

IBL Collaboration very motivated: a lot of high quality work!

Documents

IBL Status, TDR & MoU G. Darbo – INFN / Genova ATLAS Week, 26 February 2010 o IBL Status, TDR & MOU ATLAS Week CERN, February 26, 2010 G. Darbo - INFN