ALICE input to TE-MPE-EM workshop 29.11. 2012 GEM foils for the TPC upgrade ‘Low mass’...

ALICE input to TE-MPE-EM workshop 29.11. 2012

• GEM foils for the TPC upgrade

• ‘Low mass’ Aluminum/Kapton bus cables and cooling elements for the Silicon Tracker (ITS) upgrade

• Access to PCB production and assembly

ALICE upgradeALICE will install a major upgrade in 2018 (LS2).

The upgrade project was endorsed by the LHCC and we are preparing Technical Design Reports to be submitted in 2013.

The major detector elements of the upgrade are:

A new, ultra low mass Inner Tracking System (ITS).

Upgrade of the Time Projection Chamber (TPC) with with GEM detectors.

• My feeling is that no “electronic design activities” should go out of CERN without approval of TE/MPE/EM… at least for prototyping and small series– Activity code in DAI with mandatory approval from TE/MPE/EM– Electronic design review by “TE Electronic Coordinator”

• TE/MPE/EM should act as “link office” between CERN and External Firms (PCB routing, prototype assembly…)– Selection of external firms that can be used by clients developers

according to a predefined “cahier des charges”• Uniform numbering• Uniform set of files to be included in the manufacturing dossier

– Full quality control over the complete design and production chain

Future Plans

• 2 sides with 18 sectors each with 2 chambers (IROC and OROC)

• OROCs will use two sectors

• 3 sets of triple-GEMs per sector

• 3x36x3 = 324 single-mask foils

• Production: 2014-2015 ~1.5 years

• With the present lack of industrial production possibilities our baseline assumption is the production at CERN

IRO

C

ORO

C

TPC upgrade

ALICE is developing the signal/power buses for the ALICE Inner Tracking System upgrade together with the TE-MPE-EM service.

This ultra low mass Kapton/Aluminum bus is a significant element of this project and relies on know how and technology developed by TE-MPE-EM.

In addition the TE-MPE-EM service is involved in development of cooling elements for the silicon sensors.

ITS upgrade

We make heavy use of the design, fabrication and assembly services for standard multi-layer PCBs.

These are mostly boards that will be developed for the characterization of IC prototypes and for the characterization in terms of radiation hardness of commercial off-the-shelf components.

We will have the need of developing a large number of small and relatively simple boards.

The turn-around for the delivery of the final item (PCB loaded with the components) will have a large impact on the overall project schedule !

PCB Production/Assembly

Specific Feedback on PCB Production1. PCB designIn general this service provided a professional and satisfactory service . However, it is lacking a clear TECHNICAL supervision of the team. Sometimes we have the impression that people get stuck with some design simply because they encountered a technical problem that is new to them. More in general, we find that the members of the design team (to my knowledge all FSUs) should be better integrated within the CERN electronics design community. In particular they should be given the possibility to follow training courses. The billing scheme could also also be made more transparent to the users.

2. PCB manufacturingVery competent team. Outstanding contributions on R&D projects. What should be improved is a better management of the production of standard PCBs. In particular efforts should be made to guarantee the production and delivery schedule. (We had one case this year of a PCB that started beginning of February, was expected mid March and was delivered mid July: this is not ACCEPTABLE).

3. PCB assemblyQuite satisfactory.

TE-MPE-EM Workshop 29.11.2012 - Chavannes-de-Bogis 

Input from CMS for possible requests

To Surface Treatment Workshop

Archana Sharma

for

CMS GEM Collaboration

Production & Assembly – for discussion

GE1/1 - LS1Four detectors for (LS1), (2013-2014).

GE1/1 - LS2At CERN in TE/MPE workshopPresent rate : 10 to12 GEM / month/technicianWith new equipment 20 GEM/month/technician [Two technicians – One year for GE1/1 production]

One Year to produce all GEMs for GE1/1

DETECTOR MODULE ASSEMBLY(To be discussed)Expected rate : 1 detector per two days (given all procurements and pre-production complete)

Preparing a new laboratory for CMS GEM assembly and defining quality control (ready mid 2013)

Excellent work from the workshop last 2 years

Thanks for getting this project on solid ground

Future requirements: CMS GE1/1 upgrade

GEM proposed as technology to withstand the high rate requirement for eta>1.6• GE1/1 Station – with 144 detectors• Proposed for Installation during LS2 (2018)• Awaiting Approval (hopefully in Dec)• If approved – Will need 144x3 = 432 GEM

foils plus spares ~ 500 foils

Station Nbr of Triple GEMs

Sensitive area per foil

Total Nbr of SC modules

Total GEM foil area GE1/1

(Triple GEMs)

Manufacturing plan requested

GE1/1 36x2x2=144 ~0.43m2

(440x990)72+8 spares 0.43x144x3

=185.76m2

2014 - 2015

About 200 m2

of GEM foils in total

144 triple GEM detectors

SPARE

The CMS GEM Endcap system (GE)

GEM Detectors

GE1/1GE2/1

The interaction of the Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati– INFN with

TE-MPE-EM Workshop

G. BencivenniLNF-INFN

Frascati - Italy

GEM for the LHCb experiment (past)

GEM for the Cylindrical-GEM (C-GEM) of KLOE-2 experiment (present)

GEM for the possible upgrade of the muon apparatus of LHCb (future)

GEM for the possible upgrade of the Inner Tracker of BESIII (future)

GEM for the first Muon Wall of LHCB

In collaboration with INFN-Cagliari we built 24 (+6 spares) triple-GEM detectors with pad

readout (2005-2006). While the R&D and then the interaction with Rui started in 2000).

The size of the GEM was 20x24 cm2 (active area).

The TE-MPE-EM Workshop built the 90 (+20spares) GEM foils with the double-mask technique.

The readout boards were realized by ELTOS (Italy).

The Cylindrical-GEM of KLOE-2 (2011-2012)

4 CGEM layers with radii from 13 to 21 cm from IP and before KLOE Drift Chamber inner wall

700 mm active length

XV strips-pads readout (25o÷30o stereo angle)

1.5% X0 total radiation length in the active region

3 mm

2 mm2 mm

2 mm

Cathode

GEM 1GEM 2

GEM 3

Anode

Read-out

Cylindrical Triple GEM

The TE-MPE-EM workshop produced, on the basis of our design, with single-mask technology the GEM foils (up to about 400x700 mm2 active area) and also the readout foils (on kapton substrate):

- GEM n. 48 large foils - Readout boards n. 16 large foils - Cathode/Drift n. 12 large foils

The first 3 layers of CGEM

The gluing of the 3 GEM foils

700 mm

up to

1200

mm

Detail of readourt board

LHCb muon upgrade with GEM (2014-2017)

For the upgrade of most irradiated parts of the muon system, regions R1-R2 of station M2 , GEM is proposed as a possible rad-hard technology (particle fluxes up to 1 MHz/cm2 at the upgraded luminosity of 2x10 33 s-1cm-2).

# chambers / size

(w/out spares)

Total GEM foil area

M2R1 M2R2

n. 48 ~30x25 cm2

n. 96 ~60x27 cm2

~54 m2

R1-R2 of M2

Cylindrical GEM for BES III - Beijing-China (2013-2015)

?16

20

?31

8

?43

1.5

?56

2

?49

7

724

2174

1952

1782

1612

1442

12721092

910870

2582

?34

9

?11

8

?12

6

10461070

?35

9

-1

-1

?73

0

?69

0.5

?62

6.5

?36

7.8

G

24-M8 （沿8圆周 等分）

F

B

H

P-P 1 1剖旋转（ ： ）

R

K

?1620

?318

?431.5

?562

?497

724

2174

1952

1782

1612

1442

12721092

910870

2582

?349

?118

?126

10461070

?359 -1

-1

?730

?690.5

?626.5

?367.8

G

24-M8 （沿8圆周 等分）

F

B

H

P-P 1 1剖旋转（ ： ）

R

K

Dimensions of the Inner Tracker :

Rmin = 63 mm; Lmin=780mmRmax=162 mm; Lmax=870mm

Number of CGEM layers = 4 w/stereo XV readout configuration

Drift chamber

Existing Inner Tracker (wire-chamber) to be replaced with 4 layers of Cylindrical GEM

Request for the TE-MPE-EM Workshop by BESIII:

GEM n. 16 GEM foils of ~ 800-900 mm active length, 300-400 mm wide

Cathode n. 8 foils ~ 800-900 mm active length, 300-400 mm wide

Readout boards n. 8 XV readout pattern (à la KLOE or Compass) ~ 800-900 mm active length, 300-400 mm wide

Conclusions

After about 12 years of interaction/collaboration with the TE-MPE-EM Workshop, for sure we can says that it was a very positive and fruitful experience.

But with the increase of requests from users and the busy schedules both in production and in the R&D of new structures, sometimes the biggest problem was the (not negligible) delay in the delivery of the requested materials.

In addition, I personally think that Rui should be helped by a person, who should keep contacts (interface) with the various manufacturers of detectors.

Last 12 Months Activity with PH-ESE

128 jobs initiated in PH-ESE for a total cost of 258 kCHF

Cost breakdown for jobs up to 500 CHF 65 kCHF for layout (28%) 118 kCHF for PCB (52%) 46 kCHF for assembly (20%)

In addition a few productions managed by TE-MPE-EM e.g. TTCex, ALICE Router

PH-ESETE-MPE-EM workshop – 29 Nov. 2012

22

What’s Going Well

Direct contact with the people doing the work is very important, fruitful and should be maintained Layout workshop PCB for special devices (e.g. fancy flex)

Special devices and detectors are the “raison d’être” of this service in our view

Assembly workshop for advices and/or analysis

In general no major problems At least not reported A few exceptions (e.g. ALICE Router spares production)

A lot of efforts made for solving the problems

New procedures discussed for avoiding problems e.g. use of spare boards for checking PCB behaviour in the owen

PH-ESETE-MPE-EM workshop – 29 Nov. 2012

23

Usual complaints (as received)

Costing for layout Not always understood Normally a “devis” is to be

given before the work starts but it might not be always the case

Schedule For small productions, the

choice of outsourcing versus in house production is made by TE-MPE-EM with an impact on schedule not always properly advertised

Well anticipated production requests not treated early enough

Some decisions taken without informing the customer e.g. selection of components for

the assembly

What could be done Improving the approval process

at each stage Improving procedures for

solving recurrent problems

PH-ESETE-MPE-EM workshop – 29 Nov. 2012

24

Future Use and Wishes

No major changes in the coming year

We have several time in the past and very recently used a single entry company for production PCB & assembly manufacturing files, BOM provided by us The company takes care of everything

PCB production, components procurement and assembly Very efficient

Could we have a contract with one or two companies of that kind to ease the ordering process?

PH-ESETE-MPE-EM workshop – 29 Nov. 2012

25

TE-EPC FeedbackDesign Office review

D. Nisbet

29th Nov 2012

27

Introduction Most of the following feedback came from information

provided by 14 technicians and engineers from within the EPC group

The group is a large user of the design office, with approximately 100 jobs per year

Predominantly concerned with circuit board design, production and assembly, with some mechanical design.

I have summarized the information into a few points

28

Positive feedback

EDA Documentation Specialists in use of design tools Component creation Availability of designers to respond to questions General email for jobs (team available) Proto assembly is good

29

Negative feedback Job progress (late? early?) Component creation errors

how to reduce the quantity/impact? Board production cost?

30

Suggestions Introduce easy method to feedback and improve Web based job tracking Transparent pricing to estimate job cost in advance Improve flexibility to modify data in EDA

Allow job owner to modify certain data fields? Management of components

Most components are bought in small quantities Manage a larger component inventory for prototyping

31

Conclusion

The overall opinion of the service from the design office is very positive

Etienne CARLIER

TE-MPE-EM SupportFeedback from TE/ABT

What is Functioning Well

In general, good and very useful service

Thanks from TE/ABT to all the persons concerned for their continuous support to our different projects

• Schematics– Missing “macro components” that can be reused in different project (i.e.

FPGA/CPLD powering circuit). – Components library is OK. Some issues with identification of powering pins in

multi parts digital circuits.– Creation of new symbol works fine… but not error free (discovered only once

the prototype is produced). Need for quality check done on each component created

• Routing– Establishment of a clear “cahier des charges” between designer and developer

missing at the beginning of the routing process (PCB design constraints) .– Project tracking during routing is perhaps not optimum. Creation of a wiki page

for each project can perhaps help.– Manual cross-check of result provided by auto-router

• Mechanics (front-panel)– Support of CATIA drawing still missing

What Would Need Improvement

• Numbering– Not unique (EDA, AED, old PS numbering convention… )– EDA numbering reserved only to design fully handled by TE/MPE/EM– AED numbering (same structure as EDA) not supported by TE/MPE/EM– Some improvement welcome in order to obtain a unique numbering

scheme (and production folder) for all electronics design• Production (prototype and small series)

– Done at via TE/MPE/EM or directly with external firms – Acceptance of production done via TE/MPE/EM can be an issue (quality

control). Where is the responsibility. Mainly true when production include a high degree of manual actions (cabling)

• Possibility to produce special multi-layers PCB– With different copper layers thickness (power electronic)– With different dielectric layers thickness (high-voltage)– Expertise sometime missing in TE/MPE/EM

What Would Need Improvement (cont.)

• My feeling is that no “electronic design activities” should go out of CERN without approval of TE/MPE/EM… at least for prototyping and small series– Activity code in DAI with mandatory approval from TE/MPE/EM– Electronic design review by “TE Electronic Coordinator”

• TE/MPE/EM should act as “link office” between CERN and External Firms (PCB routing, prototype assembly…)– Selection of external firms that can be used by clients developers

according to a predefined “cahier des charges”• Uniform numbering• Uniform set of files to be included in the manufacturing dossier

– Full quality control over the complete design and production chain

Future Plans