ibl interim-mou annexes g. darbo – infn / genova peib, 1 march 2010 o ibl interim-mou annexes...

IBL interim-MoU AnnexesG. Darbo – INFN / Genova PEIB, 1 March 2010o

IBL interim-MoUAnnexes

Pixel Extended Institution BoardCERN, March 1st, 2010

NCP Meeting – 21/04/2010

Prepared by:

G. Darbo - INFN / Genova

Indico agenda pages (PEIB & NCP):• http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=85644• http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceOtherViews.py?view=standard&co

nfId=75714

Rev.2

Apr.2010

http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=85644


http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceOtherViews.py?view=standard&confId=75714



IBL interim-MoU AnnexesG. Darbo – INFN / Genova PEIB, 1 March 20102

IBL ProjectIBL project and schedule in dept presented in the last IBL General Meeting with a summary at the last week ATLAS General Meeting.

References:• IBL General Meeting: 11-12 February 2010


• Talk of H. Pernegger @ IBL General Meeting• 11/2/2010 - technical project status and schedule

http://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?contribId=1&sessionId=0&resId=1&materialId=slides&confId=73688

• Talks of G. Darbo @ ATLAS Week • 26/2/2010 - summary project status

http://indicoprev.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=66742




http://indicoprev.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=66742


ANNEX 1Who does what


Annex 1Project divide into 11 items. To funding Agency money matrix shows only 5 Systems. (less detail)

IBL MoU SystemsGrouping used in the Annex 4 table

MoU ItemsGrouping used in

the Annex 1.x tables


Annex 1.1: Sensor (1/4)Sensor technology selected after prototyping with FE-I4• Prototypes with Planar, 3D and

Diamond.• Once technology is selected the interim

MoU will become the final MoU. • An Institute can leave the IBL project

before signing the final MoU if is participation is “Sensor Technology Dependent”.

• The Technology Option column in Annex 4 will cover the related and additional costs implied by the technology chosen.

In the prototyping cost only part of the real cost are covered:• Sensor prototype cost largely shared

with sLHC R&D.• Cost in the IBL are for “extra wafers”

and bump-bonding with FE-I4.


A1.1: Sensors (2/4)The quoted cost for production should cover Planar sensor or “low profile 3D”. More expensive solutions in the 3D, Diamond and/or thinner FE-I4 modules are maintained in the Technology Option until final decision.


A1.1: Sensors (3/4)Only work responsibility for prototyping in the iMoU.


A1.1: Sensors (4/4)Cost sharing for prototyping follows the “work responsibility” on the sensor technology.Cost sharing for production selected to minimize “technology dependence” on funding source (see next slide).


Sensor Production Contribution


Annex 1.2: FE-I4

FE-I4 assumes two engineering runs and final production of 3 batch of 24 wafers of the second version.

Work and cost includes wafer testing.

• Including hardware (USBpix) and/or outsourcing for testing.


A 1.2: FE-I4 (2/4)In the item are:

• FE-I4 version 1 (engineering run)• Fe-I4 version 2 (engineering run)• Hardware for single mo


A 1.2: FE-I4 (3/4)


A 1.2: FE-I4 (4/4)Cost sharing is different from version 1 and version 2 due to expected work participation of Geneva in the version 2.


Annex 1.3: Bump-BondingA 1.3 Summary:

Deliverables:• Bump-bonding and QC for IBL

Prototype:• Vendor qualification.


A 1.3: Bump Bonding (2/4)The cost was evaluated with rather conservative (40%) yield. Yield is probably better, but more advanced techniques would rise the costs.


A 1.3: Bump Bonding (3/4)Notes:

In the prototype phase the cost of FE-I4 wafer thinning and bump-deposition are in MoU item #3. The sensor wafer processing (UBM/bump-deposition) and flip chip is in MoU item #1. Qualify the two vendors used by ATLAS Pixel - baseline AgSn - Technology backup Indium. KEK develops bump-bonding with Hamamatsu (possible option if the first two fail), participation to common procurement.


A 1.3: Bump Bonding (4/4)Prototype:

• INFN and BMBF to qualify AsSn and In vendors, with Barcelona contributing with dummy sensors.


Annex 1.4: Bare Stave & Cooling Pipe

A 1.4 Summary:Deliverables:

• Bare stave with cooling pipe• Cooling pipe to PP1

Package divided in:• Prototype and production

Baseline:• CO2 cooling and Titanium pipe

based on Reviewers’ recommendations.


A 1.4: Bare Stave & Cooling Pipe (2/3)


Substantial prototype work already made and paid:• Almost 50% of the cost of the stave prototype have been contributed by:

BMBF, IN2P3 and INFN.• Production and QC site need agreement.

A 1.4: Bare Stave & Cooling Pipe (3/3)


Annex 1.5: Module & Stave Loading

A 1.5 SummaryDeliverables:

• Flex hybrid (stave/module) design, production QC

• Electrical internal services (pipe is in item #4)

• Flex Module production & QC• Loading of Modules on stave and

QC• PP1 services (both electrical and

cooling)


A 1.5: Module & Stave Loading (2/3)

EoS card is equivalent to PP0 of the Pixels. No active component foreseen on it.Stave 0 is a multi module system with prototype parts (FE-I4.v1, stave, flex).


A 1.5: Module & Stave Loading (3/3)

Clarification: Flex Module is the module dressed with parts ready for loading on stave.


Annex 1.6: R/O ChainA 1.6 Summary

Deliverables:• Opto-board & boxes• Opto fibers• BOC/ROD• Opto plugins• TDAQ parts (TIM, ROD

crates, SBC …)


A 1.6: R/O Chain (2/4)


A 1.6: R/O Chain (3/4)ROD baseline is a “modernized” BOC/ROD using VME.

• Deliverables and cost sharing follows this line.


A 1.6: R/O Chain (4/4)RX-plugin assigned to Ohio (upgrade for the Pixel). DAQ hardware (187 kCH) proposed as in kind contribution from INFN Commissioning of the R/O chain is with the Institutes sharing the Work Responsibilities. BOC and ROD follow the philosophy of a modernized VME designTDAQ off-shelf hardware are in-kind from M&O-A.


Annex 1.7: Power ChainA 1.7 Summary

Deliverables:• PP2 regulators and boxes• HV & LV PS• All cables to PP1• HV-PP4/LV-PP4• DCS and Interlock


A 1.7: Power Chain (2/4)Cables and power supplies on M&O-A.


A 1.7: Power Chain (3/4)LV and DCS cables are M&O-A in-kindHV and LV PS are M&O-A in-kindHV Cables only work covered, but stay on M&O-A


A 1.7: Power Chain (4/4)


Annex 1.8: Integration & System Test


• Integration toolings• System Test infrastructure

(cooling included)


A 1.8: Integration & System Test (2/4)


Note:• This MoU item will see major involvement of CERN and Geneva with

responsibilities and full contribution to the cost. More precise sharing of responsibilities is in discussion and this will reflect an update of how “Work Responsibilities” is phrased.

• Several institutes will contribute with work in both System Test and Integration.



Note: CERN and Geneva are the two contributors in cost to this MoU item. Norway is interested in "System Test”. Expect to be able to cover about a third (i.e. 70kCHF), assuming only half the amount is to be spent during current funding period, which runs till the end of 2011. Norway contribution put into “Technology Options” Bern - Expression of interest in the Integration and System Test



Annex 1.9: Cooling Plant & Services

Item covered by M&O-A

Interest from some institutes (mainly if CO2)

• Nikhef and SLAC


Annex 1.10: Beam Pipe & Interfaces


• Beam-pipe (M&O-A)• Tooling for installation & mockup• Global supports for IBL and services.


A 1.10: Beam Pipe & Interfaces (2/3)


A 1.11: InstallationA 1.4 Summary:

Deliverables:• Most of the cost is manpower,

consultancy for ALARA, etc.


ANNEX 2The Project Organization


Annex 2:IBL Organization

• IBL MB decisions and IB decisions• IBL PL and IBL TC responsibilities• Participation of the Institutes to the IBL: Pixel Institutes, new

Institutes and participation through the Project Office.• Reporting of IBL PL and TC• Selection of IBL PL and TC (ATLAS rules), term of mandate.• Institutes voting for the IBL PL

Management Board• The IBL Management Board (MB) controls the execution of

the project. • The IBL MB meets every two weeks in phone meeting and is

chaired by the IBL PL and TC. • Meetings have closed participation to MB members and

speakers could be invited to report on specific issues on request of the IBL MB.

• The IBL MB uses indico and SharePoint to distribute material for discussion.

• Minutes circulated to the IBL collaboration and Issue Tracking is the way the MB works.

Working Groups• The construction activities of the whole IBL project are

divided into four working groups. • Each working group has two coordinators. • Sharing of responsibilities between the two coordinators in

each working group is defined on the base on a mandate document.

• The Working Group coordinators steer the activities they are concerned in periodic meetings that are largely in the form of phone conference.


Institute Board• The Institutions taking part in the project, in a direct

way (as opposed through the UPO), with money and manpower, are part of the Institute Board (IB).

• The IB is an extension of the Pixel IB and usually meets after the normal Pixel IB with the additional Institutions members in the IBL.

• Major technology choices affecting the overall performance of ATLAS have to be brought forward to the collaboration as a whole for decision in the Collaboration Board.

• Composition of the IB is ad-iterim until the IBL MoU is finalised.

IBL General Meetings• These meetings are held three or four times a year

and constitutes the forum where discussions on any aspect of the Pixel project should take place.

Collaborative Tools & EDMS• To transmit the information in the IBL project is

used a “Share Point” Collaborative Workspace. • Share Point is used during the phase of

preparation of the documents in their final form. The approved document are referenced and posted in the EDMS structure.

• Workgroup meetings and IBL General Meeting are on indico.

• To transmit the information, a few open subscription (to ATLAS members) mailing lists.


ANNEX 3The Institutes & Institutions


Annex 3: Institutes/Institutions


ANNEX 4The Money Matrix


Annex 4

Note: the numbers in the table "are not final, nor are the suggested financial contributions yet firm, but are meant for a common overall discussion.”

Technology options refer to supplementary costs that are sensor technology specific and will be known before the definite MoU takes effect.

So far, France, Italy and US have requested their shares to be moved from M&O to Project part.


Annex 4 (extended)


ANNEX 5Payment Profile


Annex 5: Payment ProfileThe payment profile corresponds to readiness for installation by end of 2014

The main cost in 2010 are for prototyping: FE-I4, sensor, stave.

ibl interim-mou annexes g. darbo – infn / genova peib, 1 march 2010 o ibl interim-mou annexes...

Documents

interim mou

ibl project ibl project

table ibl mou systems

final mou

darbo infn genova peib

ibl general meeting

table mou items

x tables mou items