us cms silicon tracker project – breakout session overview - doe/nsf review brookhaven - may 20,...

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


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


• 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


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


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.


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…


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



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


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


number

-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 350

1

2

3

4

5

6

7



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


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



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


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



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$


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


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.


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


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


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.


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)


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

us cms silicon tracker project – breakout session overview - doe/nsf review brookhaven - may 20,...

Documents