sphenix-emcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: sPHENIX EMCal discussion
List archive
Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] EMCAL Meeting tomorrow, Friday June 24, 9:00 am EDT
- From: pinkenburg <pinkenburg AT bnl.gov>
- To: sphenix-emcal-l AT lists.bnl.gov
- Subject: Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] EMCAL Meeting tomorrow, Friday June 24, 9:00 am EDT
- Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2022 14:06:12 -0400
Hello Jamie, Bill
so far we have been working with 300kB/event for "non tpc" data:
https://indico.bnl.gov/event/15770/contributions/63203/attachments/40979/68555/Soltz_computing_plan.pdf
From the offline point of view, if this changes within reason (not by an order of magnitude), it'll just affect how much tape we need for storage of the raw data. Our available bandwidth and disk i/o should be able to handle increases easily. Technically this would really just mean fewer events in the 20GB calorimeter data files so we just need to read more bytes into the calorimeter reconstruction for the same number of events.
Chris
On 6/23/2022 1:50 PM, Jamie Nagle
wrote:
Hello Bill (cc EmCal list and Chi),
A couple of years ago, John Haggerty and I did a set of
studies on DAQ throughput for the calorimeters. With 0-20%
central HIJING events run through GEANT, the EMCal average
tower energy was 37 MeV and with a threshold for zero
suppression of 30 MeV, there was a 28% occupancy.
At the time, the advice was to have 3 ADC boards/XMIT for
the EMCal and 2 ADC boards/XMIT for the Hadronic Calorimeter,
and then 1 DCM2 / PAR III --> jSEB2d board. That would
enable one to run the EMCal with 16 samples and "light" zero
suppression and the Hadronic Calorimeter without zero
suppression. Those numbers did not translate into additional
orders.
The reality is that at best we will have 3 ADC boards /
XMIT for both the EMCal and the HCal and 2 DCM2 / PAR III
-> jSEB2d board. Thus, the bandwidth limitations are
exactly the same for the EMCal and HCal -- except considering
the total final data volume going to RCF.
I am glad to re-show my earlier presentation, but the
summary is that there is a Dual Port memory on the DCM II that
when it gets 75% full, the busy is raised. The main
bandwidth limitation is going to be the 120 MHz x 36 bits on
the DCM II token passing to the PAR III. I have a "leaky
pipe" simulation that includes occupancy, centrality
fluctuations, and stochastic modeling for the multi-event
buffering etc.
(1) If you run with 16 samples and try to push 15 kHz
Level-1 trigger rate through the DAQ, you get the following without
zero suppression.
Thus you have 33% livetime -- i.e., you keep pushing too
hard and the buffers keep filling up, and you get a 5 kHz
rate. I would not call this "grinding to a halt."
(2) If you run with 16 samples and try to push 15 kHz
Level-1 trigger rate through the DAQ with 60% occupancy in
central events (overestimating) and scale occupancy with Nch
one gets.
Also, the zero suppression in the DCM II will be something
like one sample minus another sample (over an average of a
couple of pre-samples). There is no bandwidth in the DCM II
to do a sophisticated pulse shape / fit. The algorithm Chi
is working on will keep two samples (a pre and on the peak)
even if the channel is zero suppressed, and keep all N = 16
(?) samples if it is above the zero suppression.
Note that there are a lot of real world problems not
included here, but this should capture the basic bandwidth
landscape once things are fully working (which may take most
of the run).
Chris may want to comment on the implications on the total
data volume.
Sincerely,
Jamie
||------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|| James L. Nagle
|| Professor of Physics, University of Colorado Boulder
|| James L. Nagle
|| Professor of Physics, University of Colorado Boulder
|| EMAIL: jamie.nagle AT colorado.edu
|| SKYPE: jamie-nagle
|| WEB: http://spot.colorado.edu/~naglej
||------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|| SKYPE: jamie-nagle
|| WEB: http://spot.colorado.edu/~naglej
||------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 10:47
AM W.A. Zajc <zajc AT nevis.columbia.edu>
wrote:
Hello all:
I have conflicts that prevent attendance to the EmCal
meetings, so call me an interested non-observer.
I have a question about the EMCal plans for zero
suppression in Year-1. This was sparked by a statement
from Chris Pinkenburg at Tuesday’s Calibrations meeting
that always reading out non-suppressed calorimeters will
slow the readout to a crawl (Chris, please correct if I am
misquoting you).
A back-of-the-iPad calculation shows that in central
Au+Au, the average energy in a delta-eta x delta-phi =
0.025 x 0.025 is about 50 MeV. Divide this by ~4 for MB.
These numbers immediately raise the question of what
energy threshold is being considered for zero suppression,
and how do various physics signals depend on this
threshold?
1) Yes, I know the threshold will be on an ADC value,
not an energy. But I think its still useful to phrase the
question in terms of truth values.
2) Yes, I know that a central collision does not
uniformly illuminate the EmCal with 50 MeV hits; it will
be much more granular and concentrated with the average
energy per *hit* tower ~ 0.3-0.4 (??) GeV.
Chi has reminded me that when zero suppressing you are
not just throwing away empty words but you are also adding
bits to specify the tower ID. So real zero suppression
gains have to be determined with non-trivial simulations.
Perhaps this has already been done for the EMCal?
Best regards,
Bill
Bill
—————————————————
W.A.
Zajc
I.I.
Rabi Professor of Physics
Columbia
University
New
York, NY 10027
https://blogs.cuit.columbia.edu/waz1/
—————————————————
On Jun 23, 2022, at 8:22 AM, Craig Woody <woody AT bnl.gov> wrote:
Dear All,
Just a reminder that we will have our regular EMCAL meeting tomorrow, Friday June 24th starting at 9:00 am EDT. Here's the Indico link: https://indico.bnl.gov/event/16262/
Cheers,
Craig
_______________________________________________
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
-- ************************************************************* Christopher H. Pinkenburg ; pinkenburg AT bnl.gov ; http://www.phenix.bnl.gov/~pinkenbu Brookhaven National Laboratory ; phone: (631) 344-5692 Physics Department Bldg 510 C ; fax: (631) 344-3253 Upton, NY 11973-5000 *************************************************************
-
[Sphenix-emcal-l] EMCAL Meeting tomorrow, Friday June 24, 9:00 am EDT,
Craig Woody, 06/23/2022
-
Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] EMCAL Meeting tomorrow, Friday June 24, 9:00 am EDT,
W.A. Zajc, 06/23/2022
- Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] EMCAL Meeting tomorrow, Friday June 24, 9:00 am EDT, John Haggerty, 06/23/2022
-
Message not available
-
Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] EMCAL Meeting tomorrow, Friday June 24, 9:00 am EDT,
Jamie Nagle, 06/23/2022
-
Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] EMCAL Meeting tomorrow, Friday June 24, 9:00 am EDT,
pinkenburg, 06/23/2022
-
Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] EMCAL Meeting tomorrow, Friday June 24, 9:00 am EDT,
W.A. Zajc, 06/24/2022
- Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] EMCAL Meeting tomorrow, Friday June 24, 9:00 am EDT, John Haggerty, 06/24/2022
-
Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] EMCAL Meeting tomorrow, Friday June 24, 9:00 am EDT,
W.A. Zajc, 06/24/2022
-
Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] EMCAL Meeting tomorrow, Friday June 24, 9:00 am EDT,
pinkenburg, 06/23/2022
-
Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] EMCAL Meeting tomorrow, Friday June 24, 9:00 am EDT,
Jamie Nagle, 06/23/2022
-
Re: [Sphenix-emcal-l] EMCAL Meeting tomorrow, Friday June 24, 9:00 am EDT,
W.A. Zajc, 06/23/2022
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.