GLAST Large Area Telescope:

1
GLAST Large Area Telescope I T Input to
Monthly Technical/Cost/Schedule
Review 05/24/05 Elliott Bloom SU-SLAC Subsystem
Manager Ken Fouts SU-SLAC Subsystem Engineering
Manager elliott_at_slac.stanford.edu,
kfouts_at_slac.stanford.edu 650-926-2469
650-926-2553
2
Last Month's Accomplishments (1 of 3)

• Management
• Supported Observatory IT Planning Meeting at GD.
• Procedure Status
• 65 of 68 IT documents in review/approval cycle.
• Tracking hardware shortages for LAT integration.
• Current shortages
• GRID HTR PWR HARNESS ASSY, LAT-DS-05057
• GRID HTR TEMP SENSOR HARNESS ASSY, LAT-DS-03662
• IFCT
• Validated EGSE in the grid with EM TEMs prior to
  connection to flight HW.
• Completed Two-Tower Test
• Completed IT Receiving Tests on TKR 1, 2 and 3.
• Completed Bay 5 Tower (TKR/TEM/CAL) installation
• Completed Bay 1 TKR Installation
• Installed and crimped Grid thermisters and
  thermocouples.

3
Last Month's Accomplishments (2 of 3)

• Online
• E-logbook
• Added ability to search shift logbook with Google
  Desktop
• Implementing requested improvements
• Beyond 2 towers
• Housekeeping multi-pen strip chart GUI
• Parallelizing INT scripts
• Attempting to move some LATTE 5 features into
  production (e.g., HSK, LATc)
• Continued supported of CAL, TKR, TRG, INT and
  test suites.
• Supported data taking, trigger and E2E script
  development.
• Problem assessment and fixes are a large part of
  online workload
• NCRs, support for clean room operations, support
  of subsystems scripts.
• CCB activity and JIRA maintenance

4
Last Month's Accomplishments (3 of 3)

• SVAC
• Successful turn around for calibration of two
  tower data
• ready before data taking started
• Joint effort TKR/CAL/SAS/SVAC
• Offline data processing system under CCB and
  working well
• Single tower data analysis
• No show stoppers yet
• Generated several special test requests
• Good start with two tower data
• Data is being analyzed in details
• No major problem identified so far

5
Power Outage Impact on IT

• Emergency Generator allowed work to continue in
  B33
• TKR 3 was installed on Thursday
• Room 103 circuit breaker/panel fault was resolved
  by turning off non-essential power.
• The current plan to resolve the B33 Room 103
  power issue is as follows
• SEM will procure several 150A breakers to replace
  the current main breaker in the power box as time
  (and testing) permits.
• Several temporary power drops will be added to
  the office area on a separate circuit so that
  computers can be powered up and desk lamps can be
  used in the desk and board area outside of the
  clean room.
• SEM will verify the power panel arc flash
  calculations, write and execute the procedures to
  open the panel for inspection and load
  measurements in the current state (only 6 out of
  42 breakers on).
• At the completion of TVAC on Wednesday, SEM would
  begin work to replace the main breaker and
  determine the panel loads in more detail as the
  remaining breakers are turned back on.
• 4 hour shutdown is planned for Wednesday.
• Our goal is to safely bring the building back to
  100 with minimal impact to building users.

6
IT MGSE/Grid Activities
Tower A B in the Grid
Mass simulators installed
EM PDU and GASU
EGSE harness routing
EGSE shelf and cable service loop
Harness service loop
7
IT NCRs by Month Open/Closed Status
Previous Month
8
Procedure Status

• 68 documents total
• 65 latest versions submitted for sign-off
• 59 are released

9
Procedure Status (1 of 6) Management
10
Procedure Status (4 of 6) IFCT Electrical
11
Upcoming IT Events

• Two tower test (Complete)
• Receiving tests for TKR 2 (Complete 5/13)
• Receiving tests for TKR 1 (Complete 5/11)
• Receiving tests for TKR 3 (Complete 5/16)
• Receive TEM/TPS 1 and 2 ECD 5/9 (Complete 5/19)
• TKR 2 in Bay 5 (Complete 5/17)
• TKR 1 in Bay 1 (Complete 5/19)
• CAL/TEM Installation in Bay 5 ECD 5/24
• CAL/TEM Installation in Bay 1 ECD 5/25
• 4 Tower Tests ECD 6/7
• Receive TEM/TPS 3 and 4 ECD 5/16 5/26
• Receive TKR 4 ECD 6/9

12
IT Detail Schedule (1 of 4)
13
IT Detail Schedule (2 of 4)
14
IT Detail Schedule (3 of 4)
15
IT Detail Schedule (4 of 4)
16
IT 6 Month Look Ahead (1 of 2)
17
IT 6 Month Look Ahead (2 of 2)
18
Issues Concerns

• ISSUES
• Availability of flight assembly hardware.
• Shortages identified by IT and being worked with
  Subsystems.
• Flight Cables
• CONCERNS
• Continued support for NCR closure.
• Resolution of Room 103 power issue.
• TPS rework and replacement, availability for
  future tower installations.
• Delivery dates for third layer ELX boxes and TKR.
  
• LATTE 5.0 ready Oct. 1 for use in LAT Functional
  testing due to start 10/14. E2E tests start
  11/1.

19
Issues for single tower tests offline analysis

• CAL_HI and CAL_LO fired without any crystal hits
• Most likely due to direct deposition in diodes
• CAL_HI trigger fired without high energy
  deposition
• Most likely due to direct deposition in diodes
• Discrepancy between TKR occupancy on top GTRCs
  between DATA and MC in electronics space
  (generated STRXX)
• Most likely due to the differences in particle
  composition between DATA and MC
• Maybe a small fraction could be from CC FIFO
  buffers filled up in data (this is a feature not
  a bug)
• Discrepancy between Data and MC for TKR dead
  channel list
• Partially disconnected channels are not simulated
• Discrepancy calculated and measured event size
  (generated STR3)
• Miscalculations based on wrong assumptions for
  event multiplicities
• Discrepancy between GEM and TriggerAlg for
  trigger types
• Analysis software (TriggeAlg) is not a realistic
  representation of GEM since it does not address
  threshold/calibration differences
• Discrepancy in trigger rates for 1,5,10 and 20
  KHz runs, underestimated for low rates and
  overestimated for high rates at a few level
• Rates from generator were not known to better
  than a few , so it is consistent with
  measurements
• overestimation had to do with deadtime since some
  events did not make into the stream
• Compared events that triggered BOTH the TKR and
  EXT pulse generator running at 20KHz with events
  that trigger TKR only, former had lower hit
  multiplicity (generated STR8)
• Reason was that when a trigger window was opened
  (on raising edge) by EXT the TKR signal was
  already on for some time which means some of the
  hits already died away by the time we looked at.
  Expect this to be more frequent a higher rates
• Distribution for TKR trigger arrival times was
  not flat

20
The Oscar goes to
21
Two Tower Tests Baseline Run Flight
Configuration
Calibrated Energy Spectrum Expected to peak at
100 MeV
Reconstructed positions
There are 234664 triggers There are 0 events with
Trigger Parity errors There are 0 events with
Packet errors There are 20 events with TEM
errors Time of first trigger Thu May 5 204841
2005 (GMT) Time of last trigger Thu May 5
214842 2005 (GMT) Duration 3601 seconds
Rate 82 hz
79 single track events 14 two-track events
22
Time Between Events Baseline Run
As expected 26.5 us !
23
Two Tower Tests Baseline Run Reconstructed Z
Direction
From Anders
Maximum trigger acceptance is reduced and is
consistent with expectations based on
geometrical calculations
Tracks passing through 1 tower only
Tracks passing through both towers
Tracks coming from top of the tower Cos q -1

• Selection cuts
• Single track events
• Ratio between predicted and measured MIP gt 0.7
  and lt 1.3

24
Two Tower Tests Baseline Run Sum of Crystal
Energies in the CAL
Energy calibrations work within a tower and
across towers
Tracks passing through 1 tower only
Energy in MeV
Tracks passing through both towers

• Selection cuts
• Single track events
• Ratio between predicted and measured MIP gt 0.7
  and lt 1.3

Energy in MeV
25
Two Tower Tests Baseline Run MC vs DATA
Tower 0
Tower 4
From Dave
26
Science Data vs. Housekeeping Data
From Xin
Temperature
Temperature
Hit multiplicity
Hit multiplicity
Tower 0, bottom layer
Tower 0, top layer
Time
Time
Temperature
Temperature
Hit multiplicity
Hit multiplicity
Tower 4, bottom layer
Tower 4, top layer
Time
Time
27
Priorities for Data Analysis for 2 towers

• We proposed to the Collaboration to analyze these
  runs first
• We are identifying names to be attached to the
  list below
• 1/1 baseline
• Check trigger types and rates, event sizes , raw
  and recon distributions for tracks within one
  tower and across towers
• Monte Carlo comparison
• 2/1,2/2 baseline and change PDU PS values
• First time we have a Power Distribution Unit.
  Could it be a source of noise? If so, can the raw
  distributions tells us?
• 2/6, 2/7 read TKR from Left or Right only
• Cable lengths are different between odd and even
  numbered towers, but the DAQ takes that into
  account. Lets check it by comparing raw and
  recon distributions from both towers. Select
  events that triggered at the center and at the
  edges
• 4/1 to 4/4 baseline with pulse generator _at_
  1,5,10,20 kHz
• Muon distributions should not be affected by high
  rates from pulse generator
• Do we understand the deadtime?
• B2 nominal settings TEM diagnostics enabled
• It is just like 1/1 but with TEM diagnostics ON
• B10 CAL HE muon gain, 4 range readout, TEM
  diagnostics enabled
• Calibrate TOT
• measure dead strips
• Calibrate edges of crystals

28
Wrapping up

• Good start with two tower data
• Runs finished this morning
• Will distribute data to Collaboration today
• More to come
• Join us in the Instrument Analysis Weekly
  Meetings
• Friday 8 am PDT (VRVS)
• Still looking for more people
• Our web site
• http//www-glast.slac.stanford.edu/IntegrationTest
  /SVAC/Instrument_Analysis/Instrument_Analysis.html
  

29
Cost/Schedule Reports for Presentation April 2005
Month End 4.1.9 Integration Test
30
Level 3 Milestone Count
31
Level 3 Milestone List
32
Milestone Variance Explanation

• Schedule Impact
• None
• Cost Impact
• None
• Corrective Action
• Not required

33
Cost Report
34
Cost Variance Explanation

• Why overrun/underrun?
• Currently on plan
• What will be done to correct?
• Stay the course

35
FTE Report (DOE/NASA-funded only)
36
FTE Variance Explanation

• Why overrun/underrun?
• Small overrun due to use of additional SLAC
  services for machining
• What is the impact?
• None
• What will be done to correct?
• N/A