1 / 29

Status of mTCA Stripline BPM Development

Status of mTCA Stripline BPM Development. June 4-5, 2012 Dan Van Winkle for BPM team: Sonya Hoobler, Tom Himel, Jeff Olsen, Steve Smith, Till Straumann, Ernest Williams, Chuck Yee, Andrew Young. Outline. Background Motivation System Description Physics Requirements Proposed new design

eli
Télécharger la présentation

Status of mTCA Stripline BPM Development

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Status of mTCAStriplineBPM Development June 4-5, 2012 Dan Van Winkle for BPM team: Sonya Hoobler, Tom Himel, Jeff Olsen, Steve Smith, Till Straumann, Ernest Williams, Chuck Yee, Andrew Young

  2. Outline • Background • Motivation • System Description • Physics Requirements • Proposed new design • Cost comparisons • Technical Overview • Current Status • Schedule • Risks • mTCA • Pizza Box • VME/AFE • Next Steps mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  3. Background mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  4. Background 4 Flavors of BPMs LCLS Pizza Box FACET – LINAC CAMAC FACET – Sector 20 XTA mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  5. Background • Assumptions • LCLS II will use existing BPMs whenever possible (CAMAC) • 91 new BPMs will be necessary for LCLS II. These will be some type of “new” electronics. • The existing linac BPMs will eventually need to be upgraded to something more sensitive (exactly like LCLS I). • This development is targeted at both the new BPMs for LCLS II and the upgrading of the existing BPM electronics throughout the linac. mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  6. Why not just clone the LINAC (CAMAC) BPM electronics? (Motivation) • CAMAC technology is obsolete and becoming more difficult to maintain • Obsolete Parts • PDR Specs can not be met (this was demonstrated in LCLS I) • Technical expertise is disappearing • EPICS incompatibility mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  7. Why not just clone the LCLS-I stripline BPM electronics? (more Motivation) • Pizza Box solution was a quickly thrown together solution used to replace a COTS solution that did not work out. • It worked so well that it is now used throughout LCLS I. Unfortunately: • ColdfireCPU in pizza box is too wimpy to do full job of IOC. Hence special private network link to a VME IOC to transfer data for processing. • Requires VME crate/CPU/EVR per 4 BPMs • Takes multiple people each with special expertise to put in a new BPM or even to repair an existing one. • Requires a lot of network equipment and cables. mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  8. System Description mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  9. Physics Requirements • 2 Differences from LCLS I • 10pC Charge • 2 Bunches mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  10. Design Proposal • A new designed based upon the emerging technology of mTCA was proposed. • New design can be used for rest of LCLS-II (even the injector if we get the design done in time) • New Design at 250 Msamp/sec (300 MHz center frequency) means existing cable plant can be used (for existing LINAC BPMs. (~500k$ savings) • Allows for mix and match of systems (LLRF/BPMs) in same shelf (theoretically sharing infrastructure costs) mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  11. Deliverables • Design build and install one crate of 3 BPMs in a sector (1st 20 sectors) • We expect to use new 250 Msamp/sec ADC or potential undersample at 125 Msamp/sec using Struck Board • The analog front end electronics will be a new design, same topology as pizza box front end (but higher in frequency) • The necessary software will be done to integrate the BPMs into the EPICS control system • Mass production for 10 sectors (LCLS II) will be a separate AIP funded outside LCLS II core project. mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  12. Cost Comparisons mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  13. Requirements • Similar Analog Front end at new frequency (300 MHz) (next slide) • Expect slightly better dynamic range to accommodate new 10 pC charge limit for LCLS II • Initial operation will use internal clock. • For multi-bunch operation, phase synchronous ADC clock will be required to extract bunch phase information (238 MHz). mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  14. 300 MHz vs. 140 MHz • By using 300 MHz instead of 140 MHz gain 4.6 dB of signal level • This allows us to potentially save large sums of cabling costs when we eventually upgrade the LINAC BPMs. (New LCLS II BPMs will not see this cost advantage due to pulling of new cables anyway. mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  15. System Description Up to 9 BPM processors per crate mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  16. RTM Signal Flow Block Diagram 4 Channels of Analog Processing Calibrator mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  17. Current Status mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  18. 3 RTM Boards Loaded • Initial RF testing complete • Initial Data acquisition complete • RTM CPLD Programmed and verified • FPGA on AMC card started • Code for driving and control of CPLD • 250 Msamp digitizer spec started (90% complete). mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  19. Prototype Board Complete (in test) Analog Front End RTM Struck 125 MHz digitizer BPM AIP Review April 11, 2012

  20. Modifications of 125 MS/s Board mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  21. Initial Results Measured Results from mTCA system on “simulated” Beam Signal mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  22. Schedule mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  23. Current Schedule BPM AIP Review April 11, 2012

  24. Schedule Comments • Tight Schedule to make LCLS II Injector • FDR’s for Injector occurring in July/August time frame. • Hardware installed in racks not required till late 2013. • There is some belief that we can still get the design into the LCLS II injector. mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  25. Risks mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  26. Risks (mTCA) • mTCA Infrastructure • New standard - interoperability is a potential issue – we are diligently working on this • Digitizer • Counting on vendor which is currently struggling with 10 channel design. However vendor seems solid and recent vendor visit put most fears to rest. • Potential delays due to vendor • Manpower availability/Priority Setting • Backup Plan for injector is VME digitizer with AFE in small pizza box. mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  27. Risks (Pizza box) • Obsolete Parts • Unsupportable PADs with “wimpy” coldfire CPU’s • Redesign necessary on PAD for continued use • Custom electronics which must be supported for the indefinite future. mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  28. Risks (VME Digitizer/AFE) (Backup Plan) • Custom Boards (ADC and AFE) (not COTS) • Could be obsolete parts on digitizer • Custom electronics which must be supported for the indefinite future. • May not be able to do multi-bunch operation mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

  29. Next Steps • Calibrator needs to be tested • Finish FPGA code in Struck 10ch digitizer • Order new digitizer (250 Msamp/sec version) • System software and integration mTCA BPM Development June 4-5, 2012

More Related