Date post: | 21-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | elvin-burke |
View: | 215 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 1
1
BCAL Construction & Readout Update
Contributions by:•SiPMs:
•K. Janzen, A. Semenov, C. Zorn, F. Barbosa, SensL
•Simulations: •S. Katsganis
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 2
2
Overview
• BCAL Construction– Start in Spring ‘09?
• SiPM Progress– JLab, Regina, SensL: meetings, reports– Performance: PDE, DR, array assembly
• Alternative Readout• Simulation Issues
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 3
3
Construction - Two Modules(two presses)
Timeline (work days) Tasks for a Pair of Modules
D-0 + 3 Complete the lead swaging and rolling of the swaged sheets intomarked rolls indicating relative orientation for matrixconstruction. Complete the sorting and bundling of fibers foreach layer required for the module.
D-0 + 4 Start the construction of the matrix: laying and gluing of the firstbase lead sheet along the centerline and within the alignment jigs.Press and let cure overnight.
D-0 + 5 Trim the base lead sheet to matrix construction length andremove any hardened epoxy along the ends that may interferewith matrix construction. Start the matrix construction. Nominalaim is the completion of the first eight layers. Carry out QA ondimensional tolerances each morning of the construction.
D-0 + 30 Complete the matrix construction of ~201 layers. Inspectcompleted module and record exact height measurements alongits length.
D-0 + 31 Remove the module from the press frame (requires craneoperation) and prepare for next matrix construction.
D-0 + 32 Rough trim the two readout ends of the module to remove fibersand epoxy from sticking out. Ready the two ends for finalmachining and polishing.
D-0 + 33 Install the module on the CNC machine at CPP and check jigalignment. Start machining the two ends.
D-0 + 36 Complete the machining and polishing of the two readout ends.QA: Inspect the optical integrity and dimensional tolerances andprepare module for shipping to Regina.
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 4
4
Construction - Four Modules(four in a shipment)
Work Days Calendar Days Task for Four Modules10* 10* Swage all lead sheets and bundle fibers for
four modules.4 4 Glue base lead sheets to the Al base plates
for four modules, cure and trim.50 70 Matrix construction of four modules on PF1
and PF2.4 4 Craning and rough trimming of the two
ends of each module.8 10 Machining and polishing of the two readout
ends.4 4 Load and transport from Edmonton to
Regina for final machining.16 22 Modules will be machined along long sides
to the specified 7.5° ta peris completed andinspect edfor tolerances (QA).
7 9 Modules are shipped directl y from RossMachi neShop t oJLab? Final testi ng withcosmi c r ays will be done at JLab.
91 121 Total number o f working/calendar daysf or fou r modules fr om start ofconstruction t odelivery t oJLa .b
* Lead swaging and fiber sorting can proceed in parallel with matrix construction, oncethe firs t t womodules are bei ng built, therefore t 10he days are not counted i nthe total.
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 5
5
Construction Logistics
• Total calendar days for delivery of 49 modules: 817 days from D-0.• Project Coordination
– Base Crew: undergraduates– Construction Manager: one person, full time over the entire construction
period; will be trained in construction techniques and will be responsible for day-to-day supervision and QA of the matrix build, as well as crew contacting and scheduling, and reporting. Draft ad exists.
– Training: Regina faculty and staff will do the initial training of the construction crew and the Construction Manger (CM). From then on, the CM will take over this task for the subsequent crews with assistance from Regina, during carefully timed trips of the latter to Edmonton.
– Chief Machinist: Gilbert Lachat (UofA/CPP) – Supervising Engineer: Jan Soukup (UofA/CPP)
• Oct. 15 visit to U of Alberta: Elke, Elton, Tim, George, Zisis
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 6
6
BCAL Readout Considerations• Technical specifications: outlined in GlueX-doc-795-v17
– SiPM tests are underway; past/ recent results of tests of fine mesh PMTs• Geometry: especially related to acceptance gap between BCAL and FCAL
– Light guides and inactive material is different for the two options. We need to simulate the effect of each
– Precise configuration of light guides for FM PMTs on the upstream end, where the field at the end of the BCAL exceeds 0.5 T
– Detail description of cables and electronics on each detector• Granularity: optimization of distribution between inner and outer
detectors– Which detectors should have discriminators and TDCs– Study of signal splitting, choice of discriminator; this has an impact on
no of cables• Resolution: Complete simulation studies for correct thresholds for
the FM– Studies of timing resolution. Realistic simulation for both photons &
charged particles– Resolution for various geometry options (mentioned above)
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 7
7
Roadmap
• SensL is not meeting our PDEDR requirement
• Schedule delay: 3-4 months
• Contract extended• Sept 22 decision for
array cell type
ContractStart
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 8
8
Targets & Device Details
• Devices:– SPMMicro– SPMArray– SPMPlus
• Processes:– Trenching– Gettering– Electronic
s
SPMMicro Test Samples @JLab (+ 2 @Regina)
(GlueX-doc-795-v17)
• A20HD (3 samples) - 1 mm^2 - (circular pi/4 mm^2 area)- Getter 2 - 848 microcells - FF = 43%• A35HD (3 samples) - 1 mm^2 (circular) - Getter 2 - 400microcells - FF = 59%• A20HD (3 samples) - 3x3 mm^2 (square 2.85 x 2.85 mm^2)- Getter 1 - 8640 microcells - FF = 43%• A35HD (3 samples) - 3x3 mm^2 (square) - Getter 2 - 3640 microcells - FF = 59%• A35HD (3 samples - 1 defective) - 3x3 mm^2 (square) - Getter 1- 3640 microcells - FF = 59%
No trenching
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 9
9
3.88, 6
10, 13.2
5, 10
20, 18.6
8, 13.5
4.25, 9.5
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 5 10 15 20 25
Dark Rate per 3mm SPM
PDE (%)A20H Device
A35H Device
Gettering - PDE/DR effect
(SensL, C. Zorn)
(No Getter)
(Getter #1)
(Getter #2)
(No Getter)
(Getter #1)
(Getter #2)
• Gettering process drives DC reduction– Weaker effect on edge intensive device (20um)
– Minimal DC reduction going from Getter #1 to Getter #2 processing for A20H device.
• PDE reduction significant with the introduction of Gettering (more than originally anticipated).
• Closet Device to specifications:– A35H Getter #1 process: 13.5% PDE and
8MHz DC per SPM.
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 10
10
Specification: PDE vs Dark Rate
Design Goal(fixed resolution) (0.12, 42)
(GlueX-doc-795-v17)
13/16
Scaled by x16
20% sampfrac
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 11
11
Electronics and Timing• SPMPlus TIA Boards, labeled 080723 #2 and #3.
– Frequency response, transient simulation, pulse response– Optimization of the rise time and gain possible once final
sensors are available and input capacitance is fully characterized.
– SPMPlus electronics boards are well behaved and exhibit very
low output offset voltage.
• Baseline shift
• Noise at different frequencies
• 2nd pulse
(GlueX-doc-1024)
11 ns rise time-200 V offset
no abnormalitiesin tail
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 12
12
SPMMicro: Performance+ 20 C
May
Sept
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 13
13
SPMMicro: DR & Cross Talk
Correct by 13/16
Extrapolated x16
MaySept
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 14
14
SPMMicro: 90Sr
• Devices tested:– 1-mm2 A20HD/A35HD, 9-mm2 A20HD
• IV scans: Vbr origin slight diffs• 90Sr source + green fiber tests:
– good rise and fall times;– level shift, no second pulse, lots of
noise in the analog pulses, pedestal resolution from SPM
• Results: – Nice p.e. peaks at diff overbias– Good linearity; p.e. lines intercept at
+0.85 V– Good linearity also on plot versus no.
of p.e. for different overbias curves
(GlueX-doc-1066)
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 15
15
SPMPlus: Assembly Issues
• Setup: laser, fiber, SMA connector, green fiber, 1mm collimator, x-y stage, scope
• Laser at 2.5MHz, 60ps pulse
• Over-bias: +2V (at 28.3 V)
• 10 ns rise, 70 ns decay• Uniformity improved (8 cells within 10%, 12 within 20%)
(GlueX-doc-1024)
• Type 1: Low Gain Output /Good Timing– This pixel behaviour results in as much as 2x
reduction in optical output over normal pixels. – Problem corrected by optical binning procedure.
• Type 2: Dead Channels– 50% yield on early assemblies based on electrical
IV measurements.– Root cause was with subcontractor process where
poor metal adhesion was identified due to insufficient adhesion layer resulting in delamination of the metal from the glass.
– Latest builds (Build ID: 080408_1_10) have shown 100% yields on a batch of 10 array builds (i.e. all 160 channels fully functional). No type 2 defect observed indicating that new adhesion process has fixed the fail mode.
Pixel Failures
Wafer Selection
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 16
16
SPMPlus: No. of p.e. - summary
Test Setup No of p.e./MeV(@module end with cell size correction)
Comments
Hall-B cosmics XP2020+ blue fibers 4-5 Mod-1, 3.8 cm readout
Regina cosmics Burle 8575+blue fibers 4 Mod-2, 3.8 cm readout
Regina cosmics EMI + green fibers 3 Mod-2, 2 cm readout
Regina cosmics SiPMPlus + green fibers 4.6 (maybe 5.3 if all cells worked)
Mod-2, 2 cm readout
Regina 90Sr A20HD+ green fiber 7.5
(x2x0.15MeV=~2pe)
Single fiber
(GlueX-doc-1069 and 1066)
(see Beni’s talk (doc-1106) for new results - 90Sr+fiber)
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 17
17
Thinner Lead Sheets?• Objectives
– increase sampling fraction lower threshold and relax demand on PDE
• GEANT3 simulations with new geometry; they agree with FLUKA 2006.3b
Glue
Glue
0.26mm 0.5mm Pb
0.20mm 0.2mm Pb
0.20mm
Rear+sides
1.0mmPb
0.2mmPb
KLOEsamples
nominal
candidate?
nominal
candidate?
Clad
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 18
18
In a nutshell…
• A20HD SPMMicro has yielded PDE of ~6%- 9% in the +1.5V to +3V range, consistent with SensL’s numbers
• A35HD 3x3mm2 extrapolated/measured ~12-13%, DR ~ 80-90 MHz
• SPMPlus: no. of p.e. consistent with PMTs with blue and green fibers
• Significant improvement in Si wafer selection: optical binning
• Significant array manufacturing improvement: no delamination
• Progress is promising, but we need SPMMicro A35H PDE >12% and DR<40MHz, plus fully functioning SPMPlus arrays
• Upcoming decision: base cell for SPMPlus arrays
• But, we are not out of the woods…so, look at Plan B
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 19
19
BCAL Alternative ReadoutBCAL Alternative Readout Comparison standard and alternative readoutComparison standard and alternative readout
alternative readout based on fine mesh Hamamatsu PMTs:alternative readout based on fine mesh Hamamatsu PMTs: New segmentation: inner (2 x (3x3) channel) 1” FM-PMT New segmentation: inner (2 x (3x3) channel) 1” FM-PMT
outer remains (2 x (2x2) channel) 1.5” FM-PMT outer remains (2 x (2x2) channel) 1.5” FM-PMT
performanceperformance operate in magnetic field up to 0.5 Teslaoperate in magnetic field up to 0.5 Tesla
upstream B-field > 0.5Tupstream B-field > 0.5T increase light guide fromincrease light guide from
10 cm to 55 cm10 cm to 55 cm
(Courtesy of Elke)
Disadvantage:Disadvantage: Cost increase by ~350k$Cost increase by ~350k$
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 20
20
Concepts for FM PMT housing
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 21
21
Light configuration studies
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 22
22
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 23
23
Simulation studies needed
• Resolution comparison: 6x4 vs 3x3 segmentation• Improved simulation of resolutions
– Include realistic threshold for FM option– Studies of timing resolution
• Study impact of inactive material at the end of BCAL on acceptance
– Inactive material includes light guides, light detector, cables, dark box or cover, etc.
– Comparison between SiPM and FM options
– How many (which) changes in geometry should be studied?
(see Blake’s talk (doc-1101) for newest results)
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 24
24
Backup Slides
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 25
25
Carl’s Setups
N
PDE
Getter
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 26
26
Gettering Tests
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 27
27
• A20HD 9mm2 measurements are robust; extrapolate to A35HD 9mm2 PDE.
• A35HD has better resolution.
•PDE under identical geometries and illumination conditions:•PDE1mmA35HD/PDE1mmA20HD=1.35
SPMMicro: A35HD vs A20HD 1mm2
PDE9mmA35HD=1.35*PDE9mmA20HD=~12Carl: ~13%
Solid angleeffect
projected
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 28
28
SPMMicro: Laser
• Kathryn’s details…
(Regina June 30 Report)
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 29
29
SPMPlus: No. of p.e. - setup
(GlueX-doc-1069)
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 30
30
Layout of fine mesh pmts
Z. Papandreou & E. SmithGlueX Collaboration Meeting, Sep. 19/2008 31
31
mechanically not possiblemechanically not possiblenominal designnominal designalternative designalternative design
BCAL Readout Possibilities