M.Capeans nSQP Technical Meeting CERN, 13.2.12

1. Report of the Pixel nSQP PRR Review CommitteeA. Catinaccio, T. Flick (chair), J. Grosse-Knetter, D. Macina M.Capeans nSQP Technical Meeting CERN, 13.2.12

2. Summary of Conclusions • The PRR for the new Service Quarter Panels (nSQP) for the ATLAS Pixel Detector took place on 07 Feb 2012. The electrical readout part of the nSQP was explicitly excluded from this review. • The review committee recommends that production of the nSQP structures as well as the reviewed services and its assembly into the nSQP should go ahead. • The implications of the electrical readout part of the nSQP on the other parts must be understood as soon as possible. • The reviewer committee for the PRR now is very impressed by the amount of work, which has been done by the nSQP team in the last year, and thanks the team for well-prepared presentations and a huge amount of documentation.

3. Recommendations Quality assurance: The level of QA procedures and documentation is well advanced in many very detailed steps and papers. We would recommend that a main document is created describing the flow of the production, testing, assembly, as well as indicating the steps after which a QA needs to be done and which action has to be taken in case of non conformities. Milestones and acceptance criteria can be listed in this document, as well. This would also give a good overview of the project itself, pointing the detailed documents at the appropriate places. Radiation tests: There are materials (i.e. resin) to be used in the nSQP that are not used in the Pixel SQP. The results of the radiation tests, which have been done, should be made available. Connector savers: The intensive testing during production and assembly can cause damages to the used connectors. If this happens on the test connector end, it is less critical, but to prevent the detector components from being damaged, we recommend attaching cable savers to the harnesses where even possible throughout the whole assembly and test process. Repair Procedures: In case of failures during the assembly there must be procedure foreseen to repair the assembly. These repair procedures need to be documented. Spares: The spare situation of some parts is very tight, therefore the team is taking care of getting replacement productions by the vendors, in case of not fulfilled quality criteria, or to order additional parts, to be on the safe side in terms of existing spares. Pipes: The committee recommends doing a final test on the bonded pipes (HeX). A vacuum leak test as well as a pressure test at 1.25x the operating pressure should be performed.

4. Suggestions Pipe Connections: The radial position of the exhaust pipe heater can be checked vs. the scans being done in the real detector. Even though the team has a good plan of how to connect the detector, nSQP pipes to the cooling pipes outside PP1, it would be a good crosscheck. Production Yields: Yield numbers of already produced parts as well as of the assembled components should be made available.

5. Outlook of the system System test: The committee recommends that a system test with electrical readout components installed on an nSQP is investigated as soon as possible. Given the situation that the production of the e-boards not yet completely understood, there could be e-boards used, which are in hand, but not fulfilling the radiation tolerance criteria, to set up a test system close to the final situation. The prototype nSQP would serve as a natural candidate for this together with the Pixel detector SR1 ToothPix setup. We would recommend bringing such a larger scale system in place by end of March 2012 using what is in hand. Focus clearly needs to be on the function of the electrical readout itself, performance of the readout system when installed into an nSQP with all cable routing, feed through assemblies, and independently operated detector modules. This would qualify the nSQP as a whole as well. The revisiting of the electrical readout is needed, the committee offers to stay in contact if wished. Plans and schedule: The committee suggests documenting the production schedule, including milestones, resources planning, and available manpower. There is still some contingency towards the Pixel detector de-installation and the start of nSQP installation and we are convinced that this time is enough to construct the nSQP in time. Moreover after the construction of nSQP, the installation work has to be tightly aligned to the work on the existing Pixel detector package, including installing IBL. A close link to the between the different projects needs to be ensured, i.e. de-installation of the Pixel detector package, dismounting SQPs, repair of modules, installing nSQP and DPM, installing IBL, testing of connectivity, functionality and final commission on surface and in the cavern.

6. PRR Focus and Design Items • Solving out the optical linking between the optoboards and the off-detector crates, shorten fibres or install new ones? • Test of LVDS driver and receivers connected to the optoboardswith realistic patterns • Optobox cooling • Evaluation of techniques and procedures to repair the pixel package failures • Grounding scheme for the nPixel detector (detector plus nSQP). The same grounding scheme is being followed as for the present pixel detector, with the cable shields tied to ground at PP1. (This is still a possible topic for verification with realistic system tests). Still to be monitored: • Pipe failures due to corrosion and welding impacts on the pipes. If leaks start to develop in the Pixel detector this would need careful analysis. • Reference 3.5 recommendation FDR document (ATL-IP-MR-0003) “Although it was not a topic of this review, work is in progress on how to make repairs to cooling pipes or broken type 0 cables. This is an essential part of evaluating the risk/benefit of going ahead with removing the pixel package and replacing the SQP with nSQP”. • Sufficient tightness of the ID CO2 volume after cable installation • Dry air flush to the optoboxes would be desirable • Very careful synchronization of the assembly between worksteps in Bat 180 and in Bat 16 will be needed, since for space reasons the two sites are unavoidable. • Routing of E-Board wires and management of excess length at PP1 may require some structure/mechanics to manage them. These exist, the flowers. There is need to check that cables are not damaged once wrapped around the flowers and that the over length of the cables can be handled by the flowers appropriately.

7. Thank You!