[Halld-tagger] Hall D Cable Assignment

[Alexander Somov]

Hi Fernando,

I absolutely agree with Liping and Richard regarding the spare
cables. It would make sense to have a few 'extra' cables for
all beam line (probably all other) detectors.

Using a separate letter 'S' would be more logical, MIC(FA,PS2)-S-...
I was thinking of using the same label A for the signal/ADC cables,
and distinguishing TDC cables by letter 'T'. By the way, how the
splitters will look like (the small box for each individual channel
as we used for the prototype testing, or you'll design a compact 
multi-channel module; it will not be a crate based module I guess) ?

Thanks,
        Alex



On Thu, 21 Jun 2012, Richard Jones wrote:

> Fernando,
>
> Alex has already sent you a proposed naming scheme for the cables connecting 
> the tagging counters to the electronics racks.  Here is some further 
> elaboration to explain how the cabling should be configured.  It applies to 
> the microscope (MIC-xxx), and perhaps to the fixed array (FA-xxx) channels as 
> well.
>
> 1. There should be only one coax cable per electronic signal running from the 
> detector to the electronics racks.  This signal will be split at the 
> electronics racks, and short cables run from the splitter outputs to the 
> discriminator input (split output 1) and the fadc input (split output 2).
> 2. These short cables should be long enough to span the height of one rack, 
> but not much more.
> 3. The names requested by Alex, MIC-T-nnn and MIC-A-nnn, are only appropriate 
> for these short cables that come after the splitter.  Before the splitter, 
> these two are one and the same signal, and should be distinguished by names 
> of their own.
> 4. For the long cables from the microscope to the racks (before the 
> splitter), I suggest the following naming scheme: MIC-S-nnn where nnn runs 
> from 1 to 122.
>
> I also echo Liping's desire to have a few extra cables run along the long 
> route from detector to racks, just because it would be disruptive to try to 
> replace a few broken cables once they are laid in the trays.  I leave to your 
> discretion how many extra would be desirable.  Perhaps there is a policy for 
> other detectors that you could apply to us.  For these, one might just extend 
> the above scheme, for example letting nnn go from 1 to 135 instead of 1 - 
> 122.
>
> -Richard Jones
>
>
>
>
>
> On 6/21/2012 9:41 AM, Alexander Somov wrote:
>> Hi Fernando,
>> 
>> 
>> Here are cabling schemes for the PS, the  microscope,
>> and the fixed-array counters. I would not put fadc
>> channel on labels. If some fadc channels are dead, the
>> cabling is screwed up. I assume that labels are the same
>> on both cable ends; we don't have many channels in
>> these detectors.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>>          Alex
>> 
>> 
>> P.S. Richard, Franz, please take a look on the microscope
>> and fixed array labling
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Pair Spectrometer
>> -----------------
>> 
>> DET - SIDE - FADC/TDC - CH
>> 
>> 1. Fine Granularity (128 + 128 = 256 channels)
>> 
>> PS1 - 1 - A - 1
>> ..............
>> PS1 - 1 - A - 256
>> 
>> 
>> PS1 - 2 - A - 1
>> ..............
>> PS1 - 2 - A - 256
>> 
>> 2. Low granularity ( 8 + 8 = 16 channels)
>> 
>> PS2 - 1 - A - 1
>> ...............
>> PS2 - 1 - A - 8
>> 
>> 
>> PS2 - 1 - T - 1
>> ...............
>> PS2 - 1 - T - 8
>> 
>> 
>> PS2 - 2 - A - 1
>> ...............
>> PS2 - 2 - A - 8
>> 
>> 
>> PS2 - 2 - T - 1
>> ...............
>> PS2 - 2 - T - 8
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Fixed Array (190 channels)
>> --------------------------
>> 
>> DET - FADC/TDC - CH
>> 
>> FA - A - 1
>> ............
>> FA - A - 190
>> 
>> 
>> FA - T  - 1
>> ............
>> FA - T  - 190
>> 
>> 
>> Microscope (120 + 2 = 122 ch)
>> -----------------------------
>> 
>> DET - FADC/TDC - CH
>> 
>> MIC - A - 1
>> ...........
>> MIC - A - 122
>> 
>> 
>> MIC - T - 1
>> ...........
>> MIC - T - 122
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>
>
>