Experimental Physics and Industrial Control System
> the target delay must always be set so that it is greater than the physical delay, including internal delays. Otherwise some events will be missed
That's interesting and good to know.
It seems a firmware issue. Did you get any response from Jukka?
> We are starting the commissioning phase soon so we will have better results.
Would love to know your experience.
Thanks,
Guobao
On 2/20/20, 2:40 AM, "Javier Cereijo García" <javier.cereijogarcia at ess.eu> wrote:
Hi all,
Yes, here at ESS we have done some tests in the lab in the past,
although they were quite simple. I can share what we have learnt. These
tests were done using mTCA-EVR-300 and mTCA-EVM-300, not VME.
The first feeling is that everything works as expected, and changing the
target delay works smoothly, as well as changing the length of the
optical fiber. There is one thing though that seems strange to me, and
it is that the target delay must always be set so that it is greater
than the physical delay, including internal delays. Otherwise some
events will be missed. Even when using a 230-series EVG with the delay
compensation disabled on the EVR side the target delay needs to be set
correctly.
We didn't perform any complex jitter test, although monitoring the "DC
lock" shows that it gets unlocked from time to time, usually recovering
quickly. We didn't worry too much at that moment, the measured delay
wasn't changing that quickly, I think that the lock monitor is quite
sensitive. I can't recall from the top of my head if we were using the
EVM's fractional synthesizer or an external RF source, so this may
easily disappear in a more stable environment.
We are starting the commissioning phase soon so we will have better results.
Best regards,
Javier
On 19/02/2020 18:17, Michael Davidsaver wrote:
> On 2/18/20 10:43 AM, Shen, Guobao via Tech-talk wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Is there anyone who has been using MRF EVM-300 delay compensation function for any purpose, in the lab, test stand, real machine, etc?
> ESS did some testing as well.
>
>> If yes, would you mind to share us your experience?
> As I recall, it worked well on a test stand. My personal knowledge ends there.
>
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Guobao
>>
>>
>>
>> --------
>>
>> Guobao Shen
>>
>> gshen at anl.gov <mailto:gshen at anl.gov>
>>
>> Controls Group Leader
>>
>> Advanced Photon Source
>>
>> Argonne National Laboratory
>>
>> 9700 S. Cass Avenue, Lemont, IL 60439
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
--
Javier Cereijo García
Embedded System Engineer
HW&I group, ICS division
European Spallation Source ERIC
Mobile: +46 (0)72 179 23 34
E-mail: javier.cereijogarcia at ess.eu
- Replies:
- Re: MRF Delay Compensation Function Timo Korhonen via Tech-talk
- References:
- MRF Delay Compensation Function Shen, Guobao via Tech-talk
- Re: MRF Delay Compensation Function Michael Davidsaver via Tech-talk
- Re: MRF Delay Compensation Function Javier Cereijo García via Tech-talk
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Re: MEMD is stuck on windows-x64 Mark Rivers via Tech-talk
- Next:
Re: [EXTERNAL] matrix multiplication and inversions Pearson, Matthew R. via Tech-talk
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
<2020>
2021
2022
2023
2024
- Navigate by Thread:
- Prev:
Re: MRF Delay Compensation Function Javier Cereijo García via Tech-talk
- Next:
Re: MRF Delay Compensation Function Timo Korhonen via Tech-talk
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
<2020>
2021
2022
2023
2024