Trigger session report

ByungGu Cheon Hanyang University

19 March, 2009

2nd Open Meeting of the Super KEKB Collaboration

sBelle calorimeter trigger

Belle

sBelle

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

S. Ryu

Test bench for Shaper board

New Shaper Board

S. Ryu

Department of Physics & Astronomy, Seoul National UniversityDepartment of Physics & Astronomy, Seoul National University

๏ 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

S. Ryu

Department of Physics & Astronomy, Seoul National UniversityDepartment of Physics & Astronomy, Seoul National University

๏Noise level test with cosmic data → okay

RMS =1.58

~ 10 MeV

26 ch for 160 MeV

6

pedestal (mean value)

peak

ch ch

chch

S. Ryu

Problem in g4superb(?)

April 20, 2023 Y.Unno 7

Logarithm scale

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

hadron interaction effect in g4superb-ecl is strange???

Y. Unno

Effect of beam bkg

April 20, 2023 Y.Unno 8

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)

Y. Unno

Effect of beam bkg

April 20, 2023 Y.Unno 9

Random triggered event under x20 bkg will be all triggered as physics event?!

Y. Unno

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

M. FriedlAPV25, Clock and Trigger

• 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

SummaryM. Friedl

E. Won

E. Won

Y. Iwasaki

Y. Iwasaki

Y. Iwasaki

Y. Iwasaki

Backup

Tsim-ecl with Belle and sBelle

April 20, 2023 Y.Unno 19

eeX(214)

Without beam background

Belle ecl performance sBelle ecl performance

Super-Belle

Belle tsim-ecl sBelle tsim-ecl

geant3 geant4

Y. Unno

g4superbgsim

Check with single trackComparison between w/ and w/o inner detector

Note that there is no difference between w/ and w/o inner detector for gsim too.

Effect of beam bkg