1 / 18

Results of QTC and HPK scenarios

Results of QTC and HPK scenarios. IEKP – University of Karlsruhe Alexander Furgeri Alex.furgeri@web.de. QTC in Karlsruhe. QTC status prequalification W1TID for Louvain Scenarios of U dep for inner Barrel sensors. Status QTC. Prequalification W1TID. Diodes 2-5 and 10-13

indra
Download Presentation

Results of QTC and HPK scenarios

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. Results of QTC and HPK scenarios IEKP – University of Karlsruhe Alexander Furgeri Alex.furgeri@web.de Sensor meeting

  2. QTC in Karlsruhe • QTC status • prequalification W1TID for Louvain • Scenarios of Udep for inner Barrel sensors Sensor meeting

  3. Status QTC Sensor meeting

  4. Prequalification W1TID • Diodes 2-5 and 10-13 • not measurable • breakdown for diodes • between 460V and 530V • depletion voltage for • diodes 50V (for all !) • depletion voltage for • minis 80V (~1.3*Udep of • diodes) • Depletion voltage for • sensor 105V (picture of • HPK seems to be right) • Same picture for W3 Sensor meeting

  5. Experimental data for donor removal in Hamburg model rC=NC,0/Neff,0 Describes complet or partial donor removal rC <1 ! HPK with high fluence Sensor meeting

  6. Reverse annealing • Time constant ~20% • higher as ROSE • deepest niveau of • depl. voltage as predicted fit preliminary Sensor meeting

  7. Batches with high resistivity • HPK delivers sensors with high resistivity • higher depletion voltage in the end of CMS expected • Forseen fluence in the inner part of the tracker is 1.6e14 n(1MeV)/cm², distributed in • 1. year 10% • 2. year 33% • 3. year 67% • 4.-10. year 100% • In reality depending from the location in the tracker • Radial location (high effect) • Z-location (low effect, except of W2 and W3) Sensor meeting

  8. Calculation of the scenario • Local Distribution of fluence in the Tracker • Tracker-TDR • comparison with E. Migliore (same source ?!) • Fluences for different geometries • Per year: • Irradiation (at once) • Beneficial annealing (20 degree, 14 days) • Reverse annealing (20 degree, 14 days) • Scenario for 10 years • time without beam and annealing not shown Sensor meeting

  9. A. Furgeri 14 days per year @ 20 degree 5 Times higher time constant for beneficial annealing Donor removal (rC) from experimental data in Karlsruhe (better for low resistivities, less uncertainties) Fluences together as hadrons (main part) Factor 1.3 for sensors, confirm with exp. Data Factor of 1.5 for fluences E. Migliore 28 days per year @ 10 degree 26 times reduced time constant for reverse annealing Complete donor removal for hadron fluences (worse for low resistivity, but not confirm with exp. data) Neutron & proton fluences separated No factor of 1.3 (diodes instead of sensors) No factor for uncertainties Differences A. Furgeri E. Migliore Sensor meeting

  10. Fluence distribution in the tracker Low variation in fluence for most geometries. Stable damage: Important part for high fluences Sensor meeting

  11. Nominal fluences Sensors depletion voltage Overdepletion possible with 500V ! Sensor meeting

  12. Comparison of scenarios @ 10°C and 20°C Sensor depl. Voltage ! More reverse Annealing ! +10°C, 28 days per year +20°C, 14 days per year Sensor meeting

  13. Different donor removal Donor removal of 65%, due to exp. data from p-irradiation Complete donor removal Not confirm with KA-data Sensor meeting

  14. Worst case scenarios Worst case = highest fluence * 1.5 , 14 days per year @ 20°C (uncertainties in fluence, see Mika Huhtinen “Radiation Environment in Experimantal (CMS) Area”,10.4.2000) Thickness = 320μm Sensor meeting

  15. Worst case scenarios with virtual thickness Worst case = highest fluence * 1.5, 14 days per year @ 20°C Thickness = 290μm, due to n++-thickness of 30µm)  effect of 100V ! Sensor meeting

  16. DiscrepancesIQC and Scenarios Result after IQC  No reverse annealing! Sensor meeting

  17. Summary of uncertainties • Effects of uncertainties ? • Donor removal complete ? • Less expected for uncharges particles • Temperature during shutdown and repair periods ? • Avoid reverse annealing ! Try to keep temperature below 20°C ! • Effects of unpredictables ? • Time of shutdown and repair periods ? • Open (warm up) the Tracker as late as possible ! • Fluences in different running periods ? Sensor meeting

  18. Conclusions • Worst case for IB1,W1 and W1TID needs ~700V bias voltage, but expected to be better • Separation of sensors with different resistivities possible for IB1, for W1 and W1TID senseless Sensor meeting

More Related