US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 1
CMS Si Tracker: Breakout SessionCMS Si Tracker: Breakout Session
Dept. of Energy/National Science Foundation
Review of the U.S. ATLAS/CMS Detector Projects
May 20, 2003
J. Incandela: L2 Manager
University of California Santa Barbara
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 2
Executive summaryExecutive summary• Many significant achievements this past year
Technical concerns have been alleviated and parts are flowing• Regina Demina follows this closely for the US and will present a detailed
summary next. We have taken a number of steps to help this effort:• Hybrids work at UCSB & Sensor QA at Rochester
Both US production lines are complete & well-exercised !• Results are excellent: More details below.
US Module testing is the template for the tracker project • Tony Affolder has been a great new addition to the testing effort and has
brought much CDF experience. He will present the status of this work.
• Remaining problems/concerns: None are severe. Hybrids are ok now. Production this summer will be a test of capacity. Test equipment and software
• We are ok for ramp up now but need to complete our full suite in order to do complete testing and large volume testing
Manpower• FNAL: was a big concern – recent efforts have begun to pay off• UCSB: Fine for now and has a good pool of students to draw on
Technical issues• Recently have seen some damage in transport – under investigation now
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 3
• Fermilab (FNAL)• L. Spiegel, S. Tkaczyk +2+2 technicians
• Kansas State University (KSU)• T.Bolton, R.Demina, W.Kahl, S.Korjenevski, R.Sidwell, N.Stanton
• University of California, Riverside (UCR)• Gail Hanson, Gabriella Pasztor, Patrick Gartung
• University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB)• A. Affolder, S. Burke, C.Campagnari, A. Gupta, D. Hale, J.Incandela, S.
Kyre, S. Levy, C. Mills, S.Stromberg, R. Taylor, D. White +3 technicians +2 undergraduates
• University of Illinois, Chicago (UIC)• E. Chabalina, C. Gerber
• University of Kansas (KU)• P. Baringer, A. Bean, L. Christofek, D. Coppage
• University of Rochester (UR)• R. Eusebi, E. Halkiadakis, A. Hocker, P. Tipton
Manpower growthManpower growth
Recent additions (over past year or so) are indicated in blue
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 4
OverviewOverview
Layers Quantity APV/mod. Pitch phi Pitch stereo Microbond Wires
SS6 TOB5,6 1,800 6 122 - 4,147,200
SS4 TOB3,4 1,450 4 183 - 2,227,200
DS - rphi TOB1,2 1,150 4 183 - 1,766,400
DS - stereo TOB1,2 1,150 4 183 183 1,766,400
5,550 9,907,200
Type
• FNAL and UCSB will have equal capabilities and capacities FNAL production line
• Gantry operational – made ~20 operational TOB modules.• 2 of 4 DAQ and 2 of 4 ARCS
UCSB Production line• Gantry operational –made ~10 operational TOB modules• 1 of 3 DAQ and 3 of 5 ARCS
UCR module diagnostics and repair • 0 of 1 DAQ and 0 of 1 ARC
TOB Module Summary Table
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 5
New Tasks and RodsNew Tasks and Rods
• Hybrids Final assembly at CERN a bottleneck.
• US Helping in two ways:• G. Pasztor (UCR) at CERN
• We’ll now do the final wirebonding and thermal cycle tests at UCSB
Wirebonded and Tested: UCSB• Quick Test then Wirebond pa’s
• Thermal cycle with continuous ARC test and pitch adapter pulsing
Adds 3.3 M bond wires ! Ship half to FNAL
• Module production: FNAL & UCSB Fast test with ARC/LED
• Simple repairs
Overnight temp cycling with readout in “Vienna box”
Full characterization with ARC/LED
•Rods Have infrastructure being prepared
and space available. Have identified personnel
• UCSB: Dean White with Sean Stromberg and others
• FNAL: Rochester physicists and FNAL techs.
CERN tooling is en route• Will likely need modification after we
gain some experience.
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 6
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Mod 1 Mod 2
Mod 3
Without 2DWith 2D
S1-
X1
S1-
X2
S1-
X3
S1-
X4
S2-
X1
S2-
X2
S2-
X3
S2-
X4
S1-
Y1
S1-
Y2
S1-
Y3
S1-
Y4
S2-
Y1
S2-
Y2
S2-
Y3
S2-
Y4
FNAL Gantry Random ErrorsFNAL Gantry Random Errors
Original 5 m spec not always met so far.
New 10 m spec is not a problem
To improve with new tools…
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 7
UCSB Silicon Strip OffsetsUCSB Silicon Strip Offsetsnumber
-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 80.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
entries : 11.000 mean : -3.4545 rms : 6.0956 min : -13.000 max : 6.0000
number
-11 -10 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 50.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0
entries : 11.000 mean : -3.5454 rms : 4.7167 min : -11.000 max : 4.0000
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 8
Silicon Relative AngleSilicon Relative Angle
number
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 60.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3.0
entries : 11.000 mean : 1.5454 rms : 2.9653 min : -5.0000 max : 5.0000
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 9
Silicon Angle on FrameSilicon Angle on Framenumber
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 120.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
entries : 11.000 mean : 4.8181 rms : 2.6906 min : 0 max : 10.000
number
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 120.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0
entries : 11.000 mean : 1.7272 rms : 3.1360 min : -3.0000 max : 8.0000
number
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 350
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
entries : 46.000 mean : -0.15217 rms : 7.8045 min : -18.000 max : 34.000
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 10
Silicon-Frame Positioning (example)
Silicon-Frame Positioning (example)
number
-18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 160.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0
entries : 11.000 mean : -4.0909 rms : 9.4911 min : -18.000 max : 14.000
number
-8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 60.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0
entries : 11.000 mean : -3.0909 rms : 3.4233 min : -8.0000 max : 4.0000
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 11
Hybrid AngleHybrid Anglenumber
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 650.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
entries : 11.000 mean : 13.000 rms : 24.136 min : -38.000 max : 64.000
number
-240 -220 -200 -180 -160 -140 -120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 600.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
entries : 33.000 mean : -38.606 rms : 72.308 min : -248.00 max : 64.000
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 12
WirebondingWirebonding
•FNAL ok now with new bonder… Saved ~120k$
•UCSB has 2x as many bonds Wise to find a used K&S 8060
• Smaller work table than 8090: Adequate for hybrids but not ideal for modules
• Much more common than 8090 and frequently seen on used market for < 100k$
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 13
Status of equipmentStatus of equipment
Quick test hybrids on ARC Gantry makes modules.
Modules test on ARC
Assemble rods from modules Rod burn-in Rods shipped to CERN
Thermal cycled module
Wir
e b
on
d
Final pinhole test on ARC
Wire bond
Thermal cycle hybrids
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 14
Fragile componentsFragile components
•Transportation a serious business•Careful visual inspection of components necessary•Recent experience has been awful
6 US modules made at both locations in 4 shipments by 3 transportation methods were received by CERN with similar severe damage!
Change to more flexible glue ? – under investigation – not expected to be a long-term problem but likely to be a long-term worry.
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 15
Tracker: Transition to M&OTracker: Transition to M&O
• Abrupt shift to M&O in FY06 reflects the fact that we anticipated and included adequate resources for pre-ops in original project file. See my talk later for basis of resource estimates.
US CMS SiTrkr Proj / M&O Cost Estimate
$0
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
FY98FY99
FY00FY01
FY02FY03
FY04FY05
FY06FY07
FY08
AY
K$
SiTrkr CP
SiTrkr M&O
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 16
Tracker Milestones (v33)Tracker Milestones (v33)
•V33: TOB complete in April ‘05.
•We currently schedule our completion by April 2005 This is about 3 months looser than CERN schedule High probability of completion by Sep. 30, 2005 – additional 6 mo.contingency
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 17
Tracker Project ResourcesTracker Project Resources
Roughly on track but peak will likely shift a bit • UCSB currently pat
• FNAL in the process of gaining a few people as needed
US CMS SiTrkr Constr Proj Resources
0.05.0
10.015.0
20.025.0
30.035.0
40.045.0
FY98
FY99
FY00
FY01
FY02
FY03
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
FT
E's Physicists
Technicians
Engineers + Comp. Prof.
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 18
Tracker FY03 PlanningTracker FY03 Planning
SiTRK SOWs FY03 -- $.8M AY
University of California, Riverside
University of California-Santa Barbara
Fermilab
University of Illinois-Chicago
University of Kansas
Kansas State University
University of Rochester
2 Rochester technicians involved in FNAL production lines
Mostly production labor
No contingency used (yet)
US CMS Silicon Tracker Project – Breakout session Overview - DOE/NSF Review Brookhaven - May 20, 2003 - Incandela 19
SummarySummary
• We feel that actual mechanical fabrication infrastructure – both equipment and manpower- is in very good shape in the US
Database still needs to be finalized but is not critical Some new problems with glues expected to be resolved quickly
• The main issues now for the US groups are: Testing: test equipment and software
• This is probably the area of greatest activity this past year• US playing very big role in establishing protocols• Currently limits are overall throughput
Components schedules• Vast improvement and resolution of many issues over past year• We have nearly continuous information flow• All the right steps have been taken in Europe and US
• Remains now to see how the big orders work out.
• Agenda for remaining talks Have therefore scheduled talks in this breakout session that only
cover these two main points regarding production Also include a talk on M&O