[Halld-tagger] specs for microscope readout power supplies

Alexander Somov somov at jlab.org
Mon Dec 9 11:20:16 EST 2013


Hi Fernando,

I've been completely distracted with the fcal trigger/daq setup
and the PS fabrication/testing. The most convenient time for
doing this electromagnetic bg simulation would be the Christmas break.

I think that the em background origination from the radiator
would not be difficult to shield by placing some blocks
(but i certainly can estimate it contribution).

Cheers,
        Alex

P.S. The MPOD solution for the microscope seems to be the best
as we can use the same control for several sub-detectors
it is no the cheapest one... but still not that expensive)




On Mon, 9 Dec 2013, Fernando J Barbosa wrote:

> Hi Alex,
>
> A few weeks ago, Eugene mentioned that you were going to perform additional 
> simulations about the radiation levels in the tagger hall so we could settle 
> on the racks placement. Did you have a chance to look into this?
>
> Thanks and best regards,
> Fernando
>
>
> On 12/9/2013 10:56 AM, Fernando J Barbosa wrote:
>> Hi Hovanes,
>> 
>> My plan is to use a mini MPOD with two modules, one is the familiar 8V and 
>> the other is a 120V. Both are Wiener MPODs and I can segment into 6 TAGM 
>> backplane feeds. So, the controls are the same as the rest of the Hall D 
>> MPODs. This solution will cost less than $15k. I will distribute the plan 
>> shortly.
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> Fernando
>> 
>> 
>> On 12/9/2013 10:51 AM, Hovanes Egiyan wrote:
>>> Hi Richard,
>>> what type of controls is needed for these? Do we need to be able to 
>>> remotely
>>> control them, turn them on/off, power cycle them?
>>> Hovanes.
>>> 
>>> On 12/09/2013 10:37 AM, Fernando J Barbosa wrote:
>>>> Hi Richard,
>>>> 
>>>> OK, looks good. I will look at options for the supplies.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks and best regards,
>>>> Fernando
>>>> 
>>>> On 12/9/2013 10:28 AM, Richard Jones wrote:
>>>>> Fernando,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Our background study showed that we could continue to function for 10 
>>>>> years of high-rate running without annealing, just allowing the dark 
>>>>> rate to increase at the rate that was measured in Hall B and allowing 
>>>>> the supply current to increase.  Under the zero-shielding scenario, just 
>>>>> leaving the electronics unshielded in the tagger hall, we estimated that 
>>>>> we would reach the point where we would need to do something (eg. anneal 
>>>>> or replace the SiPM's) after 10 years of high-rate running.  The usual 
>>>>> assumptions were applied (100 days of running per year, standard 20 
>>>>> micron diamond, 12 GeV electrons at 2.2 microAmps).  With shielding, we 
>>>>> expect to reduce this figure by a factor of 5-10 (the simulation gave a 
>>>>> factor around 8), so we should be able to run for the duration of GlueX 
>>>>> without annealing.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I agree with you that we can segment the supplies.  Each of them can be 
>>>>> split up to 6 ways, because there are 6 identical backplanes in the 
>>>>> system.  The specs we posted were for the total sum of all 6 backplanes.
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Richard J.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Fernando J Barbosa <barbosa at jlab.org 
>>>>> <mailto:barbosa at jlab.org>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>     Hi Richard,
>>>>>
>>>>>     Certainly the rates in the tagger are higher but what is your
>>>>>     planning for annealing the SiPMs? I am just curious given the
>>>>>     higher rates.
>>>>>
>>>>>     Regarding the power supplies, you mentioned the possibility of
>>>>>     having three supplies instead of one for the whole system. Is
>>>>>     it possible to consider further segmentation? One channel per
>>>>>     backplane? Do you have a document that shows the whole system
>>>>>     as installed? The issue is also related to the space available
>>>>>     under the magnet.
>>>>>
>>>>>     Best regards,
>>>>>     Fernando
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>
>>>>>     On 12/6/2013 10:09 AM, Richard Jones wrote:
>>>>>>     Fernando,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     These estimates for the BCal do not apply to the TAGM, where
>>>>>>     the rates are much higher.  We can set up a meeting to discuss
>>>>>>     this further if you feel we need it.  We worked out these
>>>>>>     rates back during the design phase for the readout
>>>>>>     electronics, and had them reviewed within the photon beam
>>>>>>     working group. Also keep in mind that the neutron flux is much
>>>>>>     higher in the tagger hall than in the experimental hall.  On
>>>>>>     the other hand, the TAGM can operate efficiently at much
>>>>>>     higher single-pixel rates than can a calorimeter because it is
>>>>>>     not producing an energy measurement, but only time, and the
>>>>>>     photon statistics are high, <n> = 350-400 within a 15ns
>>>>>>     window.  We are shielding these electronics, but we only
>>>>>>     expect to cut down the neutron flux by about a factor 10-20 in
>>>>>>     this way.  Alex Somov did the neutron rates and shielding
>>>>>>     studies for us, and can provide more details in this regard.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     -Richard J.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 9:04 AM, Fernando J Barbosa
>>>>>>     <barbosa at jlab.org <mailto:barbosa at jlab.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>         Hi Richard,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>         In reference to the BCAL and taking Yi's measurements in
>>>>>>         Hall A regarding radiation damage, we settled on a maximum
>>>>>>         of 10mA for 10 arrays or 160 cells (3mm x 3mm). This works
>>>>>>         out to 62.5uA per cell and your estimate is higher by a
>>>>>>         factor greater than 10. What is your plan for annealing
>>>>>>         the SiPMs? Frequency?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>         Did you look into any supplies that might fit your
>>>>>>         requirements? I recall that each backplane of the TAGM has
>>>>>>         a single bias supply input, correct? This would be
>>>>>>         important in considering a multi-channel supply system.
>>>>>>         Please send me your latest drawings on the TAGM system and
>>>>>>         its installation in the Tagger hall.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>         Best regards,
>>>>>>         Fernando
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>         On 12/5/2013 10:50 PM, Richard Jones wrote:
>>>>>>>         Hello Fernando,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         I am spec'ing the Vbias supply capacity at 500mA to allow
>>>>>>>         for the maximum SiPM draw current that is permitted by
>>>>>>>         the bias voltage supply system.  Initially we expect the
>>>>>>>         average current to be around 15 mA at full intensity (2.2
>>>>>>>         uA electrons on 20 micron diamond) but that it will
>>>>>>>         increase gradually over time due to radiation damage.  To
>>>>>>>         get the maximum current spec, I imagine the worst
>>>>>>>         possible circumstances under which the radiation damage
>>>>>>>         might accumulate faster than expected, and ask how much
>>>>>>>         current could we sustain across all channels before the
>>>>>>>         resolution and efficiency degrade significantly due to
>>>>>>>         dark current.  The answer to that is approximately 800uA
>>>>>>>         per channel, which totals about 400mA from the supply.  I
>>>>>>>         rounded that up to 500mA.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         -Richard Jones
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>         On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Fernando J Barbosa
>>>>>>>         <barbosa at jlab.org <mailto:barbosa at jlab.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>             Hi Richard,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>             I looked at the specs and the bias supply current
>>>>>>>             seems to be excessive at 500mA. What's the reason for
>>>>>>>             this?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>             Best regards,
>>>>>>>             Fernando
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>             On 12/5/2013 3:33 PM, Richard Jones wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>                 Hello Alex,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>                 Here is a draft of the specs for the microscope
>>>>>>>                 readout dc power supplies.  They can be a single
>>>>>>>                 unit for each of 3 levels, or a few
>>>>>>>                 lower-capacity supplies in tandem with the same
>>>>>>>                 total output capacity.  Please request
>>>>>>>                 justification for any of the specs.  One thing we
>>>>>>>                 do not spec here, but think would be useful, is
>>>>>>>                 separate delivery and sense terminals for each
>>>>>>>                 output.  We have separate pins on the backplane
>>>>>>>                 connector for this purpose.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>                 http://zeus.phys.uconn.edu/wiki/index.php/Microscope_Electronics#Power_Supply_Requirements
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>                 -Richard Jones
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Halld-tagger mailing list
>>>> Halld-tagger at jlab.org
>>>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/halld-tagger
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Halld-tagger mailing list
>>> Halld-tagger at jlab.org
>>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/halld-tagger
>> 
>
>


More information about the Halld-tagger mailing list