1 / 19

Standalone VeloPix Simulation

Standalone VeloPix Simulation. Jianchun Wang 4/30/10. Introduction. VeloPix performance after irradiation affects our current design. We want to create tools to study these effects.

rea
Download Presentation

Standalone VeloPix Simulation

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. Standalone VeloPix Simulation Jianchun Wang 4/30/10

  2. Introduction • VeloPix performance after irradiation affects our current design. We want to create tools to study these effects. • As a first step I modify the standalone simulation package and look at performance of pixel detector before irradiation. More features are to be added. • More sophisticated electric field based ISE-TCAD simulation. • Charge trapping. • Finite integration time. • Disclaim: Some of the electronics properties may be too good to be true. If it is need, more realistic parameters can be added to provide input to other studies. • Besides of many interesting features, I am particular interested in: • The charge collection efficiency will be reduced due to insufficient bias and/or charge trapping, etc. • Reconstruction of angled tracks are biased due charge collection inefficiency. • Non-uniform irradiation dose on a single chip/sensor makes it difficult bias. • … Jianchun Wang

  3. Sensor and Electronics Properties • Silicon sensor • Thickness = 150 mm. • Charge carrier = electron • Pixel size = 55 mmx 55mm. • Full depletion voltage = 30 V • Bias HV = 50 V • Electronics • Charge collection efficiency = 100% • Noise = 100 e • Gain uncertainty = 10 % • Crosstalk between adjacent pixels = 0 • Threshold = 1000 e • Non-uniformity of thresholds = 0 % • ADC (TDC) bits = 8 • ADC range = 1000 – 24000 e • Non-linearity = 0 More realistic parameters will be added when they are available Jianchun Wang

  4. Normal Incident Tracks Angle X = 0 Angle Y = 0 MPV ~ 11 Ke <N> =1.55 <N> =1.26 Above ADC range • Track: 20 GeVp. • Row  X, Column Y • With VeloPix detector row and column have same pitches. Jianchun Wang

  5. Eta Correction Pixel border Linear charge weighting ~75%, no charge sharing info available eta correction ~25%, very narrow after eta correction partially due to small portion Jianchun Wang

  6. Tracks At Different Angles Tracks at 0 degree in Y/column direction For threshold = 1000 e, the best resolution is at 18 – 20 degree. Jianchun Wang

  7. With Plane Tilted Tracks at 0 or 20 degree in Y/column direction There are more charge sharing in column direction, thus slightly less charge sharing for normal incident track in X direction. Jianchun Wang

  8. Different Thresholds and Noise Threshold = 1000 e Noise = 300 e Threshold = 1000 e Noise = 100 e Threshold = 2000 e Noise = 100 e • Just to show how thresholds and noise affect the resolution. • With increasing of noise, the resolution is affected the most at small angles where the shared charges are less. • Threshold affects the resolution, especially for thin detector. Trim DAC in each cell may be necessary to reduce the non-uniformity of threshold, and thus reduce the overall threshold level. Jianchun Wang

  9. Plan • Use more realistic electronics parameters from TimePix studies, and generate inputs for other studies. • Add irradiation dose dependent effects • More sophisticated electric field based ISE-TCAD simulation. • Charge trapping. • Finite integration time. • … • May integrate it to more general simulation, depending CPU consumption ( ~10ms /hit ). • More interesting studies. Jianchun Wang

  10. Testbeam of Radiation Hard Sensor

  11. Telescope Configuration Y Z X Lab frame XX XX YY YY Scint DUT 120 GeV proton beam a: –22 b: +22 b: 0, –10, –20 b: –22 a: +22 Jianchun Wang

  12. Diamond HV Scan at Angle • What we want to extract from the testbeam for different bias HVs: • Total charge collected per particle hit in terms of MPV of the Landau distributions. • For a fixed threshold how the charge sharing information the detector can deliver, in terms of number of rows, or columns per particle hit cluster. • Spatial resolution. • Shift of spatial position measurement due to partial charge collection and tracks at angle. This can give us some ideas on effective depth, and charge trapping. • Status of each task: • Need more work on readout electronics gain and pedestal calibrations. It is difficult to compare the absolute charge before that. • Numbers of pixels per hit vs bias HV qualitatively agree with expectation. We need to obtain precise thresholds from bench test for MC simulation. Then we can have quantitative comparison to test our understanding. • Current resolution is not as good as expectation. Need more work on gain curve and telescope alignment. • Shift of center residual shows correct trend. It will be revised after the spatial measurement optimization. Jianchun Wang

  13. Diamond Sensor Charge Sharing vs HV HV = -250 V Preliminary Preliminary Number of Columns per Cluster • Sensor rotated to ~ 20 in row direction. • More charge collected with higher bias HV till saturation. • Need more work on gain calibration to extract the absolute charge (MPV of Landau distribution). Number of Rows per Cluster Jianchun Wang

  14. Diamond Sensor Residual Center vs HV Preliminary • Tracks are at ~ 20 with respect to normal of sensor plane in row direction. • Use the same set of telescope spatial configuration parameters. • With low bias HV, charges generated near readout electronics have more chance to be collected, equivalent to thinner effective sensor. Thus the residual center shifts. • In extreme case, the maximum possible shift ~ tan(q)*d/2 ~ 90 mm. Jianchun Wang

  15. Diamond Sensor Charge Sharing vs Angle Preliminary Preliminary • Diamond sensor is biased at -250 V. • Sensor was perpendicular to beam, or rotated by ~10 & ~20 in row direction. • Gain and threshold of the electronics are different from that of HV scan. Jianchun Wang

  16. Charge Distributions Silicon Telescope sCVD DUT Good Plane 0 Weird Plane 4 Bad Charge (Ke) Plane 8 Charge (Ke) Jianchun Wang

  17. Problem with Diamond Gain Calibration sCVD DUT MP=9.8 Charge (Ke) Charge (Ke) MP=22.7 • Double peaks belong to different cluster sizes, suggesting there is offset issue. • The difference between two peaks is too big. • The offset would have to be ~ –13 in order to have the same MP. And the MP would be ~ –3. So this is not a correct hypothesis. Charge (Ke) Jianchun Wang

  18. Diamond Residual Distribution s = 46.7 mm s = 30.5 mm Xrecon – Xtrack (mm) Yrecon – Ytrack (mm) • Tracks are at ~20 in X direction wrt the diamond. • Charging sharing information is not fully used yet due to calibration issues. • In comparison 100/12 = 28.9, 150/12 =43.3. Jianchun Wang

  19. Summary • We had tested radiation hard sensors: diamond, MCZ silicon & 3D. • Some interesting results are produced from diamond test. • Gain calibration somehow becomes bottle neck. • We provide offline analysis and alignment program for this testbeam system as our promised contribution. • We may use the telescope to test our own sensors. Jianchun Wang

More Related