1 / 31

Studies on Module 0 HAC

Studies on Module 0 HAC . V. Fascianelli , V. Kozhuharov , M. Martini, T. Spadaro, D. Tagnani. Outline. Reminder: HAC insertion in NA62: why/how M odule 0 HAC tests at BTF@LNF, for: obtaining order-zero measurement of light yield assessing possible FEE readout schemes

channing-thompson
Télécharger la présentation

Studies on Module 0 HAC

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. Studies on Module 0 HAC V. Fascianelli, V. Kozhuharov, M. Martini, T. Spadaro, D. Tagnani

  2. Outline • Reminder: HAC insertion in NA62: why/how • Module 0 HAC tests at BTF@LNF, for: • obtaining order-zero measurement of light yield • assessing possible FEE readout schemes • First data/MC comparison studies: • simple digitization/reconstruction algorithms implemented, following FEE scheme assumed Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  3. HAC: why, how • From the work by Ruggiero (23/5/2012) and Spasimir (06/02/2013): • need a new detector to reject O(10) residual background events from K->p+p+p- / year • events with p- lost (due to nuclear interaction), and a p+ escaping detection through the hole, grazing the pipe, emerging at various depths in the range 247 < z < 255 m • need to efficiently veto p of ~40 GeV, with a detector at z = 253.35 m, while sustaining a muon halo rate of ~4 MHz (dominated by p+m+ decays downstream GTK3) • bad energy resolution expected due to lateral leakage • total rate reduced by x10 if E>100 MeV is required • O(<1ns) time resolution to correctly match HAC information with the rest of event Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  4. HAC: why, how • A single HAC channel collects light from 6 scintillator tiles (4 mm wide) alternating to 16-mm Pblayers • Lights from each scintillatorcollected by a green-centered 1-mm2 WLS fibers • Tentative detector setup: 9 modules, each with 10 channels along the longitudinal direction From F. Hahn Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  5. RO: order of magnitude cost estimate Consider 90 channels in total SiPM case: • 100 E/SiPM, 150 E / amplifier + Voltage bias electronics (evaluation scaling from CHANTI board, 4000 E/32 ch’s): 22500 E • Digitizer (GANDALF, 12 bit 500 MS/s): 60000 E for 96 channels • Grand total: 82 500 E PMT case: • 400 E/PMT, 200 E/HV-ch: 54000 E • The GANDALF is a common solution for both setups • Grand total is 115 000 E Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  6. HAC studies • Order-0 questions: is the scintillator performance still valid and is the light collection enough? • Order-1 questions: can it be instrumented with SiPM’s or we have to consider PMT’s? • Order-2 question: can it be readout with Flash ADC’s? Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  7. Measurement of HAC response rates Order-0 questions: are the scintillator performance and the light collection still OK? • Data taken with SiPM at nominal bias voltage • Trigger set at ~30 mV (~7 photoelectrons), rates in dark of ~20 Hz • Use a Cs137, 0.18 MBq, 30.07 years radioactive source • Study trigger rates as the source is moved along the longitudinal direction Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  8. Measurement of HAC response rates Order-0 questions: are the scintillator performance and the light collection still OK? • Measurement from each position repeated 4 times • Expect spacing of 4 + 16 mm, OK • 6 peaks spotted, rates span a range of x3... need cosmic-ray characterization, to be done Counts from channel 3 / 10 s no source Longitudinal Position (cm) Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  9. BTF runs • Trigger setup with two positive signals from scintillator paddles • Electron beam, 50 Hz, O(1) electron multiplicity • Readout via Flash ADC, CAEN module V1751, 8 ch’s, 10 bit, 1 GS/s: • from signal shape, evaluate maximal voltages, integrated charge around the maximum, event-by-event pedestal, time of the maximum • HAC runs: 570-MeV beam impact head-on onto channel 0 region at the center • Expect some lateral leakage due to beam angular dispersion: the HAC is placed ~ 1 m downstream the pipe end Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  10. BTF runs: e- beam multiplicity, Q’s Integrated Charge horizontal paddle (C) • - 0 electrons • - 1 electron • - 2 electrons • - 3 electrons Integrated Charge vertical paddle (C) Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  11. BTF runs: e- beam multiplicity Poisson distribution fit: m = 0.94(1), c2 = 1.8/1 Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  12. HAC readout • Interface 6+1 (for calibration) fiber bundle at module end with 3x3 mm2 prototypal high-density SiPM, Hamamatsu MPPC 15 mm x15 mm pixels: • Gain of 2.5 105, at 69.3 V bias at room termperature • 57,600 15 x 15 mm2 pixels in 3x3 mm2 active area • ~ 370 pF capacitance • Gain lower than available SiPM’s by ~x3, but better time resolution expected, since novel corrections due to delay for far pixels are present (TSV, Through Silicon Via, no wire bonding, see http://kicp-workshops.uchicago.edu/ieu2013/depot/talk-ghassemi-ardavan__1.pdf) • Voltage supply and amplification during run with electronics tuned for a 70 pF SiPM: time performance not reliable • Runs were acquired with a PMT readout, as well Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  13. HAC response: sampling a signal Signal amplitude [mV] SiPM readout Signal amplitude [mV] PMT readout Time [ns] Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  14. HAC response: maximal amplitude • - 0 electrons • - 1 electron • - 2 electrons • - 3 electrons Amplitude (mV) Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  15. HAC Response: charge • - 1 electron • - 2 electrons • - 3 electrons Integrated charge (C) Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  16. HAC Response: maximum amplitude s(V)/V <V> [mV] Nominal impact energy (MeV) Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  17. HAC Response: charge s(Q)/Q <Q> [C] Nominal impact energy (MeV) s(E)/E ~ 35%/Sqrt(E[GeV]) Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  18. SiPM characterization in dark • SiPM signals sampled in laboratory at fixed temperature and with no input source • FEE electronics adapted from project developed for Mu2e (Martini, Tagnani, Corradi) performing accurate APD preamplification • FEE electronics providing x97, while being matched to the SiPM capacitance • The value correspond to optimal matching and lowest noise • Bias voltage provided via linear power supply • Study of the V-I characteristics Current (mA) Vop Bias voltage (V) Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  19. SiPM characterization in dark • Apply a 3 mV threshold, corresponding to < 1 pe (see after) • Use oscilloscope as a Flash ADC • Sampling frequency, 1 sample every 0.4 ns ~20 ns fall time pedestal evaluation region ~8 ns rise time FADC channel # = T [0.4 ns] Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  20. SiPM in dark: the analog signal Amplitude (10 mV / division) Vbias = 71.4 V Trigger Time (10 ns / division) Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  21. SiPM characterization in dark • Evaluate maximum of SiPM signals and the related population • Fit the first 3 peaks, corresponding to n, n+1, n+2 photoelectrons • Perform a single fit allowing the peak-to-peak distance as free parameter Repeat the above steps in a wide range of voltage bias: 69.3 V (nominal + 0.3V)  71.8 V Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  22. SiPM characterization in dark • Change of the single-photoelectron voltage with the bias, as expected • Single photoelectron ranges from 4.5 mV to 8.5 mV as Vbias varies from 69.3 to 71.8 V peak to peak distance (V) bias voltage (V) Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  23. SiPM characterization in dark • Change of the single-photoelectron voltage with the bias, as expected • Single photoelectron ranges from 4.5 mV to 8.5 mV as Vbias varies from 69.3 to 71.8 V • Result confirmed by the position of the first peak position of first peak (V) bias voltage (V) Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  24. SiPM characterization in dark • Change of the poissonian probability, ranging from ~0.2 to ~0.6 as the bias voltage varies • Probably an effect linked to PDE variation bias voltage (V) Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  25. SiPM characterization in dark • Evaluate charge of SiPM signals and the related population • Fit the first 3 peaks, corresponding to n, n+1, n+2 photoelectrons • Perform a single fit allowing the peak-to-peak distance as free parameter • Repeat the above steps in the bias range: 69.3 V (nominal + 0.3V)  71.8 V Charge (pC) Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  26. SiPM characterization in dark • Gain evaulation within the expectation: 105 2 105, after correcting for the FEE amplification of 100 (actually 97) • Position of 1st peak confirms that the distribution is due to 1, 2, 3 photoelectrons Gain = 1.8 105 Gain = 105 bias voltage (V) Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  27. MC HAC Digitization • Complement the MC made by Spasimir with digitization and reconstruction • The following assumptions are used: • Scintillator produces 104 photons / MeV • 10-3 of the produced photons reach the SiPM • SiPM PDE = 0.6 • The SiPM Gain is 106 (it will be changed in future) • With a FEE electronics amplification of 10, a single photo-electron produces a 4-mV peak with a 8 ns rise time and a 20 ns fall time Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  28. HAC MC: energy release electrons head-on impact s(E)/E <E> [MeV] Electron energy (MeV) Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  29. HAC MC: electrons MC reconstructed electrons head-on impact s(V)/V <V> [mV] Electron energy (MeV) Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  30. HAC Data/MC comparison: electrons data Fractional resolution • - Data • - MC reco • - MC truth Electron energy Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

  31. Conclusions Experience with HAC basically shows a working detector: • Satisfactory operation with electron beam at Frascati BTF • SiPM characterization in dark in agreement with Hamamatsu specifications • Benefiting of previous work by Spasimir on MC, a simple procedure for digitization/reconstruction added (at the moment the code is kept private) • Good linearity of energy response observed • Agreement between data and MC after digitization has to be proved with cosmic rays: data with 2-3 electrons probably affected by lateral leakage SiPM operation + Flash ADC readout satisfactory To-do list: • improved description of MC digitization (pileup of scintillator signals) • Complete development of the low-noise voltage regulator • cosmic ray tests and additional acquisitions with radioactive source • test of final electronics (at the moment, in production) • Channel by channel intercalibration studies • Final design of readout on-board electronics and mechanical interface Photon veto meeting - Liverpool

More Related