Re: GlueX electronics review

[Elton Smith <elton@jlab.org>]

Hi Paul,

We discussed the proposal for the GlueX electronics review. The general
consensus was that at this stage we might benefit more from a "Workfest"  
than a review, perhaps including external guests for brainstorming and
feedback. If Andy Lankford, or someone similar, might be willing to
participate he would help give direction and provide feedback on gaps that
need attention. 

Collaborators that should attend: 
IU (Paul,...) 
JLab Physics (Elton, Dave,...)
JLab Electronics (Fernando,...) 
JLab DAQ (Ed,...)
JLab Detector (Randy,...)
calorimeter (Regina HPD development,...)
DCs (Dan Carman, Mehmet, Curtis,...)
Vertex Detector (Werner,...)
.......

Topics:
On board electronics
Preamps: DCs/VLPCs/HPDs
FADCs: Next steps
F1 TDCs: Testing of full boards in progress
HV:
Packaging:
Trigger:
DAQ integration:

Potential dates on our side: July 7-18. Perhaps we want to bring up this 
topic at the Hall D phone conference tomorrow.

On a separate, but perhaps related topic, we also discussed various tools
for electronic design which would be useful to the Fast Electronics group
for future developments. These would include tools for simulation, perhpas
chip design, which go beyond the current capabilities of PCAD. Fernando is
visiting Fermi and Brookhaven (for CLAS developments) but will inquire
how these labs support electronic projects.

On Tue, 15 Apr 2003, Paul Smith wrote:

> 
> >1. Schedule
> 
> I was thinking of say 2 days sometime in June or July.
> 
> 
> >2. Background of reviewers. Options include a) Jlab+Friends to give us 
> >feedback b) ask one or more "well-known" experts to come into town. For 
> >option b) we might be able to piggy-back on somebody coming to Jlab for 
> >other purposes.
> 
> 
> It seems to me it should be someone from outside JLab.  One possible person I 
> thought of was Andy Lankford - he authored some general articles about BaBar
> electronics.  Elliott suggested someone from D0, I don't recall the name.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >3. What is the main purpose of the review. Look at detailed designs and 
> >give feedback? Look at very general layouts and provide advice on what 
> >avenues to pursue? Location of electronics? Connections to DAQ?
> >
> 
> 
> Well, I don't think we're quite to detailed designs yet.  I thought it would
> be a review of what we propose in the v4 design report.  Does what we propose
> make sense?  Should we be pursuing something different from what is in the 
> report?  Where are we likely to have problems?  Is there anything which will
> raise red flags down the road, say when we get to a Lehmann review?
> 
> Paul
> 
> 

-- 
Elton Smith
Jefferson Lab
elton@jlab.org
(757) 269-7625