1 / 23

Trigger session report

Trigger session report. ByungGu Cheon Hanyang University. 19 March , 2009 2 nd Open Meeting of the Super KEKB Collaboration. S. Ryu. Belle. sBelle. sBelle calorimeter trigger. Feature : Much simpler electronics chain (2 steps) than Belle

cruz-chen
Télécharger la présentation

Trigger session report

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. Trigger session report ByungGu Cheon Hanyang University 19 March, 2009 2nd Open Meeting of the Super KEKB Collaboration

  2. S. Ryu Belle sBelle sBelle calorimeter trigger Feature : • Much simpler electronics chain (2 steps) than Belle • More flexible trigger algorithm design than Belle • 1st step (FAM) : 10MHz/12bit FADC + FPGA • 2nd step (TMM) : cascade/partitioning FPGAs • Bulky copper cables  52 optical fibers • Simple monitoring scheme • Simultaneous handling of CsI(Tl) and pure-CsI signals Current status : • We now investigate fast shaping signal from new Shaper. • FAM core firmware algorithm has been tested. • TSIM MC study has been performed w/ g4superb. Plan : • FAM/TMM prototypes will be ready by June. • Basic test of Shaper/FAM/TMM readout chain • Under real environment before Belle shutdown

  3. Test bench for Shaperboard S. Ryu New Shaper Board

  4. S. Ryu • Gain Test for fast shaping output :6 bits are reserved for the gain adjustment. → enough • Undershoot tail has been corrected with pole-zero cancelation → okay

  5. S. Ryu • Noise level test with cosmic data → okay pedestal (mean value) 26 ch for 160 MeV ch ch peak RMS =1.58 ~ 10 MeV 6 ch ch

  6. Problem in g4superb(?) Y. Unno • Single tracks( / e- / - / - / K+) are checked for gsim and g4superb. • Generate p=5GeV/c single track in CM isotrapically. • Without beam background • Check only Barrel region Logarithm scale hadron interaction effect in g4superb-ecl is strange??? November 6, 2014 7 Y.Unno

  7. Effect of beam bkg Y. Unno • Check tsim response for signal MC with “beam background”. • “beam background”(addbg) is real random-triggered data. • Used here is exp.51 data: 2006/04-06(peak L =~ 16x1033/cm2/sec) November 6, 2014 8 Y.Unno

  8. Effect of beam bkg Y. Unno Random triggered event under x20 bkg will be all triggered as physics event?! November 6, 2014 9 Y.Unno

  9. APV25, Clock and Trigger M. Friedl APV25 • Please refer to my December 2008 meeting slides for details about APV25 (SVD session) • In Nov/Dec 2008 beam test, we confirmed that APV works perfectly fine with both • 42.4 MHz clock (=RF/12)  3.5 µs max L1 latency • 31.8 MHz clock (=RF/16)  4.7 µs max L1 latency • We can make the APV25 clock switchable Schematics of one channel

  10. M. Friedl Summary • APV25 has trigger limitations due to (1) Minimum L1 distance of 6 APV clocks (2) Maximum pipeline filling • APV25 trigger simulation was performed to estimate dead time. • In case of no external limitation, we get @ 30kHZ L1: • 0.87% for 42.4MHz clock, 3.43% at 31.8MHz (see December slides for more detail) • With 500ns time jitter as estimated by CDC trigger we get • 0.42% for 42.4MHz clock, 2.7% at 31.8MHz • Conclusion: With 500ns CDC trigger jitter, both frequencies are fine according to Nakao-san‘s wish of<3% APV25 dead time@ L1=30kHz

  11. E. Won

  12. E. Won

  13. Y. Iwasaki

  14. Y. Iwasaki

  15. Y. Iwasaki

  16. Y. Iwasaki

  17. Backup

  18. Tsim-ecl with Belle and sBelle Y. Unno B Kp / Bp0p0 / Br0g / Btn /tmg / eeX(214)(mm)g Without beam background gsim g4superb Super-Belle geant3 geant4 Belle tsim-ecl sBelle tsim-ecl Belle ecl performance sBelle ecl performance November 6, 2014 19 Y.Unno

  19. Check with single track Comparison between w/ and w/o inner detector Note that there is no difference between w/ and w/o inner detector for gsim too.

  20. Effect of beam bkg

More Related