DZero Run IIb PMG February 25, 2003 1 Run IIb DZero PMG Status overview, issues (Kotcher) Schedule, project status (Freeman) AOB Jon Kotcher Fermilab

DZero Run IIb PMGFebruary 25, 2003

1

Run IIb DZero PMG

Status overview, issues (Kotcher) Schedule, project status (Freeman) AOB

Jon KotcherFermilab PMG

February 25, 2003


2

Run IIb Project Organization

D0 Run IIb ProjectJ. Kotcher, Project Manager

R. Partridge, Deputy; V. O’Dell, Associate; W. Freeman, Assistant

M. Johnson, Technical Coordinator A. Amorn-Vichet, Budget Officer; T. Erickson, Administration

WBS 1.1Silicon

M. DemarteauG. Ginther

1.1.1 Sensors R. Demina, F. Lehner

1.1.2 Readout SystemA. Nomerotski, E. von Toerne

1.1.4 QA, Testing, & Burn-inC. Gerber

1.1.3, 1.1.5 Mechanics & Assembly

W. Cooper, K. Krempetz

1.1.6 MonitoringM. Corcoran, S. de Jong

1.1.4 ProductionJ. Fast

1.1.7 Software & Simulation F. Rizatdinova, L Shabalina

WBS 1.2Trigger

H. Evans D. Wood

1.2.3 L1 Track TriggerM. Narain

1.2.1 L1 Cal UpgradeM. Abolins, (H. Evans),

P. LeDu

1.2.4 L2UpgradeR. Hirosky

1.2.5 Silicon Track Trigger U. Heintz

WBS 1.3DAQ/Online

S. FuessP. Slattery

1.2.2 L1 Cal/Track MatchK. Johns

1.2.6 SimulationM. Hildreth, E. Perez

WBS 1.5 Installation

R. Smith

1.5.1 Silicon InstallationMechanical:H. Lubatti

Electronics: L. Bagby, R. Sidwell

1.5.2 Trigger InstallationD. Edmunds

WBS 1.4Project

Administration

1.2.7 Administration(D. Wood)

1.1.8 Administration(M. Demarteau)

1.3.3 Control SystemsF. Bartlett, G. Savage,

V. Sirotenko

1.3.1 Level 3 SystemsD. Chapin, G. Watts

1.3.4 DAQ/Online Management(P. Slattery)

1.3.2 Network & Host Systems

J. Fitzmaurice, S. Krzywdzinski

• George Ginther is new silicon co-leader• Eckhard von Toerne is new silicon

readout co-leader (replaces Bill Reay)

• Arisara Amorn-Vichet, new Budget Officer

• Kurt Krempetz, K. Hanagaki plenary speakers


3

WBS 1.1: Basic Silicon Design Choices

Six layer silicon tracker, divided into two radial regions Inner layers: Layers 0 and 1

Axial readout only Mounted on integrated support Assembled into one unit Designed for Vbias up to 700 V

Outer layers: Layers 2-5 Axial and stereo readout Stave support structure Designed for Vbias up to 300 V

Employ single sided silicon only, 3 sensor types

2-chip wide for Layer 0 3-chip wide for Layer 1 5-chip wide for Layers 2-5

No element supported from beampipe


4

Silicon Detector Elements

168 silicon staves: basic building block of outer layers

Supported in positioning bulkheads at z=0, z=610 mm

Silicon

Analogue cables

Hybrid

Layer 0 Support structure: University of Washington

Silicon Hybrid

Digital cable

Layer 0/Layer 1 mated


5

Silicon Layer 0 Support Structure

University of Washington First Layer 0 prototype carbon fiber support structure delivered to

Fermilab for tests in January Integrated grounding – kapton/copper mesh Performs very well under deflection tests – major technical

achievement

Silicon

Analogue cables

Hybrid

CMM headMounted

L0 structure

Mounted L0

structure, ground mesh

Clamps to inner

carbon shell

Balls for deflection

measurements


6

Prototype Mechanical Stave

Prototype mechanical stave being thermally tested at SiDet

Dec 18 ’02 integration milestone met

Al-ceramic hybrid

(dummy)

Stereo silicon,

axial mounted

underneath

Input cooling channel

10/10 (upper)20/20 (lower)

mechanical modules,

concatenated


7

Outer Layer Silicon Module Prototypes

20/20 axial module

Silicon sensors

20/20 stereo hybrid

SVX4 readout chip

20/20 axial hybrid

First outer layer electrical-grade (“20/20”) prototypes fabricated

Two types: axial & stereo readout

Each are 12 sensors long, ~100 mm in length

Stereo angle obtained by rotating sensors

Testing underway

Digital cable


8

Module Test Results

Electrical tests of 20/20 axial module (10 chips)

Charge injection

Pedestal

Unbonded chip

Total/ random noise

Bonded to single (dual)

sensors


9

Silicon Status

Ordered Delivered Ordered Delivered

ELMA

HPK

ELMA

HPK

L2 Sensors HPK

Analogue Cable Dycx

L0 Hybr id Amitr .

L1 Hybr id CPT

CPT

Amitr .

L2S Hybr id CPT

Honey

Basic

J unction Card

Twisted Pr . Cable

Adapter Card

Purple Card

Test Stand Elctr .

L0 Sensors

L1 Sensors

Digital Cable

L2A Hybr id

First Prototype Second Prototype

Component Vendor Design


10

WBS 1.2: Trigger Upgrades

Level 1 projects underway Level 1 Calorimeter Level 1 Cal-track

matching Level 1 Tracking Trigger simulations

Level 2 projects (not discussed here)

L2 Beta upgrade & STT upgrade

Later start in schedule VTM’s procured for STT

(part of larger order)

WBS 1.2: Trigger UpgradeH. Evans (Columbia), D. Wood (Northeastern)

WBS 1.2.1: Level 1 CalorimeterM.Abolins(MSU),

H.Evans(Columbia), P.LeDu (Saclay)

WBS 1.2.2: Level 1 Cal-track matchK. Johns (Arizona)

WBS 1.2.3: Level 1 TrackingM. Narain (Boston)

WBS 1.2.4: Level 2 Beta upgradeR. Hirosky (Virginia)

WBS 1.2.5: Level 2 STT upgradeU. Heintz (Boston)

WBS 1.2.6: Trigger SimulationM. Hildreth (ND), E. Perez

(Saclay)


11

WBS 1.2.1: Calorimeter Trigger Upgrade

Saclay ADC+Digital Filter

(ADF) ADF timing

distribution board Analog splitter (for

in-situ tests) ADF

Crate/backplane

Nevis Trigger algorithm

board (TAB) Global Algorithm

Board (GAB) Crates for TAB/GAB Test system for

ADF-to-GAB cables

BLS

2 EM + 2 H

EM

H

ADC + Digital-Filter (ADF)

Trig Algo’s (TAB)

Global +

Control (GAB)

ADF Timing Fanout

Existing BLS Cards:

2560 TT 0.2x0.2

TT Signal Processing

8-bit TT Et

16 EM 16 H

x 80 Sliding

Windows

x 8

clusters

sums

Global Sums

x 1

Framework Interfaces

Timing (SCL) L2 & L3 Control (TCC)

F r a me w o r k

Jets

EM

Tau

Et,Mpt

timing/ctrl timing/ctrl

Cal-Trk Match

encoded clusters

Signals from L1 Track

Michigan State Interfacing to

existing system, framework

Infrastructure

L1 Cal/Track Match:

University of Arizona


12

Level 1 Trigger Highlights

Prototype design phase concluded for three major boards in Level 1 trigger upgrade:

Level 1 Calorimeter Trigger ADC-Digital Filter Board (ADF) - Saclay Trigger Algorithm Board (TAB) – Columbia University 2/3 of the PCBs required for L1 Cal

– Remaining Global Algorithm Boards (GAB) being completed

Level 1 Calorimeter/Track Match Flavor Board (MTFB)

Layouts begun Analog splitter installed during January shutdown in Level

1 Cal rack at DZero Assembly Building, Movable Counting House

Picks off in-situ signals from four trigger towers Data will be taken, analyzed during next few months Preparation for tests of full L1 Cal prototype chain (ADF,

TAB, GAB), beginning this summer


13

Analog Splitter: Saclay & MSU

Analog splitter: allows in-situ test of digital filtering with real signals

Designed and tested at Saclay

Shipped to MSU Dec 20th: tested there

Installed in DØ L1Cal trigger (Run IIa) during current shutdown

Noise tests in progress

Tests with beam (w/ splitter vs. w/o splitter) to follow


14

WBS 1.2.2: Cal-Trk Match: Arizona

Uses “L1mu” electronics, apart from specialized “flavor board”

Flavor board (MTFB) prototype design >90% complete

Some procurements anticipated for next month

Approval was essential for keeping this on track

Run IIa MTFB(scint flavor)


15

L1 CTT: Boston Univ.

Firmware design for target algorithm began in Nov

“front end” and “back end” code from Run IIa rewritten – latency reduced

Ongoing work on maps of single fibers


16

Trigger Simulation Progress

Studies of effects of trigger tower thresholds on L1 Cal global sums (missing ET)

L1 Cal tau algorithm included in trigger simulation

Output of Run IIb L1 Cal interfaced to standard DZero framework simulation package

Simulation of Cal-Track matching progressing Central Track Trigger (CTT) as-built geometry

and beam offsets incorporated into simulation Beam offsets up to ~1 mm do not effect efficiency of

Run IIb equations


17

Production Readiness Reviews (PRR)

First review: “Purple Card” - sequencer/hybrid interface PC card – held 1/30/03. Committee:

C. Gerber (UIC), J. Green (Fermilab), K. Hanagaki (Fermilab), S. Lager (Stockholm), R. Lipton (Fermilab, Chair), R. Sidwell (KSU)

Report submitted – ready to go

Next review: Outer layer silicon sensors, 3/6/03. Committee: N. Bacchetta (PISA), B. Gobbi (NWestern), J. Ellison (UCR, Chair), R.

Lipton (Fermilab), H. Sadrozinski (UCSC), S. Worm (Rutgers) $1.5M order with Hamamatsu – procurement ready to move upon

receiving nod from Committee. Costed in four lots. Placement of order was second Run IIb DOE milestone (March 24)

Project target date: Feb 18 PRR report due March 14, procurement immediately thereafter Project is learning from such experiences


18

Labor Cost Extracted from Schedule vs. Actuals (R&D)

FNAL Technical LaborAll Funding Sources

FY02 & FY03

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

$120,000

$140,000

$160,000

$180,000

$200,000O

ct-0

1

Nov

-01

De

c-01

Jan-

02

Fe

b-02

Mar

-02

Apr

-02

Ma

y-02

Jun-

02

Jul-0

2

Aug

-02

Sep

-02

Oct

-02

Nov

-02

Dec

-02

Jan

-03

Feb

-03

Mar

-03

Apr

-03

May

-03

Jun-

03

Jul-0

3

Aug

-03

Se

p-03

Calendar Month

Co

st (

FY

02

$)

W irebonderSF

MechTechSF

MechTechF

MechEngF

ElecTechSF

ElecTechF

ElecEngF

DesignerF

CompProfF

CMMProgrammerSF

CMMOperatorSF

AdminAsstF

Dec + Jan (predicted) ~ Dec + Jan (observed)

Actuals in FY02 k$

Scheduled labor in FY02 k$


19

Current Conclusions on Labor from 1st Quarter

We are using very different flavors of people than the schedule predicted

Rates for given flavor consistent with average rates used as input to project cost

<DesF> actual pay ~ <DesF> as used in schedule

Using more labor than we thought 10% high in hours and cost

Actual cost within 1% of predicted Above all very good…but even though we are

using more labor, we are not keeping up with aggressive schedule in all cases

Comments to follow…


20

Costs Loaded Into COBRA

DZero Run IIb Upgrade Cost and ContingencyWBS Name COBRA Base Contingency Total Cost Cont %

1.1 Silicon $15,762,834 $5,127,166 $20,890,000 33%1.2 Trigger $3,061,564 $1,430,436 $4,492,000 47%1.3 Online $1,050,759 $342,241 $1,393,000 33%1.4 Project Administration $1,497,798 $331,202 $1,829,000 22%

TOTAL PROJECT $21,372,955 $7,231,045 $28,604,000 34%

WBS Name EIR Base EIR Cont EIR Cost

1.1 Silicon $15,986,000 $4,904,000 $20,890,0001.2 Trigger $3,276,000 $1,216,000 $4,492,0001.3 Online $1,062,000 $332,000 $1,393,0001.4 Project Administration $1,463,000 $366,000 $1,829,000

TOTAL PROJECT $21,787,000 $6,818,000 $28,604,000

Differences (EIR-COBRA)WBS Name Base Contingency

1.1 Silicon $223,166 ($223,166)1.2 Trigger $214,436 ($214,436)1.3 Online $11,241 ($10,241)1.4 Project Administration ($34,798) $34,798

TOTAL PROJECT $414,045 ($413,045)

COBRA ready to go

(see monthly report)

Thanks to Rissa, Dale,

Colleen, Dean


21

Adhering to Schedule

Creating, maintaining a schedule and using it to monitoring progress is only initial step

Essential that next step be taken: extract lessons learned from slippages, implement corrective actions where possible. Anticipate project needs well in advance.

Project has begun to turn this corner Schedule being taken with increasing

seriousness, attentiveness by all principals This is a major step, will continue until we’ve

finished


22

Miscellany, Conclusions

MoU/SoWs being generated project-wide Overhead-free MoUs for silicon MRI in place

for some time First formal agreement just completed, Run

IIb PO being generated (Louisiana Tech) COBRA loaded, ready to use

Report on equipment costs only Technical progress continues to be

excellent Beginning to truly manage to aggressive

schedule – positive and important step No change controls on horizon


23

Keeping Run II(b) on the Map: Next Six Months

Experiments now directly participating in BD planning. Comes with a price: Reviews (both sides of table), associated preparation quite extensive

Above demonstrates impact of current climate, + compressed schedule Heavy emphasis on project management at all levels

Feb Mar

Apr May

Jun Jul Aug

Accelerator

Advisory Committe

eBD Long-

Range Plan for

Run II due to DOE

Director’s Review of BD Long-

Range Plan

P5 Review of Run IIb

Director’s Review

of Run IIb

DOE (Lehman) Review of

Run IIb (CD-3b)

DOE Review of Accelerator

All information required by DOE

for long-term assessment in hand at this

pointDOE

Review of FNAL

Program

Monthly PMGs:

Long-Range BD, Run IIb

Green = Beams Div (BD)Brick = Run IIb Detector ProjectsDates shown are latest est

PAC

Documents

DZero Run IIb PMG February 25, 2003 1 Run IIb DZero PMG Status overview, issues (Kotcher) Schedule, project status (Freeman) AOB Jon Kotcher Fermilab