1 / 32

STS simulations: Layout, digitizers, performance

STS simulations: Layout, digitizers, performance. Radoslaw Karabowicz GSI. STS detector. Tracking detector: - low-mass detector - full azimuthal angle coverage - polar angle coverage: from 2.5° to 25 ° high track density in the inner-most region high collision rate

alan-brooks
Download Presentation

STS simulations: Layout, digitizers, performance

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. STS simulations:Layout, digitizers, performance Radoslaw Karabowicz GSI

  2. STS detector • Tracking detector: • - low-mass detector • - full azimuthal angle coverage • - polar angle coverage: • from 2.5° to 25° • high track density in the inner-most region • high collision rate • vertical magnetic field

  3. STS design Silicon Tracking System: 8 stations (at 30, 35, 40, 50, 60, 75, 90 and 100cm away from the target) build from micro-strip double-sided silicon sensors (~300mm thick, 6cm wide, 2÷6 cm high) with narrow strips (60mm): vertically oriented on the front side and slightly rotated on the back side (by 15°) readout electronics located in the bottom and top parts outside of defined acceptance sensor readout ensured by low-mass microcables small sensors in the inner region to reduce the occupancy, outer regions covered by larger sensors, or even chained sensors, to minimize number of channels

  4. FEB with 8 s FEB with 8 s n-XY TER n-XY TER Module Cable Cable Silicon sensor 2-6cm ~6cm

  5. Overlaps vs gaps gaps Example realizations of the station #3 at z=40cm overlaps intermediate 39.65 40 40.35

  6. Overlaps vs gaps – tracking efficiency Overlap geometry Gap geometry overall efficiency 1 gap, 2 gaps 1 overlap, 2 overlaps Traversing overlaps does not change tracking efficiency Traversing gaps does change tracking efficiency Work done by the GSI Summer Student Maksym Zyzak from National University, Kyiv

  7. Overlaps vs gaps – momentum resolution Overlap geometry Gap geometry overall resolution 1 gap, 2 gaps 1 overlap, 2 overlaps Traversing overlaps does not change momentum resolution Traversing gaps does change momentum resolution Work done by the GSI Summer Student Maksym Zyzak from National University, Kyiv

  8. Realistic detector response Ideal response: Realistic response: The hit is determined by the track position in the center of the silicon detector • Physical processes: • charge smearing • collection efficiency • Lorentz angle due to magnetic field

  9. Realistic response - models CMS @ LHC w/2 p/2 transverse tracks CBM: |B| = 1T Holes: Q = 1.5°, Dx = 8mm Electrons: Q = 7.5°, Dx = 40mm

  10. Ideal Realistic Hit density 0-35 hits/cm2 0-31 hits/cm2 Strip occupancy 0-5.8% 0-11%

  11. Ideal Realistic Cluster length 1 strip from definition of ideal response 1.4-2.3 strips Hit finding efficiency <eff> = 98.6% 94-100% <eff> = 91.9% 54-99%

  12. Realistic response - results Ideal response: Realistic response:

  13. Ideal

  14. Realistic

  15. Detector X-ray y[cm] x[cm] station 5 (z = 60cm) x/x0 Radiation length thickness 6 million 10 GeV/c pions in Geant STS detector x/x0 • - silicon detector thickness: • currently 0.3% x0 (300mm) • station with cables and support • structure: up to 1% x0 • total vertex/tracking system: < 15% x0

  16. Summary (more)Realistic geometry that matches recent discussions on construction possibilities available (thanks to Sergey Belogurov) The geometry has been tested by Irina Rostovtseva, Maksym Zyzak and me More discussion with engineers needed The realistic digitizer and cluster finder ready Detector response study essential

  17. Deltas – expected behavior Station 1 0.3 e- / beam particle Station 4 0.12 e- / beam particle Station 5 0.08 e- / beam particle

  18. Deltas – surprising feature Station 6 0.15 e- / beam particle 0.05 – 0.1 Station 7 0.15 e- / beam particle 0.03 – 0.12 Station 8 0.03 e- / beam particle HEAR MORE ABOUT THIS FROM YOURI’s PRESENTATION

  19. Delta electrons study by Iouri Vassiliev

  20. Left-right asymmetry

  21. Ideal Realistic Hit density 0-35 hits/cm2 0-31 hits/cm2 Strip occupancy 0-5.8% 0-11%

  22. Ideal Realistic Cluster length 1 strip from definition of ideal response 1.4-2.3 strips Hit finding efficiency <eff> = 98.6% 94-100% <eff> = 91.9% 54-99%

  23. STS test beam early results Radoslaw Karabowicz GSI

  24. FEB with FEB with n-XY TER n-XY TER Test beam setup Silicon sensor Silicon sensor

  25. First signals from beta source 90Sr yield source source Time in epochs

  26. First signals from beta source 90Sr yield Noise Beta source ADC channels

  27. Beam in Cave C!!! Screams: Do we have beam?? yield Playing with threshold Time in epochs

  28. Beam bunches Hits Beam counter Yield time [a.u.] .

  29. Channel number correlations channel number Vertical strips Horizontal strips on detector 1 on detector 2 Horizontal strips Vertical strips channel number on detector 1 on detector 2

  30. beam detector time – hit time [a.u.] channel number on roc1 (n side) Time correlations

  31. Time correlations Run020 Run015

  32. Summary Conclusions LOTS TO DO!!! to analyze and understand the data to prepare for next beam time

More Related