Status of Radiation Proposal

1. Status of Radiation Proposal • Focus on: • Amendment to Proposal • Radiation Protocols C. Issever, Oxford

2. Plans 2006 and Conclusions C. Issever, Oxford

3. Fibre irradiations (Oxford, Taiwan): • No GRIN or SM fibre irradiation done. Tony and Todd contacted Marco at SCR and agreed to visit the source. • SIMM irradiation up to 100 Mrad ad 60Co source at INER (Taiwan) done: Very good performance. • Fibre irradiations (SMU): • Infinicor SX+ 50/250m/1.6mm MM 10G fiber from Corning. Germanium doped irradiated at 60Co source and 230 MeV p source (fluence: 1.9×1013 proton/cm2). • Very promising for LHC upgrade. C. Issever, Oxford

4. ATLAS VCSEL/PIN test at Louvain (Oxford, Taiwan): • We did not irradiate PINs but only VCSELs. • VCSELs survive up to 9x1015 n(1MeV)/cm2; All came back after 10 days of annealing at 10mA and 5 days at 15mA. The threshold shift at the highest fluence was not more than 2.5mA. This looks very promising. • Further running of the VCSELs caused three out of five arrays to develop a higher common resistance across the array. KK and Maurice observed the same behaviour with their some non-irradiated Pixel VCSEL arrays. This features seems to be not related to irradiation. • Future tests: won't go into a radiation test before running the devices for a long time (weeks) and carefully evaluating their long term behaviour before irradiation. C. Issever, Oxford

5. VCSEL/PIN tests at PS (Ohio, Oklahoma): • 4 different type of VCSELs which are available on the market (all 850nm) irradiated at the PS.Optowell survives up to 1.4E16 n(1MeV)/cm2. The devices were killed during the radiation. • PINs irradiated up to 2.5 10E15 n(1MeV)/cm2:responsivity drops by 65%. C. Issever, Oxford

6. GOL and SOS TID and SEU tests @ 230 p source (SMU): • GOL TID: survived 106 Mrad (Si) without current increase. Chip fully functioning during and after irradiation. • GOL SEE: no error when flux < 1×109 proton/cm2/sec. When flux = 5×1011 proton/cm2/sec, error cross section is measured to be 1.1×10-13 error·cm2/proton (loss of link) and 1.1×10-14 error·cm2/proton (bit error). • SOS SEE: With a total fluence of 1.9×1013 proton/cm2 and ionizing dose of 106 Mrad (Si), and a flux range from 1×107 to 5×1011 proton/cm2/sec, no SEE was measured and all shift registers function after the irradiation. • Finesar VCSEL SEE (total fluence of 1.9×1013 proton/cm2 ): Looks very promising but more tests needed. C. Issever, Oxford

7. Milestone not reached: • VCSEL(850nm) tests most progressed and all three groups show conclude that the results are promising. • PIN tests just started • Fibre tests just started and promising • GRIN fibre tests are missing. C. Issever, Oxford

8. Plans for 2007 to 2008 • xxxx Karl: This seems very early!! Karl: Why the PS source? Total dose is most often done with a Co-60 gamma or X-ray source (for unpackaged parts) to reduce the effects of bulk damage. SEU is often done with monoenergetic (e.g. 60MeV) proton source. C. Issever, Oxford

9. Problems • Funding not yet available for some groups. • Delays in the current ID installation and commissioning are effecting R&D: • No ATLAS VCSEL or PIN arrays from Taiwan for at least a year! • Man power is very critical given the vast amount of work to be done. • Proposal shifted at least by one year. Hence: Need to adjust current proposal and include CMS and CERN. C. Issever, Oxford

10. Plan for irradiation tests by CERN optolinks group (K. Gill) • Focus limited resources currently available on SEE tests instead of total bulk/ionising damage • Higher radiation flux + higher data rates • greater SEE rates • Qualifying best, i.e. least sensitive parts may not be sufficient • Need to look into error characteristics and coding schemes with error correction • Aim is to make SEE tests (first since 2000) on p-i-n photodiodes • Start with InGaAs but later possibly Si and GaAs (MSM) C. Issever, Oxford

11. Buy some bare p-i-n die and mount with TIA either at external company or at CERN Note, same components available with pigtailed or receptacle package More suitable for total bulk/ionization damage tests Foresee SEE tests at PSI 60MeV proton source Aim to measure bit-error vs data rate (to 4.5Gb/s), optical power incident proton angle BERT based on Virtex 4 FPGA platform Must be shielded from protons Control remotely from outside source Try to modify firmware to look at advanced statistics, e.g. #consecutive bits upset Error free interval SEE test on receivers (K. Gill) Alberto Jimenez Pacheco C. Issever, Oxford

12. Amendments to the existing Proposal -- Discussion • Milestones and plans need to be revisited. • e.g: 1310 nm VCSEL? • Development of common radiation procedures. • CMS and CERN plans needs to be included. Timescale of these changes: end of 2007? C. Issever, Oxford

13. Radiation Protocols -- Discussion • Evaluate devices which should be irradiated thoroughly: • run them for at least 2 months and check performance regularly • temperature cycling and performance check • Statistics: How many devices shall we irradiate? • How do we select which devices to test? • Survey radiation source.  • Which are the set of beam types and energies required given that we don't want to trust NIEL scaling. • Come up with a setup that allows to move the devices out of target area without disconnecting anything.  • Anneal for couple of months if possible at the radiation facility until devices are transportable.   • Perform ageing tests in an environmental chamber. • what is the criteria for a device to pass the test eg 3 dB decrease = fail? C. Issever, Oxford

14. Man Power -- Discussion • How do we manage all this work with so few people? • One way forward is to define a minimal set of tests required to select a baseline option and then concentrate on this unless it fails. ie drop all work on other options. C. Issever, Oxford

15. What can we achieve realistically in 2007-- Discussion • Make changes to proposal • Radiation Protocols • Include Plans of CMS/CERN • Survey markets and decide which components to test. ….. C. Issever, Oxford