-- question on tensioning. The operation described in chap 2 looks like a tedious and long operation to be performed manually on each chamber; it can be a problem in mass production. The point is not clarified in chap 5. Are there tools being designed to automatize the operation? A sentence on how long it takes per chamber would be appropriate, if possible, or an estimate.

-- questions on the GEB: section 3.3 seems too short for such an important element. A few pending questions: sIgnal integrity at high data rate? Since there is a lot of copper, are there activation issues with radiation? The data lines are of different lengths: impedance matching? timing issues?

-- Question on production rate and sites: at the end of the chapter 5 one has the impression that almost 2 chambers can be assembled per day. there are 144 chambers plus spares to be assembled. If all 6 six sites qualify, then the production can be done in a month with some margin. In the schedule of fig 9.3 the construction sites are 4 and the assembly takes 2 months. Inmy mind this is too optimistic: there should be quite a correlation between tensioning and gain uniformity. Maybe the 6 months assigned to the gain uniformity tests also consider re-tuning the tensioning in case?

-- section 7.2.4 on Alignment : the level of details is too much too much, and should be cut. Nevertheless, an important ingredient is missing: in the introduction one should underlay the importance of the GEM alignment since it impacts the accuracy of the measurement of the bending angle of a particle trajectory, which is important for the Pt assignment at the trigger level.

-- cable routing question at lines 2734 to 2737: can, for any reasons, coolant drops from leaky cooling pipes move along the GE11 cables and reach the PP ?

-- anything on the DSS system for GE11?

===================================================================

line-by-line:

front page the sentence "the upgrade.....improve the muon trigger and tracking performance at high luminosity, and to add redundancy to the muon system in the 1.6<|eta|<2.4 region, where.... bending is reduced." sounds bizarre as if we were not attentive in designing the current detector. Propose to trim it to "the upgrade .... improve the muon trigger and tracking performance at high luminosity in the in the 1.6<|eta|<2.4 region."

Chapter 1 overall: good

159 missing reference

170 drop ")" before "."

191 H2Tau

201 to 204 the sentence is unnecessary

236 here the important information is that the GEM signals are sent to CSC. The ganging in 2 or 4 is too detailed at this stage and raises early questions in the reader's mind. propose to drop "ganged in sets if 2 or 4 strips, and"

Chapter 2 overall: good

281 and AN induction region

316 missing reference

372 suffers from electron attachment. Can you please elaborate a bit? What is it meant exactly?

438 [11?

458 missing reference

Figure 2.9 can you please insert eta sector numbering since it is used several times in the text?

Figure 2.11 the top picture has different units and labels with respect to the two bottom ones. The reader is given the information that the measurement is at R ~1.9m and can work out the comparison with the bottom plots, but it is preferable to have all plots with homogeneous units and labels.

first line of page 17 [? ? ]

505 abOve

511-512 ??? it sounds odd. One could have planned for mechanically displacing the chamber. What is the actual reason?

Figure 2.14 the Ar/CO2 look changing too rapidly between 1 and 1.5 kV/cm. Can you comment?

581 I suggest putting a reference for the Penning effect.

646-647 "HV segment" in 647 has not been defined. It appears in fig 2.28. Propose adding a sentence in line 646 after the sentence ending with "operating conditions.": "The strips are grouped in eight independent HV segments."

Fig 2.28 The strips are not drawn properly. A better picture?

723-725 If you have more information, please add. The sentence also hints at a correlation between aging and tensioning, which would be a nightmare. Please comment.

739 Propose copying lines 786-788 on the reasons for varnishing, and paste them before the sentence starting with "While".

Fig. 2.32 please expand the caption by explaining the meaning of the labels

749-751 the sentence (two irradiated, two shielded) is inconsistent with figures 2.34 and 2.35

Figure 2.35 Propose adding a final sentence "Data in black are corrected for fluctuations of the environment parameters T,P."

777 it is not clear from the picture why there are 8 individual pieces per layer

800 question on tensioning. The described operation looks like a tedious and long operation to be performed manually on each chamber; it can be a problem in mass production. The point is not clarified in chap 5. Are there tools being designed to automatize the operation? Is there a devise for tensioning or it is done manually one screw after the other? A sentence on how long it takes per chamber would be appropriate, if possible, or an estimate. The section 2.3.4 increases the worry in the reader's mind.

834 the spelling "aluminUm" is more frequently seen

835 see 834

843 asymmetric in what?

fig. 2.40 Is this really needed?

fig.2.41 the line with pink characters is unreadable. It seems important though. Yellow?

section 2.3.4 on foil stretching, see comment for line 800

862 this is achieved manually....

920 "..foils presenting no significant obstacle to the flow." There is no sentence about the configuration with 3 GEM foils though.

Chapter 3 overall: ~good

page 47 the figure is missing a number (should be 3.1) and a caption, but there is a "[htpb]" in line 979

990 GigaBitt --> GigaBit

993 micRo-TCA

997 Figure 3.1 --> FIgure 3.2

Figure 3.1 --> should be 3.2 Make it bigger: the VFAT3 hybrid is unreadable

1009 duration of several tens of ns --> about sixty ns (which in my mind are not just several tens)

1029 latency capability of beyond 20 us --> I think the requirement is beyond 12 us

1043 requirEments

1054 radiation hardness of up to 1MRad is sufficient also fro HL-LHC ?

1067 misplaced parenthesis: gaseous (and in particular GEM detectors). -->gaseous (and in particular GEM) detectors.

1102 missing space before "A"

1132 fig 3.7 --> fig.3.6

1151 one 1 --> 1

section 3.3 seems too short for such an important element. SIgnal integrity at high data rate? Since there is a lot of copper, are there activation issues with radiation? The data lines are of different lengths: impedance matching? timing issues?

1173 A mezzanine

Figure 3.8 for consistency with fig 3.2 (that is figure 3.1 on page 48) can you please show the E-links and the "s" signals in input?

1237 is there a reference for the AMC13?

Chapter 4 overall: propose merging with 3. It is not possible to read it stand-alone (f.i. see 4.2)

1274 Control Character

1278 "sharing" does not appropriate, The links are not shared. Propose "mapping" instead.

1279-1280 super-chambers. Propose moving here line 1288 recalling the definition of super-chamber. The original definition in chapter 2 is far away.

1283 ~Gbps at 100kHz --> which means it is not sustainable when scaled at 1 MHz?

Figure 4.1 Sharing --> Mapping

1309 The reader remains with the unsolved question: the copy of the trigger data that are not sent to CSC, where does it go? what happens to them?

1316 TMB --> OTMB

1317 see 1316

1319 averaged hit rate in the eta region covered by GE11. ??? what does it mean? how about 140 Minimum Bias events pile up? punch through? n+gamma rates? please be more explicit.

Chapter 5 overall: ~ good . Great movie!

Figure 5.1 It is not clear what is the role of QC2. AT that point you just want to look for damage during transportation. So why optical inspection and cleaning are not enough?

1460 cleanroom: it is used here and in many place in the chapter. Does it exist has a single word, instead of clean room? here are the other lines where it appears: 1490, 1494, 1496, 1530, 1536, 1545, 1557, 1558 and in table 5.1
[clean room -> cleanroom; fixed - PK]

table 5,1 what is the meaning of the 1 in the UGent top row cell?

section 5.3.4 hands a bit too sharply, when one would expect at least a short description of the procedures to be actually used

Question: at the end of the chapter one has the impression that about 2 chambers can be assembled per day. there are 144 chambers plus spares to be assembled. If all 6 six sites qualify, then the production can be done in a month with some margin? Is that really true? Tensioning does not seem an operation that is exhausted in one shot. Maybe it has to be repeated several times, for instance when performing the gain uniformity tests?

Fig 5.2 are there better pictures for BARC and INFN-Bari, maybe showing the clean rooms?

Fig 5.3 GE1 /11
[fixed - PK]

Fig 5.3 a number in the pictures showing their time order will help

Chapter 6 overall: skip comments, I understand the new Chap.6 will be vastly different.

Chapter 7 overall: it is not complete.

2512 drop "expected" ; it is repeated in the next line
done

section 7.2.4 Alignment : the level of details is too much too much, and should be cut. Nevertheless, an important ingredient is missing: in the introduction one should underlay the importance of the GEM alignment since it impacts the accuracy of the measurement of the bending angle of a particle trajectory, which is important for the Pt assignment at the trigger level.

2539 The ACCURACY OF THE rest of the translations and rotations
done

2552 and ARE capable
done

2555 432? so the sensors are on both front and back face?

2579 suggest adding a comma after G1/1 disk
done

2596 drop "e.g. shortcuts"
done

2609 of he --> of the
done

2614 reveAL
done

2617 explOItation
done

2618 der --> deg
done

2656 UP to
done

section 7.3.1.2 is vague and full of repetitions.

2673 missing reference

Figure 7.9 what is the need for this general and obvious sketch? Propose dropping.

2681to 2687 drop the whole lot. The same general concepts are stated at the beginning and are stated again in the following lines.

2734 to 2737 this routing raises a question: can, for any reasons, coolant drops from leaky cooling pipes move along the GE11 cables and reach the PP ?

2745 shin ? maybe "seen"?
done

2776 near by --> nearby
done

Chapter 8. overall: too general; it can be reduced substantially. It explains a lot about CMS but it is vague on the GEM specific stuff. DSS is not discussed. But maybe it does not belong in here.

2788 by the and Data --> by the Data

2789 proved --> provided ?

section 8.2.2: question: what will be the GEE11 operational states and settings on the LHC state transitions? like CSC? like RPC?

section 8.3 is much too general. Only at the end of section 8.3.1 in lines 2935 to 2949 there is information specific for GE11. Can you add a few plots as examples?

2976 form --> from

Chapter 9 overall: ~good. Overdoing in some instances

3100 where-with-all ??? sorry I cannot figure out what it means

3147 EPR points --> maybe it needs a definition for non CMS people?

3183 you really want that?

3199 key areas --> work-packages

at the end of section 9.6, can you give indications on how many FTEs are engaged in each work-package?

fig 9.2 enlarge

table 9.1 at least the first line is outdated, right?

3243 table 9.1 is actually figure 9.3

3246 table 9.3 is actually table 9.1

Figure 9.5 the first row should say "GE11 chambers total" for consistency with Figure 9.4

3311 the required services and cabling for the GE11 station wiil be in place and tested. ---> is that so? then you can tell at the present tense: we are at the end of LS1

-- MarcoDallavalle - 2014-12-06