[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GlueX electronics review
Hi Elton
I have a feeling that structuring the discussion to be more like a review
than a workfest is preferably because it will force us to focus more and
hopefully do serious homework before the review. I recall how valuable
the first Hall D was for us and mainly because it forced us to work hard
and think carefully about what we were presenting. A workfest - I fear
will be too relaxed and not as focused.
Thought?
Alex
At 1:07 PM -0400 4/16/03, Elton Smith wrote:
>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
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Alex R. Dzierba - Professor of Physics
Department of Physics - Indiana University - Swain West 117
727 E 3rd Street - Bloomington, IN 47405-7105
Office - (812)855-9421 855-0440 (fax)
Cell - (812) 327-1881
Home - (812) 825-4063 (812) 825-4152 (fax)
Secretary: Donna Martin (812) 855-2785
dzierba@indiana.edu
http://dustbunny.physics.indiana.edu/~dzierba
Visit the College: http://www.indiana.edu/~college/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~