From novaes@fnal.gov Wed Aug 21 16:06:19 2002
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 16:03:01 -0500
From: Sergio F. Novaes <novaes@fnal.gov>
To: novaes@d0mino.fnal.gov
Subject: FW:

             Abracos,

             Sergio

__________________________________________________________________________

 Sergio F. Novaes                                                Fermilab
 E-mail: novaes@fnal.gov                                     P.O. Box 500
 Phone: (630) 840.2454                                   Mail Station 352
 Cell:  (630) 272.1819                             Batavia, IL 60510-0500
 Fax:   (630) 840.8886                                                USA
__________________________________________________________________________

-----Original Message-----
From: Sergio F. Novaes [mailto:novaes@fnal.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 3:48 PM
To: Sergio F. Novaes
Subject:

Michael Strang
Wednesday, July 03, 2002
Cal/FPD shifter instructions

Here is the link to the instruction as they now exist.

http://d0server1.fnal.gov/users/strang/web/fpd/documents/nonfpd_shifter.html

Please let me know about any changes so they can be incorporated.
__________________________________________________________________________

Victor Bodyagin
Friday, July 05, 2002
pictures for oklahoma

             I've prepared three ps-files for your talk in Oklahoma.
 They are in /home/bodyagin/d0/fpd/offline/oklahoma directory of online
 cluster.
   Their names are: adc3.ps,  planes.ps, and  two-dim.ps

           Let me know if you face some problems.

__________________________________________________________________________

Jorge Luis Barreto
Tuesday, July 09, 2002
Data Analyse Summary

        We (M. Strang, J. Molina, V. Bodyagin, J. Barreto) met today at
SDH to have updates in the data analyse issues.

        M. Strang: presented ADC distribution for D1 and D2 diffractive
data and others plots that can be found at:

All of my plots are located on d0mino in

/prj_root/810/fp_1/strang/analyze/ps

where it is broken down by runnumber or runlist name.

adc* are the tdc and adc plots
plot* are the other diagnostic plots

Today I showed information from Run278 (adc plots) and Run281
(diagnostic plots).

        Plots for X-X' distributions for both detectors show a pattern
that is similar to MC diffractive data, although shifted to lower X and
X' values (a shift in the vertical direction for D1 and D2 ?). A final
data sample for tracking purpose should be released soon.

        J. Molina - updated the list of bad channels for D1 and D2:

The list of bad channels after taking out the extra set of cable in D1 is:

D1

ADC             Bad channel number (0 to 15)                    # of bad
channels

 0              1-2-4-7-13-15                                   6
 1                      -                                               -
 2              0-11-13                                         3
 3              3                                                       1
 4              15                                                      1
 5              13                                                      1
 6              1-2-3                                                   3

D2

 7              12                                                      1
 8              16                                                      1
 9              0                                                       1
10              6-9-15                                          3
11              1-2-4-6-9-10-14                                 7
12              15                                                      1
13              0-15                                                    2
                                                                     ---
                                                        total           31

So, we have in total 30 dead channels due not only to bad cable but to A/S
and and MAPMTs also.

        He also showed a 47m flat cable where the weldings were ver poorly
done, both at the ground and signal connections. Some time was spent
discussing how to solve this issue of bad channels, with no good
solution.

        J. Barreto: updated on MC issues related to the Proton ID
document.
__________________________________________________________________________

Victor Bodyagin
Wednesday, July 10, 2002
AFE signals

  the matter is that 100mv is an abnormally huge signal for any
  PMT. Moreover, many things depend upon the light source.
  Was your light source calibrated for MIP? If not you
  could get any PMT current you wanted.
    The signals I observed were nearly an order of magintude
 smaller and that was after using A/S. Pierrick tried to get
 ADC distributions having bypassed A/S and did not get something
 in ADC spectra which could remind somebody Landau distribution.
 Let me deliver the numbers I have:
  1. Gate width = 150nsec
  2. 1 FERA ADC count is equal to 0.25 pC.
  5. The load I used at the input of the scope was 46 Ohm (~50 Ohm).

    I did the measurements by comparison of pedestal shift in ADC
    distribution with the shift in the scope.

    Having used formula: Q = V*G/R,
     Where Q - charge measured by ADC,
           G - gate width,
           R - 46 Ohm resistor

   I got that 1 ADC count corresponds to 0.066 mv of DC coming from A/S,
   or 1mv of DC to 13 ADC counts.

      Typically pulses coming from MAPMT+A/S have ~50 nsec width.
   So the voltage of DC current averaged over 150 nsec interval for 100mv
   amplitude can be estimated by 30mv.

          It will give us 390 ADC counts.
   This value is well above most of our fiber signals, since Landau
  distribution is rather steep in the left part and has a very
  long and flat due to delta electrons (practically infinite!)  tail in
  its right.

         Therefore, I'm really cencerned about this numbers.

   Anyway, I'm going to repeat and cricically examine my measurements.
__________________________________________________________________________

Jorge Molina
Thursday, July 11, 2002
DI bad channel list

Hi,

I made this afternoon the measurements of bad cables channels using the
device made by Newton to look at the reflection of the wave created by a
pulse generator. The list is:

D1

 Cable          Bad chann # (0-15)                              Problem

RC32-1          1                                               shorted at
the connector in SCR
                        4
shorted at the connector in SCR
                        6
shorted at the connector in SCR
                        9-10
shorted between them at the conn in SCR
                        15
shorted at the connector in SCR

RC32-2          -
    -

RC32-3          11                                              shorted at
PW08
                        13
shorted at PW08

RC32-4          6

RC32-5          15                                              shorted
under the floor in SCR

RC32-6          0                                               shorted
under the floor in SCR
                        1
shorted under the floor in SCR
                        13
shorted at PW08
                        15
shorted at the junction in the tunnel

RC32-7          1                                               shorted at
the connector in SCR
                        3
shorted at the connector in SCR
                        8
shorted at the connector in SCR

D2

FERA 8          0-1                                             shorted
between them at PW08
                        14-15
shorted between them at PW08

FERA 9          6-7                                             shorted
between them under the floor in SCR
                        15
shorted under the floor in SCR

FERA
             -

FERA 11         6                                               no
reflexion -> broken wire
                        9
shorted under the floor in SCR
                        11
shorted under the floor in SCR
                        15
shorted at PW08

FERA 12         14                                              shorted
under the floor in SCR

FERA 13         15                                              shorted
under the floor in SCR

FERA 14         0                                               shorted
under the floor in SCR

So in total we have 31 bad cable channels.
__________________________________________________________________________

Michael Strang
Thursday, July 11, 2002
detector mapping, is it worthwhile

As I mentioned in the video conference on Tuesday, the mapping of the
detectors I performed shows that there should be some gaps in the
coverage of the frames due to an increased offset between the primed and
unprimed planes. At best the accuracy of the measurements performed were
10 microns but some of the gaps are as large as 100 microns.

So, to see if these gaps actually exist in the data, I created segments
plots for the large elastic sample. These plots can be found in d0mino
area at:

/prj_root/810/fp_1/strang/analyze/ps/el-pd3

in the file

plotsel-pd_p1_d0_50.ps

on the last page.

To first convince myself that the segments plots were accurate, I
determined what segments should be dead based on the dead channels. I
found correspondence between the segments I would expect to be off and
what is plotted.

However, I do not see the holes that my mapping says should be there. I
do, however, see evidence that the offset between primed and unprimed
planes is greater or less than 0.54 as can be seen by the effect of 3
large segment peaks followed by a weak peak. This can be explained by a
different offset ( 0.54 was chosen since it was roughly 2/3 of a fiber
width, if we vary from this it forces one of the segments to be much
smaller than the other three).

So, now we need to decide if detector mapping is worthwhile. I still
think I should measure the gross features of how the U and V frames are
aligned with the X frame. This takes all of 20 minutes.

I think we can get a reasonable mapping (better than the current 0.27,
0.26 one) if we use the dimensions of the grooves and fins from the
drawing used to produce the original metal frames and hence the molds
and put 0.78 (or 0.77) fibers in the center of each groove to reflect
the size of the actual fibers used.

Then, perhaps, play around with the offset a little to see what is
needed to look like data?

This is just a suggestion but we should decide if we want to continue
with full mapping or not.
__________________________________________________________________________

Harry Melanson
Sunday, July 14, 2002
Updated Algorithms web page

The Algorithms web page

http://www-d0.fnal.gov/computing/algorithms/

has been updated.  The following new items are available:

*	Update on p11 status
	*	p11.09.00 CPU / event size statistics
	*	p11.09.00 standard plots
	*	http://www-d0.fnal.gov/computing/algorithms/status/p11.html

*	New general documentation
	*	Thumbnail
	*	Thumbnail ROOT tree
	*	http://www-d0.fnal.gov/computing/algorithms/#doc

*	New ^How to^ documents
	*	^How to run RECO^
	*	^How to use the software releases^
	*	http://www-d0.fnal.gov/computing/algorithms/howto/index.html
__________________________________________________________________________

Victor Bodyagin
Tuesday, July 16, 2002
a new DAQ version

 I've introduced some changes in DAQ in order to make life of
 our calorimeter guys easier.
   Now after the finish of first run one can start data
collection by
 one LINUX command-line:

          ./daq_v03 <run number>

  To start the first run one has to fulfill all the steps as before
 but instead of:

  -></home/d0fpd/vme/daq/tRdaQ.load

  one has to do:

  -></home/d0fpd/vme/daq/tDaQ.load

  and after ./daq_v03 <run number>

   VME DaQ should be started as:

  ->tDaQ

   Having done all of the above once one can continue data taking

   LINUX command-line.

     Seemingly, it works OK. But I would rather prefer to test it more
 thoroughly...
__________________________________________________________________________

Jorge Luis Barreto
Tuesday, July 16, 2002
Status for workshop Ichep

Hello,

        You can find the FPD slide at

        http://www-clued0.fnal.gov/~barreto/fpd/fpd_ichep02.ppt

__________________________________________________________________________

Wagner de Paula Carvalho
Wednesday, July 17, 2002
Equations

    I've just created a page containing links and some explanation about
the
C++ code that I used to create the trigger logic equations, following VHDL
standards:

    http://alpha1.lafex.cbpf.br/~wagner/L1Code.html

    This is all standing alone code and has nothing to do with the D0
software
structure. The several programs perform tasks like define segments,
validate
them, convert hit/segments maps into logic equations, etc.

    Just to remind you, there's another page which is complementary to the
previous one:

    http://alpha1.lafex.cbpf.br/~wagner/l1equations.html

    Take a look on them and feel free to ask me any questions you may have!

__________________________________________________________________________

Jorge Molina
Wednesday, July 17, 2002
transparencies

I put the transparencies (in .ppt) from today's talk at the halo meeting in
my home page
area at:
http://www-d0.fnal.gov/~molina/fpd/separator.ppt

__________________________________________________________________________

Victor Bodyagin
Friday, July 19, 2002
some DAQ updates

   I've introduced a couple of new options into DAQ.

Option No.1:

   Now one can run DAQ as follows:

 1. In the beginning of data taking one can issue in host Linux machine:

     ./daq_v04 <run number>

  after that in VME window one has to issue a command which will load
  a version of VME daq which can operate with daq_v04:

 -></home/d0fpd/vme/daq/tDaQ.load

  after all files loaded one should issue in VME shell:

 ->tDaQ

  And finally all DAQ will start.

  After data taking run in host machine stopped tDaQ will be in a waiting
  mode.

   To start next run one has to issue in host Linux window:

    ./daq_v04 <run number>

   and all things will go automatically.

     Note that to stop tDaQ (for instance for pedestal taking) one has to
issue <Ctrl/C>.

              I hope this will make calorimeter shifter's life a bit
easier.

 Option No.2

   Now the picture "det_planes" will pop up automatically.

       I've tested it thoroughly enough and it works.
__________________________________________________________________________

Andrew Brandt
Monday, July 22, 2002
notes from ops meeting

1) Too many mistakes recently (control lines, HV, etc.).  People WILL
   start using the checklists again (even/especially experts) in order to
   remind them not to leave out any crucial tasks.  Also Carlos will put
   up a note, like the one on the back of SCR door, as well as mount a
   white board to keep track of ongoing problems and comments.

2) Rates at home position should be recorded every store, including
   halo rates for all pots, p and pbar intensities, lum, and p+pbar halo.
   Halo task force will discuss how to use this rate information in
   separate meeting later this week. Should discuss with Vladimir and
   Victor how to automate collection of this information

3) Pot Rates during run not necessary to record due to title file, but
   recording unavailable information at start of run, like
   p+pbar intensities, lum+halos would be useful if pots are in.

4) We discussed turning tubes not being used to standby, but for
   this week let's keep them on to collect more information for halo
   studies.

5) Mike S. needs to immediately make P2 database current change so that
   it is done before access to allow for testing of P2 PMT's.  Note
   if this is not done before access, the tubes should be checked one
   by one (following careful safety procedures on HV!!!!!), and then
   all of them should be left plugged in.

6) Carlos is preparing access teams and task lists.  Everyone should
   send Carlos blackout times if they have any. I am available ~24x7
   at 630 579-3086 (appartment), except tomorrow 10-8.  HV should be
   turned off before access from standby.  accessers should discuss
   controlled access procedures beforehand, and have a clear scheme
   prepared to avoid dropping interlocks.

7) We need to swap an interface board with A1I, and A1I should not
   be moved now since it is currently unreliabl.  If we can test one
   first we should do so, otherwise, should swap a currently working
   but unused one (A2U or A2D for example?).  Andrew sent note to
   Newton with question about problems and also A2I LVDT flakiness
   (is there a spare conditioner at Lab6?).

8) 4 dipole triggers were discussed
   a) diffractive
   b) elastic
   c) dipole+A2I (high t) --operating position determined at 24.9 for now
      Mike set limit for this and 22.9 for A1I.
   d) Junk  dipole +VC+LM
   2 triggers/store is probably a good amount, starting with 1-2
   diffractive runs to understand conditions

9) We discussed trigger efficiencies.  Need to get a pattern unit
   for this and consider modifying setup of camac crate.  Jorge+Victor
   should map out a plan for this (perhaps Jorge can write a short
   note?) Jorge would like to do this before he leaves, and it might
   be possible, if we can get Pside functionality back.

10) Shifts were filled out and Carlos will provide email version which
   Mike will enter in calendar, along with last weeks shifts!  Note
   no accel studies this week.

__________________________________________________________________________

Newton Barros de Oliveira
Wednesday, July 24, 2002
interface board or mux problem?

    On June shut down last days I saw this problem with A1 (I dont remember
exactly if was IN or OUT pot now).
    First, I checked the encoder, no problem found. Then I changed the IIB
(and checked it, it was ok) but we still have the problem with a new IIB.  I
made a complete test of the system sending signals, locally, with the
switches rule board to the MUX (disconnected from the Rack Monitor) and all
pots worked perfectly.
    At that point the conclusion was the local movement system (MUX, IIBs,
Drivers, Motors and encoders) was ok.
    I suspected the software was sending  wrong signals so I tested this
possibility. With Gilvan help seeing the strobe activity on the LEDs test
box I asked Vladimir to move the pot  to a desired position. What we saw :
when the pot reached the desired position and stoped the software sent three
more commands showed by the strobe light activity. It was not possible to
verify what commands the software issued because it was in quick sucession.
    We expected not to see any command after the pot reaches the desired
position ( one Stop command should be ok but not necessary) but why three
more commands ?.  I though it was a software bug and informed the situation
to Vladimir.

    Now, you and Mike are talking about problems with the LVDT readings. As
I was informed, the software sends the pot to Home if LVDT readings doesnt
agree with the desired programmed position.  Maybe the extra commands issued
by the software are related with this fact, Im not sure.

    Important:  Fluctuations on LVDT readings may be dued to bad contact on
signal conditioner connectors. I found  this problem several times in past.
Some times the connector press the plastic wire insulator instead of the
wire itself and we cant see by eye, causing a bad contact.

    Instructions to repair this situation:

    Attention- There is live 127V inside signal conditioner box at wires
connected to the fuse terminals. Unplug from the power outlet before
working.

1- Open the signal conditioner box ( at right side of IIBs) removing four
small screws from the perforated aluminum cover.

2- Localize the signal conditioner (light blue unit) corresponding to the
pot with problems.  From left to right (front view) the sequence is UP,
DOWN, IN and OUT.

3- Identifie  the green coaxial cable (there are four of them, one for each
pot at the lower portion of the box) connected to the signal conditioner.

4- The cable runs to terminals 4 and 5 on signal conditioner. Center wire to
terminal 4 and the mesh to terminal  5.  You will see another wire
connecting all terminals 5 on all signal conditioner too. Check to see if
the wires are firmily connected.  It is more probably the center wire is not
well connected. This wire is very thin and if it is not in the right
position the connector will press the plastic cover (clear plastic
insulator) instead the wire.

5- Unscrew the terminal 5 screw several turns with a small screw driver to
reposition the wire in the correct place. You can use a mirror and a flash
light to see if the wire is well located inside the press connector.
This operation is critical. The wire must be at the center of the connector
to be correctly pressed. Tight the screw to hold the wire and check if it is
well connected by pulling it on a delicate way.

6-  Check the mesh wire too.

7- Plug the power cable on the outlet and ask some one to move the pot and
check the LVDT readings.

8- If everything is ok, cover the box.

If correcting LVDT problem doesnt solve the movement problem, check the
software logic to understand why it is sending the extra commands after the
pot reaches the desired position.

By now, I dont believe on any problems with IIB or MUX since I tested in
place and it was fine.

Maintain me informed about the situation.
__________________________________________________________________________

Helio da Motta Filho
Wednesday, July 24, 2002
LVDT fluctuation

I and Molina have looked at the LVDT's readout.

A2IN shows very large fluctuations that must still be investigated.

The interesting observation is that, for each castle, the fluctuations
are highly correlated. So, for P2, UP, DOWN, BOTTOM LVDT all fluctuate
together. The IN LVDT shows no fluctuation. P1's LVDTs show similar
behavior.

The dipole castles show no fluctuation.

Fluctuations in P2 are correlated to fluctuations in A1. Fluctuations in
A2 seem correlated to fluctuations in P1 (apart the fact that A2IN shows
bigger fluctuations).

Whatever is causing the fluctuation it should be in any commom part of the
system. You can see the plots of the LVDT fluctuations at

http://cns40.fnal.gov/userb/pic/capture/dzero/lvdt_p2_24jul_***.gif

or lvdt_p1_24jul*** or lvdt_a1_24jul***.gif etc

Do you have any idea about the cause of this? The fact that the
fluctuations are time correlated can not be a coincidence.
__________________________________________________________________________

Michael Strang
Thursday, July 25, 2002
HV changed

I was finally able to get hold of David Meder with LiAr and he ramped
down their HV. I had Jorge Barreto ramp down our HV then I reset
d0olctl45. So,
the current setup is:

DIL0 set for 2 tubes (1.5mA)
A2L0 set for 1 tube  (1mA)
A1L0 set for 3 tubes (2mA)
P1L0 set for 3 tubes (2mA)
P2L0 set for 3 tubes (2mA)

These were the values recommended by Carlos, Gilvan, Jorge M when they
were studying the current draws in the last tunnel access.

__________________________________________________________________________

FPD Group account
Friday, July 26, 2002
changes in docs

Several changes to documentation in Run Checklist Details:

1) If starting FPDGui.py there is no message "Initialization ok" and you
see "pots are not in home, move them home first" message, press ok and after
that move pots home by: swithing ON hardware control line and pressing
"INIT"
button. Then software will turn on automatically all amplifiers and drivers,
will move pots which are not at home to home position and after that turn
off
amps/driver lines.

2) in DAQ section:   tdaQ should be replaced by tDaQ

3) Rate Watcher:
it's a cron job on d0ol19 and there is no need to start it because it
may be confusing. So first two paragraphs should be removed.
If you have to check that cron job is set up, just do
   > crontab -l
and check that line starting with 00,05,.. in not commented out by #

4) All that business with setupdaq.sh,setupdaq3.sh is confusing, I'll talk
to Victor how to make in simpler

Vladimir
__________________________________________________________________________

Carlos Avila
Tuesday, July 30, 2002
access report

ACCESS REPORT - July 30 2002
============================

1) P1OUT SIGNAL
  ==============

It was found that the pmt base had a problem. We swapped the pmt base in
the tunnel and Mike turned HV on and cheked in the scope for dark current
signal coming from P1out signal and P1out was ok.

2) P2OUT SIGNAL
  =============

Found that HV connector for P2out was loose. We connected HV for P2out and
then for P2U, Mike in the control room turned HV on for P2 and checked
that the gui was able to drive current for the three pmts. Also dark
current
signnal was observed at SCR.

3) A1IN POSTION VERIFICATION PROBLEM
  ==================================

Initially the mux box was replaced but the problem persisted. Then we
swapped interface boards of A1D and A1in, found that the problem was in
the interface board because problem moved to A1D. We replaced the
interface board at the end and now A1in is moving withouth problems.

4) A2OUT FLAKY LVDT
   ================
Newton's instructins were followed to check the center wire to terminal 4
in the signal conditioner box. The center wire was well connected. The
A2in has some jumping in the LVDT readings during the first mm of
insertion, it seems to get stable when it keeps moving further in.

5) LMB POWER CABLE
  ================
Lmb power cable was connected. At this moment it still needs to be tested.

6) TLD BADGES
 =============

TLD badges were placed in the outside of the cartridge tops in the
following order:

   Detector            TLD-REFERENCE #
 ===============     =================
    A1U                 0575492T
    A1O                 0574514T
    A2in                0307438T
    A2U                 0438131T (on top, no cartridge top there)
    D1                  0279732T
    P1out               0586766T
    P1U                 0307411T
    P2U                 0569857T
    P2D                 0573268T
    P2out               0728138T

7) A/S low voltage power supplies for the A side were taken out of the
tunnel for testing. They will be connected back next acces.

8) A/S in D1 crate was replaced.

Thanks to all three teams of people who helped in the access:

team 1 - in the tunnel A side
Victor, Jorge Barreto
team2 - in the tunnel P side
Jorge Molina , Carlos
team3 - in the control room
Mike Strang, Helio
__________________________________________________________________________

Jorge Luis Barreto
Wednesday, July 31, 2002
data analysis meeting summary

        Yesterday, at 3pm we had our weekly meeting at SDH.

 1) Short rapport on previous week data taken:

        J. Molina presented 2D plots from last week elastic and
diffractive data taken with dipoles spectrometers. Compared with
previous plots on same type of data, D1 presents an improvement
wrt spurious hits, while D2 shows same pattern as before. TDC
studies need to be done to clarify this issue.

        V. Bodyagin presented plots from D1 ADC distribution of L0
signals before (not biased) and after (biased by discriminator),
that show a good signal efficiency, after triggering, above 100 counts.

 2) Plans for next data taken:

        C. Avila presented the trigger list to be used in next shifts
this week:

        1) En of store study for P1out and P2out

        2) Runs to take:
            a) D1.D2.DCLK.OLVNbar.LMSbar.VCS   ---> low mass diffractive
            b) D1.D2.DCLK.OLVNbar.OLVSbar      ---> dipole elastic
            c) D1.D2.DCLK.OLVN.OLVS            ---> junk
            d) D1.D2.DCLK.A1I.A2I.OLVNbar.OLVS ---> High t diffractive
            e) D1.D2.DCLK.A1I.A2I.OLVNbar.OLVsbar.P1O.P2O ---> High t
               elastic
            f) D1.D2.DCLK.OLVNbar.OLVSbar.P1O.P2O ---> High t elastic_P

         3) We want to take runs of about 100K events. 2 runs per trigger.

 3) Data Analysis update:

        M. Strang sent a short update on diffractive Dipole data
analysis:

        The TDC cut needs to be tighter up, to remove halo contamination
in data sample.

        With the contamination, and from what I could see, for diffractive
data, the % of total events in each sample breakdown was:

cut        before trigger change        after trigger change
tdc        44.8                            39.3
mult1      12.7                            12.1
mult2      3.6                             3.6
all        3.1                             3.1

So, in the end, the same fraction of events pass the cut before the
change in trigger timing as after.

 4) MC update:

        J. Barreto presented new MC acceptance values for quadrupole and
dipole spectrometers (8Sig), using as an input a t exponential
f(t)=exp(-b*t)
distribution, with

        b = 4.0 (xi=0)
        b = 4.5 - 0.5ln(xi^^-1) (xi#0)

        Wrt the flat t distribution, the new results show that most of the
cross-section lies on in the intervals:

        0.025<=xi<=0.07 and 0=<t<=0.5 for dipole spectrometers
        0<=xi<=0.1 and 0.6<=t<=1 for quadrupole spectrometers

        These studies were done in collaboration with J. Montanha
(Unicamp/Brazil).

        J. Barreto also presented correlation plots between xi_in/xi_out
and t_in/t_out for PDw quadrupole spectrometer for a flat-t distribution
and no vertex smearing. The results show that the reconstructed xi
resolution is worse at small-xi than at high-xi values and is better at
low-t than at high-t values.

 5) AOB:
        It was stressed the need to have a data analysis home-page were
plots, tables, results should be available to the FPD community.
__________________________________________________________________________

Carlos Avila
Friday, August 02, 2002
Dipole TDCs

 The TDC information from the dipole detectors is telling us that the
 distance from the dipoles from the interaction point is:
                     D1 = 58.5m
                     D2 = 60.5m
 The explanation for this is given below:
 When looking at the tdc distributions for the dipole detectors, from
the
 runs we have been taking, one finds the following (see attached ps
 figure):

 1) The peak with lower number of counts in D1 tdc is expected to be
    from pbars (early peak in D1 = pbar peak).
    If we select only events from the pbar peak on D1 and see D2 tdc
    we find that pbars correspond to the late peak in D2. Therefore,
    pbars arrive later than protons on D2.

 2) The two peaks in each tdc are separated by:

     D1 TDC = 902 - 878 channels = 24 channels = 6.0 nseconds
     D2 TDC = 890 - 860 channels = 30 channels = 7.5 nseconds

 Using this information one can make an estimation of where D1 and D2
 are located respect to the interaction point.

 From the difference found in point 1):

 delta_D1 = t_pbar - t_proton = -6nsec = L_D1/c - (396ns - L_D1/c)
 delta_D2 = t_pbar - t_proton = 7.5ns = L_D2/c - (396ns - L_D2/c)

 where L_d1 = distance of D1 respect to interaction point
         L_d2 = distance of D2 respect to interaction point
         c = speed of light

 the 396ns in parenthesis comes from the fact that protons hitting the
 dipoles within the coincidence window come form the early bunch.

 solving for L_D1 and L_D2:

      L_D1 = 390ns*c/2 = 58.5 m
      L_D2 = (396 +7.5)ns*c/2 = 60.5 m

3) Last plot of the attached figure shows D2-D1 TDC, as Mike has already
shown. The peak towards the right is the pbar peak. The difference
between
the two peaks is the time pbar time of flight from D1 to D2 plus the
proton time of flight from D2 to D1. If one counts the number of
channels
one finds out that the difference in time between the two peaks is 14ns
(1channel=1/4 ns) which is consistent with the measured distance from D1
and D2.
__________________________________________________________________________

Helio da Motta Filho
Monday, August 05, 2002
LVDT's and pots

I took the oportunity of some time without been to make some
measurements I need. There seems to be a miscalibration in
some LVDTs (their readings been misunderstood.

These effects were noted last November when Sergio and I measured
several pots position with a caliper.

By now I should say the following:

a)several LVDTs show oscilation much higher than their resolution.
  Since Molina and I have found a strong correlation P2-A1 and
  P1-A2 we must investigate an external source of this interference
  that seems to be risponsible for the oscilations. A2In shows
  oscilations much higher than its brothers from other castles; however,
  these oscilations seem correlated to the ones P1. I would like to
  see how the remaining A2's LVDT oscilate. Maybe some magnet system
  of the TEVATRON is interfeering and whatever it is may be very close to
  A2 (?).

b)after small increments fro 0.5 mm from HOME to 2.0 mm I send the pots
  to 10.00 (skipping the intermediate steps just to get a measurement
  at a higher valued to see if the oscilations would disapeppear
  (they did not, but since the absolute value is much higher they
  do not catch our attention as much as when the LVDTs are at or
  close to HOME). The disturbing event is that A1OUT started its journey
  from 2.00 mm to 10.00 mm and missed its destination. It kept moving
  on, and on. Eventually it was automatically sent back to the HOME
  position (I think after hiting the IN switch, not sure since I could
  not find a clear information on that - by the way, does the system
  keep automatically a record of all the operations done? Since lots of
  messages are displayed it would be easy to have them logged into a file
  for future reference in case we need). Anyway, the missing of the
  destination with the consequent charge towards the beamm is a serious
  event !!! A kind of alarm should have popped on the screen warning
  the shifter of it. Others have observed the same behavior before.

c)there are some disagreements between LVDT and encoder(caliper)
  position. D2 LVDT reads zero from HOME up to 2.0 mm. It starts giving
  non zero readouts somewhere after 2.0 mm . See table

       POSITION (mm)      LVDT (mm)        OFFSET
          2.5                0.29           -2.2
          3.0                0.9            -2.1
          3.5                1.48           -2.0
          4.0                2.01           -1.9
         10.0                8.78           -1.2
         20.0               20.18            0.2
         30.0               31.51            1.5
     IN POSITION            38.6

   We had noticed an offset of about 2.5 mm in November. It is strange
   that now the offset gradually reduces and, aparently starts shifting
   in the other direction.

I will send a more detailed e-mail when I finish going through all the
information I have gotten.

__________________________________________________________________________

Anton Smith
Monday, August 05, 2002
Presentation link

I believe that some people are not able read my report because it was
written in word, therefore I am sending a link where the document is a PDF
file.

Link: http://d0server1.fnal.gov/users/antonhc/seqdelay/delay.pdf

\\d0server1.fnal.gov\users\antonhc\seqdelay\Presentation.ppt
__________________________________________________________________________

Andrew Brandt
Monday, August 05, 2002
FPD meetings

We discussed FPD related  meetings today:

Monday    2-3 Salle D0  Carlos Avila  FPD operations
          for local people: sets shift lists, data taking
          tasks, discuss any hardware problems

Thursday  Proton ID off weeks Thurs 11-12:30  Sergio/Moacyr
          For everyone Software/data analysis

          Data analysis meetings tentatively will move to on-weeks Thurs
          11-12:30 (room to be confirmed by Jorge maybe west wing
          available? check at x3201) Jorge Barreto  for people actively
          involved/interested in stand alone data analysis
          (this week it will be weds at 4 in doghouse

Friday    8-9  AFE/DFE meeting  Mario/Ricardo  Trigger integration
          VRVS with brazil.  Slot reserved every week.  May only hold
          meetings on alternate off-weeks.
          10-11:30 on weeks Local Trigger Integration meeting (Carlos)

For typical week that is 4 hours in FPD meetings if you are in the
core group.

other FPD Time slots currently reserved
Tues 12-1:30 doghouse (should we release this?)
Tues  3-4 SDH  (can release this?)
Weds 4-5:30 doghouse

Other relevant meetings
QCD meeting on-weeks Monday 10:30 starting 26th everybody
DFE trigger Thurs 2 or 2:30 depending on weeks Ricardo
Commish Friday 2 Carlos
__________________________________________________________________________

Jorge Luis Barreto
Tuesday, August 06,
New Meeting Scheduled with VRVS

        I've just fixed with C. Laue a new bi-weekly meeting
at HR-West Wing on Thursdays from 11am-12:30pm, starting next
Thur. 08-15:

             FPD Data Analysis

which will require VRVS capabilities.

        Please, note that this new meeting will alternate with
Sergio Novaes's Proton ID (same place and time).
__________________________________________________________________________

Carlos Avila
Wednesday, August 07, 2002
pot motion

We are having some few problems with pot motion that I describe below.
Helio and Newton please send your comments.

1)The verification of home position for some pots: A1in, A2in,
P1in,P2in. This problem happens sometimes and the solution that seems to
work is to give few home commands. However we woul like to investigate
it and solve it.

A problem that is correlated with the pot not being at home is that the
software doesnot allow to turn off the drivers because the software
assumes that if the pot is not at home is because it is moving or it is
going to be moved.

We believe that the problem could be with the home switch that does not
get completely pressed when the pot is moved to home.

Please sendinstructions on how we can verify the home switch during next
tunnel access.

2) A2in LVDT. The lvdt readout for A2in shows jumps of 5 to 8mm.
can we fix that lvdt during next access? or do we have to replace it?

When there is not bea, on the machine the fpd shifter should exercise
the pot moption
especially A1in, A2in to see any other effect. Helio will be doing some
more tests during the next days.
__________________________________________________________________________

Carlos Avila
Thursday, August 08, 2002
TDC start

 We have checked during last week that our tdc distributions for the
 dipole detectors change shape for different triggers.
 The reason why we are biasing our tdc distributions with the trigger
 was explained by Victor and I just made a drawing to make it more
clear:

 The problem is that we have the start of the TDC with the trigger. In
 the drawing attached I just show how the coincidence of D1.D2.DCLk
 produces that bias:

 If we have same lengths of cables for D1 and D2, we expect D1 pbar to
 arrive early than D2 pbar. Because of the coincidence, only until the
 arrival of D2 pbar the trigger will be formed. Therefore the pbar
 triggers are dictated by D2 signal.
 In the case of protons, protons arrive first to D2 and then to D1.
 Therefore D1 dictates when the trigger is produced for the passage of
 protons.

 The consequence of this is that the TDC start for pbars and protons is
 different, one is shifted respect to the other (see attached eps file).
 When data is stored to the tdcs the proton and pbar peaks
 would appear at times that are different to the real ones dictated by
 the distance of the detectors to D0 interaction point.

 the detector that has the latest signal arriving to the coincidence
will  appear as a narrow peak because it is the one that defines the
start of  the TDC. So for D1 the proton peak will appear narrow and for
D2 the narrow peak will correspond to pbars.
see second file attached where we compare two triggers. the first upper
two figure show D1,D2 TDCs when D1.D2.DClk was part of the trigger and
the second show when D1,D2 where not part of the trigger.

Notice that the difference of pbar and proton peaks in D1 TDC, for the
lower plot, is about 73 adc channels which means about 18.25ns between
the peaks, that mean that 18.25ns = (396ns-LD1/c)-LD1/c
from where LD1 = (396ns-18.25ns)*c/2 = 56.7m which agrees with the
tevatron lattice.

So, what we learned from this is that the TDC start has to be the
coincidence of the ADC gate with the DCLK delayed, then the TDC start
will be dictated by the DCLK which is fixed in time.
__________________________________________________________________________

Andrew Brandt
Friday, August 09, 2002
trigger/daq integration

The number one priority of FPD is integration with D0.
We are pursuing several tasks in parallel, with the
highest priority item being getting dipole information
into an AFE and reading them out.

Overall organization:

trigger/daq effort

Victor, Carley, Carlos, Ricardo, Mario, Wagner, Wanda, Jorge B., Andrew

Integration Leader Carlos

AFE  Carlos
  TPP                Carlos
  Sequencer/timing   Anton/Ricardo
  Downloads/SDAQ/    Victor/Wanda
  Database           Wanda
  Commissioning      Carlos,Victor,Wanda,Carley

DFE  Mario
  Programming        Mario+Ricardo
  Purchasing         Andrew
  Board Construction Jamieson

LM  Barreto/Carlay
  VHDL?
  Schedule?
  VTX board?
  rates in Epics?    Victor

TM Victor
  2 cables    Victor/Carley/Fermilab support
  VHDL?       Mario?
  algorithm   Andrew?
  MRC/MFC?

More details on AFE integration issues+steps:
AFE Integration
1) TPP board stuffed
2) Need to test AFE/TPP combination  (Carlos)
   requires final AFE board/Phase 5 test stand
   George to hook up, a little bit of Rubinov's time.
   (8 hours min, evening/weekend)
3) Need to install AFE requires collison hall access (how long)
   TPP tool (Carlos), George's time (after TPP installed, possibly
   2nd access)
4) Need to have remote power supply tested, requires
   that this be defined in a database (Victor, Wanda)
   with help from Jadwiga and perhaps Geoff Savage?
   This should be done right away, so that it can be
   tested with help from Pat Sheahan at next access.
   Pat says bus address is D0octl40 Bus 3 address 29
   for power supply controls (RM) .
   Pat says D0octl36 Bus 6 address 16-23 available for
   AFE. Need to double check these with stefan (do we need
   all 8 addresses or only the five that we will use)
   This info is needed to add AFE to database as well.
5) Need to install sequencer, and verify address and add to
   database. Sequencer delay PLD tested okay, but needs NRZ' delay
   added (Anton+Ricardo).  Dipole board needs minor firmware
   modification to get final delay from second delay time
   (Ricardo with assist from Anderson). Need this finalized
   by end of next week.
6) Need VTM (Stefan)
7) Need VRB (?)
8) Unpacking (Naeem/Carlos)

9) Commissioning (Carlos, Victor, Wanda, Carlay)

__________________________________________________________________________

Newton Barros de Oliveira
Tuesday, August 13, 2002
pot motion. Check.

    I still believe we have a software bug.

    I dont know how the software was implemented but there are things that
must be clearly understood:
    Home position when the pot is going out doesnt mean it will stop at
0mm. The switch has Histeresis.  If the command is "go to 0mm" the pot will
not open the home switch. To go home and to open the home switch it is
necessary to send the true Home command. The reference position, 0mm, is
counted when the pot is moving in the In direction just when the home switch
closes again. So, it is necessary to check the software code to be sure that
Home command means the true home command not go to 0mm. It is possible the
software is using 0mm instead of Home.

    I dont believe on a problem with the home switch itself. The only way
to stop the motor when you uses the true Home command or with the Emergency
switch is the pot to reach and open the Home switch. IF THE MOTOR STOPS WHEN
THE POT REACHES HOME USING THE EMERGENCY SWITCH IN THE CONTROL ROOM IT MEANS
THE HOME SWITCH IS GOOD!  Check it first.

    When the pot reaches the home switch, the out red LED at the IIB will
turn on and the signal is going to the software. So, check it in the tunnel
and at the GUI at the same time.

    Check LVDT smothness before replace it.  Use a multimeter at the output
of the signal conditioner (connectors 4 and 5, 5 is positive). Move the pot
and check if the the voltage changes continuosly . At home position you
should read about -9.5V.
__________________________________________________________________________

Carlos Avila
Tuesday, August 13, 2002
tunnel access report

REPORT FOR TUNNEL ACCESS ON AUGUST 12 2002

1) P2out signal
  ==============
Sent a pulser signal from the tunnel to SCR. Ricardo checked
at SCR that pulser signal was arriving.
HV was turned on to -1700V and we observed signals compatible
with dark current noise. We concluded that P2out should be
working.

2) TLD badges were removed from tunnel
  ====================================

The TLD badges were dropped this afternoon to ESH department to have
the dose being readout by them.

3) Low Voltage power supplies for A detectors
==============================================
Victor changed the toggle switch on the voltage supplies and then
he reinstall then back in the tunnel. It was cheked from the control
room that amplifiers for A1 and A2 could be turned on and off.

4) A2in LVDT
============

We requested to MCR to grant Helio permission to go into the tunnel
being
scorted by two qualified people. MCR rejected our request. Helio showed
us
how to cahnge a LVDT and how to test the signal conditioner connectors.
Victor and Jroge B. went to the tunnel and tested voltage settings on
the
conditioner at different pot positions. They saw stable voltages. At the
control room it was observed that when they had the voltage probe on,
LVDT readings were stable but when the probe was taken off readings
started
fluctuating again. The conclusion is that one wire at the conditioner
was
not making good contact. Victor and Jorge worked on tryiong to make the
wires in better contact with the screws in the conditioner.
Now I just got a page from shift captain that A2in was at 23mm and there
is a shot setup. I checked and A2in is at home position but the lvdt
reading
is at 23mm. I believe thre is a ground wire disconnected.

5) TPP Mechanical test at Pw08
===============================

Pierrick and Carlos went to Pw08 to find solutions for tpp mechanical
fit.
Pierric took a look at the alignment comb we have and made two
suggestions:
- to have handles on the tool
- to tapered the slots.
It will be still very hard to connect all ribbon cables at the same time
to one TPP board. We still need to think if there is a better solution.

People who collaborated in this access:
1. Jorge Barreto
2. Victor Bodyagin
3. Helio DaMota
4. Ricardo Ramirez
5. Pierric Hanlet
6. Carlos Avila
__________________________________________________________________________

Helio Da Motta
Friday, August 16, 2002
bellows leak

As suspected by our friends at LNLS the bellows is the bad guy.
It has a leak in one of its convolution. We can't see anything strange
at naked eye but helium does go through that area.

The bellows must be replaced. LNLS has already sent a replacement
(along with an extra new pot window just in case). We can use the pot
window that is still attached at the assembly and keep the new one for any
possible future use.

I think that there is no good reason to replace all the bellwos.
Marcelo (LNLS) agrees with this opinion. Replacing all the
bellows is a big
operation and the problem with Gentil's upper bellows maybe just
be a fluke. There is nothing telling us that all Gentil's and Pacoval's
inner bellows are compromised. If bellows leak keep happening will then
can think on this operation

The assembly must be repaired by the next shutdown period (whenever
it happens since reinstalling the upper arm will demand over a week
because of the new survey and baking). We do not know when this
shutdown will happen.

The guys at FERMILAB are able to replace the bellows piece, clean the
assembly and preparer it for ultra-vacuum. I have gotten drawings
and instructions on how to do it and on the use a precision level to
make the pot bottom surface as paralel as possible to the assembly top
flange by playing with the piece conic bearings. I will talk to the
guys at NWA about these proceedures.

Off course all the survey regarding Gentil's upper arm will have to
be redone. Since the castle was not removed it will probably be
necessary to survey the assembly alone and then when reconnected to
Gentil. There is time to decide how to do it.

I am happy that there is no serious problem and that the assembly
has once more given proof of its outstanding design and
construction. I want publicaly compliment LNLS for its work.
__________________________________________________________________________

Ricardo Ramirez-Gomez
Sunday, August 18, 2002
LUT - Sender and Receiver requirements

Sender and Receiver take the following amount of resources.

RAMs   -->    20 out of     24 (83%)
FFs    -->  3281 out of  6,912 (47%)
LUTs   -->  3821 out of 13,824 (27%)

In our case, there is not a general number for this measurement.
However, I would say that the utilization of the XCV600 devices for
these components is around of 35 %. It excluding RAMs use.

__________________________________________________________________________

Helio da Motta Filho
Tuesday, August 20, 2002
parts for Gentil

I have been at NWA and have seen the parts. I have called
LNLS (Campinas) and have gotten the data for the cam follower

The piece was made by SKF, model number KR 16 (the thread is metric).

The sleeve is custom made. We do not have an extra unit in
Campinas. As long as it works (it works now) it should be OK.
They have sugested cleaning it well with acetone. My understanding
is that acetone is not an option here but James has told me that
he can probably do
it with some other solution. He was trying to have safety aproval,
or something like that, to have the piece immersed in the solution.

The cam follower is a very unexpensive piece but you may have dificulty
getting it here because it is metric. Let me know if you have
any problem.

__________________________________________________________________________

Mario Vaz
Tuesday, August 20, 2002
LUT - Sender and Receiver requirements

Good news for he FPD PU L1 trigger implemented with wide segments for high
t and fine segments for low t : it fits into Xilinx Virtex 600 :
Number of errors:      0
   Number of warnings:    0
   Number of Slices:              3,917 out of  6,912   56%
   Number of Slices containing
      unrelated logic:                0 out of  3,917    0%
   Number of Slice Flip Flops:      725 out of 13,824    5%
   Number of 4 input LUTs:        7,773 out of 13,824   56%
   Number of bonded IOBs:           228 out of    404   56%
   Number of GCLKs:                   1 out of      4   25%
   Number of GCLKIOBs:                1 out of      4   25%
Total equivalent gate count for design:  52,438
Additional JTAG gate count for IOBs:  10,992

Adding the numbers from Ricardo Ramirez for the Sender and Receiver
firmware :
> RAMs   -->    20 out of     24 (83%)
> FFs    -->  3281 out of  6,912 (47%)
> LUTs   -->  3821 out of 13,824 (27%)
> However, I would say that the utilization of the XCV600 devices for
> these components is around of 35 %. It excluding RAMs use.

gives a total utilization of 11594 LUTs (13824 available) - 84 %  and 4006
FlipFlops (13824 available) - 29 % of a XCV600 FPGA.

It is tight for LUTs but it seems feasible. Ricardo, please try to put
together the Sender and Receiver code and our code, that is availalbe at
http://d0br1.lafex.cbpf.br/~mario/L1_PU/BlkP.vhd (top level)
http://d0br1.lafex.cbpf.br/~mario/L1_PU/segf.vhd (fine segments)
http://d0br1.lafex.cbpf.br/~mario/L1_PU/segw.vhd (wide segments)
http://d0br1.lafex.cbpf.br/~mario/L1_PU/PU_t-low_xsi-low_trigger.vhd
http://d0br1.lafex.cbpf.br/~mario/L1_PU/PU_t-low_xsi-high_trigger.vhd
http://d0br1.lafex.cbpf.br/~mario/L1_PU/PU_t-high_trigger.vhd

Working now on PI and DI again.
__________________________________________________________________________

Michael Strang
Wednesday, August 21, 2002
pedestals

From: "Jorge Molina"
August 21, 2002

]We were looking with Gilvan the pedestal distributions for a lot of
]runs and we found funny things about the numbers that appear in the
]file.
]
]Lets take for example the pedestal file y02m08d03t1628.txt
]corresponding to runs 317-319.
]Looking there we have the two initial numbers
]   0   0   0   442.07     1.58   444
]   1   0   1   523.60     1.89   525
]
]After the unpacking we observe inside the ped file run317.ped the
]numbers:
]46
]31

The run*.ped file is created with my kumac pedsfrwrd or pedsbkwrd
depending on how the channels need to be unpacked. The ordering in the
run*.ped file is different than the ordering in the *.txt file.
The run*.ped file is only applicable if you are using the analysis code
that I came up with. If you are using your own code, you will need to
transform the *.txt file to whatever form you need.

For reference, the raw ADC ped file (the *.txt file) has things in the
order (from top to bottom):

UP1(1:16), M1(U1(17:20),UP1(17:20),V1(17:20),VP1(17:20)), VP1(1:16),
V1(1:16), XP1(1:16), X1(1:16), U1(1:16) and same for detector 2 then
l0(1:16) for forward mapping and:

UP1(16:1), M1(VP1(20:17),V1(20:17),UP1(20:17),U1(20:17)), VP1(16:1),
V1(16:1), XP1(16:1), X1(16:1), U1(16:1) and same for detector 2 then
l0(1:16) for reverse mapping.

In my remapped ADC ped file (the run*.ped file) first, it contains
as the pedestal the mean + 3 * sig + 2 and it is reordered (from
top to bottom):

U1(1:20), UP1(1:20), X1(1:20), XP1(1:20), V1(1:20), VP1(1:20) and same
for detector 2 then l0(1:16) where the mapping has been taken care
depending on which kumac was used to generate the file.

You can look in the pedsfrwrd (the one being used) and pedsbkwrd for
the mapping correspondence between the two files.

]In case we use Victor's program I can see the distribution (without
]pedestal subtraction) that the pedestals are around these numbers
]showed in the last column (444 and 525). Then when we opened the ntuple
](without ped aubtraction) we see in the distribution that the pedestals
]peaks are around 46 and 31 for the respectives channels.

In Victor's programs, he is not remapping the ADC info so the *.txt
file should be used. In the ntuple, the ADCs have been reordered by
frame and channel so the run*.ped file should be used if you are using
my analysis code.

]What does it means?, according to the mapping these two numbers
]corresponds to fibers up1(1) and up1(2) but what is the operation in
]the middle (during the unpacking we think - but we could not see any
]operation in the unpacking program) to make them change in the scales?

It's because Victor's ADCs haven't been remapped so you are comparing
apples to oranges.

]Another issue is that while in Victor's program before the unpacking
]the value for fiber up1(2) was bigger than for up1(1) while after the
]unpacking now up1(1) is bigger than up1(2).

Once again, it is because of the mapping.

Victor's code is setup so we can easily debug the hardware. My code
is setup to put things into the detector system.

IOne other thing about the pedestals. In the database, I record what
ped file to use based on the y*m*d*t*.txt format. When I transfer the
ped files over to d0mino, I rename this *.txt file into run*.ped but
if it is in the ped directory with the unpacked data, it has not
been remapped.

I then create new run*.ped files in my analysis directory that have been
remapped.

You can easily tell the difference because the unmapped ped file has
6 columns per row whereas the mapped ped file only has one column.