DRS4 Forum
  DRS4 Discussion Forum, Page 9 of 45  Not logged in ELOG logo
ID Date Authordown Subject
  95   Tue Jun 22 11:02:30 2010 Stefan RittReset of DRS4

Jinhong Wang wrote:

 Hi Stefan, 

      I found DRS draw a lot of current when applied Reset after power on,  and the PLL does not work properly. I believe there was something that I misunderstood. So,  what will happen when Reset is applied more than once after power on? . Though the chip worked well without a Reset,   i want to try to find out what was wrong, for a better understanding of DRS. 

     best regards!

           Jinhong

Have you made sure that DENABLE and DWRITE stays low during the reset? 

  97   Tue Jun 22 11:35:18 2010 Stefan RittReset of DRS4

Jinhong Wang wrote:

Stefan Ritt wrote:

Jinhong Wang wrote:

 Hi Stefan, 

      I found DRS draw a lot of current when applied Reset after power on,  and the PLL does not work properly. I believe there was something that I misunderstood. So,  what will happen when Reset is applied more than once after power on? . Though the chip worked well without a Reset,   i want to try to find out what was wrong, for a better understanding of DRS. 

     best regards!

           Jinhong

Have you made sure that DENABLE and DWRITE stays low during the reset? 

 Yes, they are stay low until Reset goes high. the process is as following

   Step1: Reset ='1', DEnable ='0', DWrite ='0', Reg_addr ="1111", Rsload='0', Srin ='0'

  Step2: Reset='0', the others do not change, the low of the pulse is longer than 10 ns.

  Step3: Reset='1', the others do not change, wait for some time

  Step4:  DEnable ='1' to start the domino.

Ok, then I have no idea. I never tried several reset pulses (actually this is not needed), so I have to reproduce the problem myself and investigate it. Actually in all my designs the reset input is just left open, since the internal initial reset is enough, so I have to modify my design first... 

  99   Mon Jul 12 16:07:37 2010 Stefan RittAnnouncement evaluation board V3

Dear DRS4 users,

a new version of the evaluation board has been designed and is in production now. The main difference is that it uses active input amplifiers, which result in an analog bandwidth of 700 MHz (as compared with the 220 MHz of the previous board) at moderate power consumption, so the board can still be powered by the USB port. New orders will receive boards V3, the old V2 boards are not available any more.

It is mandatory to use the software revision 3.0.0 or later with the new board. This software has also many new features in the oscilloscope application, and together with the new firmware it reduces the noise of the board below 0.5 mV RMS. Although the software can be used with old V2 boards, some limitations might apply due to the old firmware of the boards. People having a Xilinx download cable can flash the firmware contained in the 3.0.0 revision to their V2 board to get all features of the new software.

The evaluation board manual V3 contains the new schematics of the analog inputs using the THS4508 differential amplifier, so people doing their own design can use this schematics as and example.

Best regards,

   Stefan Ritt

  105   Mon Jul 19 12:47:17 2010 Stefan RittFixed Patter Timing Jitter

Jinhong Wang wrote:

 Hi Stefan, can you give some suggestions on determination of fixed pattern timing jitter of DRS4?  Thanks~

I will prepare some more detailed description of how to do this in the near future, but we are still learning ourselves constantly how to do that better. 


So for the moment I only can recommend you to read the function DRSBoard::CalibrateTiming() and AnalyzeWF(). What you basically do is to define an array of "effective" bin widths t[i]. You start with the nominal bin width (let's say 500ps at 2 GSPS). Now you measure a periodic signal, and look for the zero crossings. If you have a 100 MHz clock, the time between two positive transitions (low-to-high) is 10.000ns. Now you measure the width as seen by the DRS chip, assuming the effective bin widths. The exact zero crossing you interpolate between two samples to improve the accuracy. Now you measure something different, let's say 10.1ns. So you know the ~20 bins between the zero crossings are "too wide", but you don't know which one of them is too wide. So you distribute the "too wide" equally between all bins, that is you decrease the effective width of these bins from 500ps to 500-0.1ns/20=499.995 ps. Then you do this iteratively, that is for all cycles in the waveform, and for many (1000's) of recorded waveforms. It is important that the phase of you measured clock is random, so that all bins are covered equally. Then you realize that the solution oscillates, which you can reduce by using a damping factor (called "damping" in my C code). So you do not correct to 499.995ps, but maybe to 499.999ps. If you iterate often enough, the solution kind of stabilizes.

The attached picture shows the result of such a calibration. Green is the effective bin width which in the end only slightly deviates from 500ps. But the "integral temporal nonlinearity" shows a typical shape for the DRS chip. It's defined as

          n
 Ti[n] = Sum (t[i]-500ps)
         i=0

where t[i] is the effective bin width. So Ti[0] is zero by definition, but the deviation around bin 450 can go up to 1ns at 2 GSPS.

Now you can test you calibration, by measuring again the period of your clock. If you do everything correctly and have a low jitter external clock and no noise on your DRS4 power supply voltages, you should see a residual jitter of about 40ps.

Hope this explanation helps a bit. Let me know if I was not clear enough at some points. 

- Stefan

  107   Wed Jul 21 10:58:20 2010 Stefan Ritt ENOB of DRS

Jinhong Wang wrote:

 Hi, Stefan, I see in your ppt "Design and performance of 6 GSPS waveform digitizing chip DRS4" , you define DRS4 ENOB as 1Vpp/0.35mv(RMS) = 11.5bit, where, 1Vpp is the linearity input range, and 0.35mv is the rms voltage after offset correction. What I understand is that 0.35mV is obtained from DC offset Correction, hence 11.5 bit is for DC input, am i right?  If true, what about ENOB for AC input in the whole analog bandwidth?  thanks~

The expression ENOB for 1Vpp/0.35mV(RMS) is wrong, but I learned this later. Now I call it SNR. The ENOB is calculated in a more complicated way, see for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ENOB. If you measure the ENOB without timing correction, it's pretty poor (in the order of 7-8 bits). This is because without timing calibration, a sine input has huge side bands, and the ENOB involves the power of your signal over the power of the side bands. If you do a proper timing calibration, you spectrum gets "sharper", and hence the ENOB increases. But I have to admit that I never measured it carefully, since we are still optimizing the timing calibration. Once we have a perfect timing calibration, I will do it and update the data sheet. 

  111   Tue Nov 16 16:38:06 2010 Stefan RittReference design for DRS4 active input buffer

Jinhong Wang wrote:

 

 Hi, stefan,

 

     In the DC coupled version of the analog drivers for DRS4 input in Eval. Board V3, you mentioned that CMOFS of THS4508 was set to 1.8V to match the input range of DRS4, however, will this clash with the requirements of  DRS4 input voltage between 0.1 V ~1.5V ? The output of THS4508 can easily rise beyond 1.5V for CMOFS=1.8V. I also noticed the resister paris R13/R15, R14/R16 was added among the output of THS4508 and the inputs of DRS4, were these resister pairs were used to attenuate the level of THS4508 output signal (a half ? ) to match the input requirements of DRS4? Maybe I have some misunderstanding about it.

 

No you are right about that. The THS4508 has a gain of +2, and by using the resistor pairs we do

1) Reduce the gain back to unity

2) Reduce the input DC level from 1.8V to 0.9V to match the input range

3) Terminate the signals at the input of the DRS chip to minimize reflections

I know this is not so obvious from the schematic, so thanks for asking.

- Stefan 

  113   Sat Feb 19 22:46:35 2011 Stefan Ritthow to synchronize Sampling frequency of two evaluation boards

S S Upadhya wrote:

 Dear sir,

We have two evaluation boards of DRS4. We would like to use 8 inputs to be recorded on a trigger and we would like to find the relative time difference of inputs. So is it possible to synchronize the sampling frequency of the two evaluation boards. 

with best regards

S S Upadhya

No, not in this version. We plan a future version of the evaluation board with clock synchronization, but that board will not be ready before 2-3 months. Anyhow the board is more meant as an evaluation board, to test the chip and develop own electronics, and not to build a complete DAQ system. Note that CAEN distributes now a VME board containing the four DRS4 chips and 32 channels on a board. 

  114   Mon Feb 21 08:10:31 2011 Stefan Ritthow to synchronize Sampling frequency of two evaluation boards

Stefan Ritt wrote:

S S Upadhya wrote:

 Dear sir,

We have two evaluation boards of DRS4. We would like to use 8 inputs to be recorded on a trigger and we would like to find the relative time difference of inputs. So is it possible to synchronize the sampling frequency of the two evaluation boards. 

with best regards

S S Upadhya

No, not in this version. We plan a future version of the evaluation board with clock synchronization, but that board will not be ready before 2-3 months. Anyhow the board is more meant as an evaluation board, to test the chip and develop own electronics, and not to build a complete DAQ system. Note that CAEN distributes now a VME board containing the four DRS4 chips and 32 channels on a board. 

Well, one thing you can do is to generate an external trigger and send it to the external trigger input of both cards. Then you can determine the time in respect to the trigger point in both boards. But since the trigger cell jitters by 2-3 cells in each chip, the accuracy is limited to about 1-2 ns when running at 2 GS/s. 

  116   Fri Feb 25 10:13:51 2011 Stefan RittAnnouncement digital pulse processing workshop

Dear colleague,

if you live not so far from Zurich, you might be interested in this workshop:

http://www.xtronix.ch/hep/psi_workshop.htm

This is a combined PSI-CAEN presentation of digitizer hardware including the new V1742 board based on the DRS4 chip. The workshop will also show how digital pulse processing can be used to effectively extract time and energy from detector signals, and thus replace more and more traditional analog electronics. Please register at the above site if you are interested.

Best regards,

    Stefan Ritt

  118   Fri Apr 15 08:28:54 2011 Stefan RittFixes to DOScreen.cpp for recent built on linux
> Hello,
> 
> I was just building version 3.1.0 and ran into some problems in DOScreen.cpp.  Basically the conversions from
> char* to wxString were generating "ambiguous overload" errors (in gcc 4.4.3, wx-2.8)
> 
> The simple fix is given in  the following diff output.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Bob
> 
> diff drs-3.1.0_o/src/DOScreen.cpp drs-3.1.0/src
> 237c237
> <      wxst = wxString(m_frame->GetOsci()->GetDebugMsg(),wxConvUTF8);  //BH
> ---
> >       wxst = m_frame->GetOsci()->GetDebugMsg();
> 246c246
> <       wxst = wxString(m_debugMsg,wxConvUTF8);  //BH
> ---
> >       wxst = m_debugMsg;
> 477c477
> <     wxst = wxString("AUTO",wxConvUTF8); //BH
> ---
> >          wxst = "AUTO";
> 479c479
> <     wxst = wxString("TRIG?",wxConvUTF8);  //BH
> ---
> >          wxst = "TRIG?";
>  

Thanks for mentioning this. I always overlook this because I develop under Windows where this warning does not show 
up. I fixed that in the current version. Usually I just use _T() instead wxString() because this is shorter and 
recommended by the developers.

Cheers, Stefan.
  120   Thu Jun 2 21:01:29 2011 Stefan RittRemoving spikes

Martin Petriska wrote:

I have DSR4 eval board. Found that there are spikes in channels. Procedure Osc::RemoveSpikes to remove them looks litlle dificult. There is simple way, if you doesnt need to measure all 4 channels.Spikes are in all channels, and it looks like they are same in time and value between channels. To remove them, if you are not using one channel, substract that unused channel with spikes from used channel and your data will be without spikes. If you need all 4 inputs, then may be channel 9 could be substracted.

Indeed that's what I had before. If you don't need the 9th channels, you can use it to identify the spikes. But we have applications where we need all 9 channels. That's why I made Osc::RemoveSpikes a bit more complicated, so it will still work when all 9 channels are used. This new version is release 3.1.0. If you just blindly subtract the 9th channel, your noise could increase by a sqrt(2). 

  122   Tue Jul 5 10:09:43 2011 Stefan RittFixed Patter Timing Jitter

Jinhong Wang wrote:

Stefan Ritt wrote:

Jinhong Wang wrote:

 Hi Stefan, can you give some suggestions on determination of fixed pattern timing jitter of DRS4?  Thanks~

I will prepare some more detailed description of how to do this in the near future, but we are still learning ourselves constantly how to do that better. 


So for the moment I only can recommend you to read the function DRSBoard::CalibrateTiming() and AnalyzeWF(). What you basically do is to define an array of "effective" bin widths t[i]. You start with the nominal bin width (let's say 500ps at 2 GSPS). Now you measure a periodic signal, and look for the zero crossings. If you have a 100 MHz clock, the time between two positive transitions (low-to-high) is 10.000ns. Now you measure the width as seen by the DRS chip, assuming the effective bin widths. The exact zero crossing you interpolate between two samples to improve the accuracy. Now you measure something different, let's say 10.1ns. So you know the ~20 bins between the zero crossings are "too wide", but you don't know which one of them is too wide. So you distribute the "too wide" equally between all bins, that is you decrease the effective width of these bins from 500ps to 500-0.1ns/20=499.995 ps. Then you do this iteratively, that is for all cycles in the waveform, and for many (1000's) of recorded waveforms. It is important that the phase of you measured clock is random, so that all bins are covered equally. Then you realize that the solution oscillates, which you can reduce by using a damping factor (called "damping" in my C code). So you do not correct to 499.995ps, but maybe to 499.999ps. If you iterate often enough, the solution kind of stabilizes.

The attached picture shows the result of such a calibration. Green is the effective bin width which in the end only slightly deviates from 500ps. But the "integral temporal nonlinearity" shows a typical shape for the DRS chip. It's defined as

          n
 Ti[n] = Sum (t[i]-500ps)
         i=0

where t[i] is the effective bin width. So Ti[0] is zero by definition, but the deviation around bin 450 can go up to 1ns at 2 GSPS.

Now you can test you calibration, by measuring again the period of your clock. If you do everything correctly and have a low jitter external clock and no noise on your DRS4 power supply voltages, you should see a residual jitter of about 40ps.

Hope this explanation helps a bit. Let me know if I was not clear enough at some points. 

- Stefan

 Hi, Stefan,

    I noticed other groups of SCA reported the technique to histogram the zero crossings of a sine wave, and use the bin occupancy to derive the effective aperture width.  Recently , I tried this technique to DRS4. In my test, the frequency of the sine wave was selected uncorrelated to the domino frequency.The results were discouraging. Large variations of the domino tap delay was observed.   Besides, I also tried to induce an external trigger, which is uncorrelated to the domino frequency, and histogram the stop positions. Unfortunately, large variations were obtained again. I knew there must be something wrong. Do you have any suggestions?

   The attachment is the histogram of the stop positions (the vertical axis is the bin count, the horizontal axis is the bin number). First, I calculate the ration of each bin count to the total counts, supposed the total count is 10000, count of bin 37 is 12, so the corresponding ratio is 12/10000=0.0012. The bin delay is derived by multiplying its ratio to the whole domino period (1024*1/FSamp, eg., for 5 GSP/s, this period is 200ps *1024). (The bin delay i observed was with an variation of about 30 ps).  If the external trigger is uncorrelated to the domino frequency, so, the stop positions are supposed to distribute equally to all bins? If this is true, can i calculate the bin delay via the histogram ?

   thank you~

                 Wang Jinhong

One obvious problem in your method is your statistics. If you have n hits in a bin of the histogram, the error of n is sqrt(n). So if you measure 100 hits, this is more like 100+-10 hits. If you want a better precision, you need much higher statistics. I myself never used this method, but I attach a typical nonlinearity curve running at 2 GSPS, sot hat you know what you should expect. I do some smoothing between neighbor bins so that they do not scatter too much. As you can see, the integral nonlinearity goes almost up to +-2 ns. This value is smaller at higher sampling speeds.

 - Stefan 

  124   Wed Jul 13 04:26:52 2011 Stefan RittFixed Patter Timing Jitter

Jinhong Wang wrote:

Stefan Ritt wrote:

Jinhong Wang wrote:

Stefan Ritt wrote:

Jinhong Wang wrote:

 Hi Stefan, can you give some suggestions on determination of fixed pattern timing jitter of DRS4?  Thanks~

I will prepare some more detailed description of how to do this in the near future, but we are still learning ourselves constantly how to do that better. 


So for the moment I only can recommend you to read the function DRSBoard::CalibrateTiming() and AnalyzeWF(). What you basically do is to define an array of "effective" bin widths t[i]. You start with the nominal bin width (let's say 500ps at 2 GSPS). Now you measure a periodic signal, and look for the zero crossings. If you have a 100 MHz clock, the time between two positive transitions (low-to-high) is 10.000ns. Now you measure the width as seen by the DRS chip, assuming the effective bin widths. The exact zero crossing you interpolate between two samples to improve the accuracy. Now you measure something different, let's say 10.1ns. So you know the ~20 bins between the zero crossings are "too wide", but you don't know which one of them is too wide. So you distribute the "too wide" equally between all bins, that is you decrease the effective width of these bins from 500ps to 500-0.1ns/20=499.995 ps. Then you do this iteratively, that is for all cycles in the waveform, and for many (1000's) of recorded waveforms. It is important that the phase of you measured clock is random, so that all bins are covered equally. Then you realize that the solution oscillates, which you can reduce by using a damping factor (called "damping" in my C code). So you do not correct to 499.995ps, but maybe to 499.999ps. If you iterate often enough, the solution kind of stabilizes.

The attached picture shows the result of such a calibration. Green is the effective bin width which in the end only slightly deviates from 500ps. But the "integral temporal nonlinearity" shows a typical shape for the DRS chip. It's defined as

          n
 Ti[n] = Sum (t[i]-500ps)
         i=0

where t[i] is the effective bin width. So Ti[0] is zero by definition, but the deviation around bin 450 can go up to 1ns at 2 GSPS.

Now you can test you calibration, by measuring again the period of your clock. If you do everything correctly and have a low jitter external clock and no noise on your DRS4 power supply voltages, you should see a residual jitter of about 40ps.

Hope this explanation helps a bit. Let me know if I was not clear enough at some points. 

- Stefan

 Hi, Stefan,

    I noticed other groups of SCA reported the technique to histogram the zero crossings of a sine wave, and use the bin occupancy to derive the effective aperture width.  Recently , I tried this technique to DRS4. In my test, the frequency of the sine wave was selected uncorrelated to the domino frequency.The results were discouraging. Large variations of the domino tap delay was observed.   Besides, I also tried to induce an external trigger, which is uncorrelated to the domino frequency, and histogram the stop positions. Unfortunately, large variations were obtained again. I knew there must be something wrong. Do you have any suggestions?

   The attachment is the histogram of the stop positions (the vertical axis is the bin count, the horizontal axis is the bin number). First, I calculate the ration of each bin count to the total counts, supposed the total count is 10000, count of bin 37 is 12, so the corresponding ratio is 12/10000=0.0012. The bin delay is derived by multiplying its ratio to the whole domino period (1024*1/FSamp, eg., for 5 GSP/s, this period is 200ps *1024). (The bin delay i observed was with an variation of about 30 ps).  If the external trigger is uncorrelated to the domino frequency, so, the stop positions are supposed to distribute equally to all bins? If this is true, can i calculate the bin delay via the histogram ?

   thank you~

                 Wang Jinhong

One obvious problem in your method is your statistics. If you have n hits in a bin of the histogram, the error of n is sqrt(n). So if you measure 100 hits, this is more like 100+-10 hits. If you want a better precision, you need much higher statistics. I myself never used this method, but I attach a typical nonlinearity curve running at 2 GSPS, sot hat you know what you should expect. I do some smoothing between neighbor bins so that they do not scatter too much. As you can see, the integral nonlinearity goes almost up to +-2 ns. This value is smaller at higher sampling speeds.

 - Stefan 

 Thank you, Stefan. It is really kind of you to offer suggestions or comments on our concern. 

Recently, we input a sine wave to our DRS board. DRS works at about 5 GS/s. The frequency varies from 131 MHz to 231MHz. The attached picture shows the reconstructed points of sine wave (vertical is the amplitude, horizontal axis is the point numbers). We noticed that the variation of the length of the zero crossing segments is very large. The max. length is perhaps two times the length of the min. I marked in blue color in the picture.  It means the corresponding sampling interval of the max. is two times of that of the min.  If this is true, DNL of the DRS sampling interval would be very large. We know, for uniform sampling, the length of the zero crossing segments are assumed to be uniform.  Do you have any comments? Thank you~

The length of the segments is a combination of the sampling jitter and the voltage noise. If you signal contains some noise (and all signals do) it will translate to timing jitter. The DNL of the DRS sampling interval shows a variation from the mean of typically 30%. After you correct for it, it will of course become much smaller. As I said, some people measured 10 ps timing with the DRS4 after careful timing calibration. 

  126   Wed Sep 7 16:56:43 2011 Stefan RittDRS4 and AD9222

Guillaume Blanchard wrote:

Hello,

I am designing a DAQ board with both DRS4 + AD9222 and a  FPGA to monitor.

Do I have to change the default value of O-OFS ?

Does a simple low-pass filter (series resistor + capacitor) on each AD9222 input is enough to limit the noise ?

I am planning to use the (DRS4,AD9222,FPGA) group as both a trigger and digitizing system (as shown in the DRS4 datasheet). The DRS4 will be working at 5Ghz with 8 active channels.
So each channel will have a time depth of 1/5Ghz x 1024 = 204.8ns. So, in order to miss nothing, the ADC latency + the trigger decision must be inferior to 204.8ns, am I correct ?
This leads me to implement on my board the 65Mhz version of the AD9222 as this converter has a 8 clock period latency, i.e. 123ns and it left me 81ns to perform a trigger decision ?

Cordially,

G.Blanchard

I'm not so sure about the temperature stability of the default (DRS4 internal O-OFS) value, that's why I used a precision DAC in my design. But actually I never tried without. Probably the default internal value is good enough if you calibrate each chip (which you do anyhow).

Most designs use no filter between DRS4 and AD9222. Since the DRS4 output is BW limited at around 50 MHz, there is not much you win if you put a 32.5 MHz low pass there. And the PCS gets just so much simpler.

You are right with the latency of the AD9222, this is an issue. From the remaining 81 ns you loose a few going out of the FPGA, you need one or two FPGA clock cycles to make the decision, the DRS4 has also some stopping latency (maybe 10 ns). So you are at the edge. Some people use hardware comparators which are faster than the AD9222, one guy uses even directly an LVDS input of the FPGA "mis-used" as a comparator, where the comparator level (=LVDS negative input) comes from a DAC.

 

- Stefan

  129   Fri Sep 9 09:31:33 2011 Stefan RittDRS4 and AD9222

Guillaume Blanchard wrote:

Thank you for your answers,

Another question : Have you ever tried to split the differential signal at the output of the DRS4 chip ? For example to feed both an AD9222 and a diff. amplifier (followed by discriminators) ?

 

Yes. Just have a look at the schematics of the evaluation board. This is exactly what is done there.

Actually in the newest version we went one step further and put the comparator at the input of the DRS chip. This way it is active even during the readout of the DRS4 chip and we can use this as a counter to count the overall hit rate at the input.

 

- Stefan

  131   Mon Sep 19 08:53:22 2011 Stefan Rittcompilation error for version 4.0.0 on linux

Andriy Zatserklyaniy wrote:

To fix it I added TriggerDialog.o into CPP_OBJ line of the Makefile:

Thanks. I added your fix to the current 4.0.0 distribution.

- Stefan 

  133   Sat Oct 22 00:40:02 2011 Stefan RittDRS4 eval board: readout rate

Aurelien Bouvier wrote:

Hi,

Our setup uses a DRS4 evaluation board (version 2.0).

Although we trigger the board at a rate of ~4kHz (on channel2), readout through USB2 is only happening at a rate of ~125Hz.

After some investigation, we could pin down that it is due to the time it takes to complete the following commands: musb_write() and musb_read() which both take ~150 microsecond to complete. Because they are called multiple times, reading out 1 trigger takes ~8 millisecond which explains the 125Hz we're seeing.

Is ~150 us to complete a musb_read()/musb_write() command expected?

Is there any way we could speed up the readout rate of the DRS4 board so that data acquisition through USB2 is closer to our trigger rate of 4kHz?

Any feedback you might have on this topic would be greatly appreciated.

Many thanks,

Aurelien

With version 4 of the DRSOsc program and a decent computer, you should be able to achieve something close to 500 Hz, but that's the limit. The board is for evaluation purposes of the chip, not for production data acquisition. The main limit comes from USB2, which is limited to ~25 MB/sec. We are in the process of designing a new board with Gigabit Ethernet readout, with which you should be able to get your 4 kHz. But this board will not be ready before spring. There is also a VME board by CAEN in Italy which sits in a VME crate. This board is also much faster than the USB board. Here is the link:

http://www.caen.it/csite/CaenProfList.jsp?parent=13&Type=WOCateg&prodsupp=home

 

  135   Mon Oct 24 10:30:15 2011 Stefan RittPhase Shift for ADC Readout

Hao Huan wrote:

Dear Dr. Ritt,

    In the DRS 4 datasheet it is recommended to sample the analog output of the chip after 8~10 ns of the SRCLK edge for it to stablize and thus a phase shift between SRCLK and the ADC sampling clock is necessary. However in the latest version of the evaluation board firmware the phase-shifted clock was generated but not really used for the ADC interface. Is there any reason for that?

Good questions. I looked myself in the code and found:

  drs_readout_clk       <= I_CLK33;

  drs_readout_clk_ps    <= I_CLK33; -- phase shifted clock for FADC

  drs_serial_clk        <= I_CLK33;

which is apparently wrong (should be drs_readout_clk_ps <= I_CLK33_PS;) . But apparently the board is working with the unshifted clock. Could be that the PCB traces to the DRS and the ADC have different lengths, and by accident, they have just the right value.

The way to find that out is to keep the ADC clock phase variable (most FPGAs allow a +-5 ns phase adjustment inside their clock blocks), and then try different values. If the phase shift is wrong, you will see spikes every 32 samples in the readout. The spikes are always there (from some internal switching of bus segments), and you can see them with a differential probe at the DRS output. The ADC phase must then be made such that the sampling point of the ADC comes after that spike, just at the end of the settling time, barely before the next analog value shows up at the DRS output. This is a bit tricky and can be made best just by trying out different values.

  137   Tue Nov 1 11:07:02 2011 Stefan RittHow to link PMT

Zhongwei Du wrote:

I want to measure the signal from PMT . But it is a current signal, should i just put a series resistance, or use a amplifier to convert it to voltage signal before drs4?  

Can you give me some advice ? 

The evaluation board has a 50 Ohm termination resistor, which already converts your current into a voltage signal. If the resulting signal is too low (<20 mV) you can put in an amplifier or raise the HV of your PMT (inside the valid range given by its datasheet of course).

- Stefan 

  139   Mon Dec 12 16:43:04 2011 Stefan RittDC coupled DRS4 input stage

In the attachement you will find a working DC-coupled input stage to the DRS4 chip. The bandwidth of this design is about 700 MHz, the gain is 1.

The upper version does not have an additional input buffer. This is not a very "clean" design, since the differential driver has an input impedance of 150 Ohm, which together with the 75 Ohm termination resistor gives about 50 Ohm termination. 

The lover version has an additional input buffer, which nicely decouples the input from the differential driver, so a proper 50 Ohm termination can be used at the cost of additional power for that buffer.

The COM common mode voltage and the OFS voltage have to be set according to the required input range, so that ranges such as 0V...1V, -0.5V...+0.5V, -1V...0V can be used. The COM voltage can be high impedance (simple resistor divider), while the OFS voltage needs to be low impedance (fast active buffer). The analog switch ADG918 can be used to digitize a precise calibration voltage CAL+, which can then be used for precise gain calibration of the DRS4 sampling cells.

ELOG V3.1.5-fe60aaf