ePIC AC-LGAD TOF DSC Weekly Meeting
https://bnl.zoomgov.com/j/1617546118?pwd=qNzxLqF8Q4Mj3RerAZdVSELzEgEQzV.1
zoom link
eic-projdet-tofpid-l@lists.bnl.gov
zoom link : https://bnl.zoomgov.com/j/1617546118?pwd=qNzxLqF8Q4Mj3RerAZdVSELzEgEQzV.1
1. Test Beam Updates
1.1 Japan Test Beam
• Test beam proposal submitted (pixel-type sensors, mainly for ZDC studies)
• Not directly part of TOF activity, but opportunity exists to include TOF-related measurements
⸻
1.2 SPS Test Beam (CERN)
Schedule:
• July 22–27 (5 days only)
• Shared in parallel with ATLAS HGTD
Key Constraints:
• Strong dependence on:
• EICROC0 availability
• Firmware readiness
Critical Decision Timeline:
• Mid-May: Go/No-Go decision
• Requires:
• Fully working setup
• Lab validation mimicking SPS conditions
Important Points:
• Sensor-only test is not justifiable
• Already sufficient sensor data pending analysis
• Must include:
• ASIC (EICROC)
• Ideally FCFD testing
Risk:
• If firmware is not ready → likely cancellation
⸻
1.3 Telescope Availability
• Requested but not yet confirmed
• HGTD expected to have priority
• Clarification pending from CERN contact (Martin)
⸻
1.4 Immediate Actions
• Communication with EICROC developers (firmware urgency)
• Simone to provide:
• PCB vendor information (company + contact)
• Needed to proceed with board production
⸻
2. Simulation Status
• No update (responsible person absent)
• Action:
• Follow-up next week
• John Lajoie to also contact directly
⸻
3. Recent Test Beam Analysis
• Analysis ongoing (DESY, KEK, RARiS)
• Preliminary results:
• “Looks promising”
• Presentation planned for next meeting
⸻
4. Belle II Collaboration / Synergy
4.1 Review Outcome
• External review strongly supports:
• Intermediate tracking + timing system
• Possible inclusion of AC-LGAD TOF layer
4.2 Implications
• Strong encouragement to:
• Continue simulation
• Proceed with TOF development
4.3 Collaboration Opportunities
• Joint activities between ePIC and Belle II
• Possible:
• Joint workshop
• Shared detector concepts (geometry similarities noted)
4.4 Upcoming
• April 10 meeting (Japan teams + Belle II)
• Possible workshop alignment with:
• EIC Asia meeting
• RRB-related travel
⸻
5. PED Funding & QA Infrastructure
5.1 Funding Availability
• PED funds available, but:
• Must align with project goals (P6 / FDR roadmap)
5.2 Key Constraints
• Avoid duplication:
• Example: multiple QC test stations not automatically justified
• Must demonstrate:
• Necessity
• Complementarity
⸻
5.3 QA Strategy Discussion (Important)
Topics raised:
• Required number of QA sites
• Throughput expectations during production
• Available infrastructure across groups
Concerns:
• Underestimating production/testing rate (historical examples)
• Personnel limitations (even if hardware exists)
Suggested approach:
• Define:
• Required testing rate
• Sensor volume
• Map:
• Existing capabilities
• Gaps
⸻
5.4 Action Items
• Add QA discussion to next meeting agenda
• Ensure key people (e.g. Mathieu) attend
• Define:
• QC workflow (probe station, TCT scans, etc.)
• Resource distribution
⸻
6. Sensor Production & Design (FBK)
6.1 Status
• New production underway (partially funded)
• ~1 wafer share:
• ~20 pixel sensors
• ~10 strip sensors
6.2 Urgent Issue
• Compatibility of pixel geometry with:
• Bump bonding
• EICROC pads
Action:
• Urgent confirmation needed from Mathieu
⸻
6.3 Bump Bonding Strategy
• Interim testing:
• Use 16-channel ASICs
• Full validation:
• Requires EICROC1 (expected in coming months)
Risks:
• Limited ASIC availability
• Potential yield issues due to high channel count
⸻
7. Sensor (4x32=128ch, 20um) Performance Study (Laser Tests)
Key Observations
• Strong signal (~70–80 mV) under strip
• Very weak signal (~10–20 mV) between strips
→ Poor charge sharing
Implications
• Explains weak signal in previous beam test
• Large strip pitch (~1 mm) problematic
Additional Observation
• Signal dip at strip center:
• Due to metal blocking IR laser
⸻
Next Steps
• Repeat measurements (laser focus issue suspected)
• Provide data for reconstruction studies
⸻
8. Next Meeting Plans
• Presentation:
• Test beam analysis results (Satoshi)
• Possible sensor updates (Simone)
• Dedicated discussion:
• QA/QC strategy
• Simulation update expected
⸻
Summary of Key Risks
• SPS test beam at risk
• Firmware readiness critical
• ASIC dependency
• Central to future validation
• QA planning insufficiently defined
• Needs immediate coordination
• Sensor design constraints
• Charge sharing and geometry issues
⸻
Main Action Items
• EICROC firmware readiness (mid-May deadline)
• Provide PCB vendor info (Simone)
• QA strategy discussion (next meeting)
• Confirm pixel geometry compatibility (urgent)
• Follow up simulation update
• Prepare test beam analysis results