sphenix-emcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: sPHENIX EMCal discussion
List archive
Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] plan for reading out EMCal channels?
- From: Cheng-Yi Chi <chi AT nevis.columbia.edu>
- To: <sphenix-emcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
- Subject: Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] plan for reading out EMCal channels?
- Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2018 11:18:52 -0500
Dear All: If you want to readout the data through DCM II, you have to
zero suppressed the data. Each DCM II module has 8 optical inputs.
There 4 Stratix II FPGA to handle the fibers. Each FPGA get 2
fibers. Each fiber is 1.6 Gbps bandwidth. Each FPGA output data
to the 5th one. I have dig out the bandwidth limit on that link.
If I remember correctly, we assume 50% of input raw bandwidth. The DCM II backplane is only at 512 MByte/sec at full speed.
The JSEB II max bandwidth is only at 6.25 Gbps/sec. Which
translate to about 625 Mbytes/sec. I doubt we will get that much
bandwidth in the real word. Even one just do a light zero suppression data data volume
goes up because now you have to label the data.
On 12/20/2018 12:34 AM, Martin Purschke
wrote:
Hi Dennis, the plan is recording 16 samples per channel. Please keep in mind that this is already a change in plans from 12 samples, and that forced us to reduce the number of digitizers per XMIT board from 4 to 3 to stay within the front-end bandwidth limits. Past that stage, whatever generates more data will reduce the event rate, and eventually we will run into our data logging limits. The classic zero suppression scheme is to see if those 16 samples contain a "signal" - where it remains to be determined how we define that, exactly - and zero-suppress the others. I would assume that we try to time the trigger in a way that the peak of the waveform is in the first half of the samples so we have some baseline before and catch the tail, as you can see in the attached raw waveform. This is from the 2016 test beam where we kept 24, not 16, samples, but you get the idea. Whatever is contained in those 16 samples is what you have - including noise. Now we are already pushing hard against the limits of what the RCF told us is doable. Most of it comes from the TPC, but generally, almost every current estimate of the overall data logging rate is exceeding this limit, some even by factors of more than 3. This means that we will not be able to afford a dramatically relaxed threshold and keep most, if not all, emcal waveforms for many events. We can tweak that to the breaking point, but more data/event will mean fewer events. Do we need such a full view for every event? We could generate a slow trickle of such full events. Say every few seconds we tag an event special so the DCM2s skip the zero-suppression (that would need to get implemented), and then you get some events like that without breaking the bank. (We are thinking of that for special events such as in-beam pedestal events on empty crossings). Not sure if that, and what minimum fraction of events, would satisfy such a fluctuation analysis. Also, what is your current assumption how stable the baseline is? 1.5 bits? 2? I guess early on we could take special runs with a few hundred thousand events in a non-zero-suppressed mode and see if that is an issue or not, but we cannot expect huge statistics here. We can kick this around some more as needed... Martin On 12/19/18 13:55, Perepelitsa, Dennis wrote: Hi EMCal group, There was some discussion at the recent Collaboration Meeting regarding whether we would read out every EMCal channel every event, or if there will be some zero / noise suppression. For the heavy ion jet reconstruction, it may be important to have every channel to get both positive and negative noise fluctuations. What is the current thinking or plan for both p+p and Au+Au running? What do the currently estimated data throughput and volume numbers assume in terms of information from the EMCal? Dennis Dennis V. Perepelitsa Assistant Professor, Physics Department University of Colorado Boulder _______________________________________________ sPHENIX-EMCal-l mailing list sPHENIX-EMCal-l AT lists.bnl.gov https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-emcal-l _______________________________________________ sPHENIX-EMCal-l mailing list sPHENIX-EMCal-l AT lists.bnl.gov https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-emcal-l |
-
[Sphenix-emcal-l] plan for reading out EMCal channels?,
Perepelitsa, Dennis, 12/19/2018
- Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] plan for reading out EMCal channels?, John Haggerty, 12/19/2018
-
Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] plan for reading out EMCal channels?,
Martin Purschke, 12/20/2018
- Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] plan for reading out EMCal channels?, Cheng-Yi Chi, 12/20/2018
-
Message not available
- Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] plan for reading out EMCal channels?, Jamie Nagle, 12/20/2018
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.