Download - Digital ECAL: Lecture 3
![Page 1: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 1
Digital ECAL: Lecture 3
Paul Dauncey,
Imperial College London
![Page 2: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 2
DECAL lectures summary• Lecture 1 – Ideal case and limits to resolution
• Digital ECAL motivation and ideal performance compared with AECAL
• Shower densities at high granularity; pixel sizes
• Effects of EM shower physics on DECAL performance
• Lecture 2 – Status of DECAL sensors• Basic design requirements for a DECAL sensor
• Current implementation in CMOS technology
• Characteristics of sensors; noise, charge diffusion
• Results from first prototypes; verification of performance
• Lecture 3 – Detector effects and realistic resolution• Effect of sensor characteristics on EM resolution
• Degradation of resolution due to sensor performance
• Main issues affecting resolution
• Remaining measurements required to verify resolution
![Page 3: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 3
DECAL lectures summary• Lecture 1 – Ideal case and limits to resolution
• Digital ECAL motivation and ideal performance compared with AECAL
• Shower densities at high granularity; pixel sizes
• Effects of EM shower physics on DECAL performance
• Lecture 2 – Status of DECAL sensors• Basic design requirements for a DECAL sensor
• Current implementation in CMOS technology
• Characteristics of sensors; noise, charge diffusion
• Results from first prototypes; verification of performance
• Lecture 3 – Detector effects and realistic resolution• Effect of sensor characteristics on EM resolution
• Degradation of resolution due to sensor performance
• Main issues affecting resolution
• Remaining measurements required to verify resolution
![Page 4: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 4
Detector effects• Lecture 1 showed that a DECAL with 50m pixels has potential to give
good linearity and resolution
• Lecture 2 showed we can characterise the TPAC1 sensor performance
• Now put the two together to show realistic resolution• Assume a whole ECAL made from TPAC1-like sensors
• Must include the effects of• Noise
• Charge diffusion between pixels
• Dead areas
![Page 5: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 5
Basic epitaxial layer energy deposits• A MIP creates ~80 electron-
hole pairs in silicon per 1m• Equivalently, deposits energy
with dE/dx ~ 300eV/m
• Passing through 12m of the epitaxial layer at normal incidence leaves an average of ~1000e− signal charge
• Equivalently, deposits a total of ~3.6keV
• Noise is ~20e− • Equivalent to ~70eV deposit
![Page 6: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 6
Effect of diffusion; example layer
Diffusion
1mm
![Page 7: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 7
Effect of diffusion
Diffusion
MeVMeV
![Page 8: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 8
Effect of diffusion on signal charge• Original charge (energy)
deposited in hit pixel
• Remaining charge in hit pixel after diffusion
• Charge diffused into hit pixels from neighbours
• Charge diffused into non-hit pixels
• Total charge distribution
• Total distribution including noise
![Page 9: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 9
Effect of threshold
Threshold
![Page 10: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 10
Compare with original particlesTETRIS! • Single particle can result in ~1-4
pixels being above threshold
• All neighbouring
• Call each isolated group a “cluster”
• Count clusters not pixels to estimate particle number
• PROBLEM: close-by particles give larger clusters
• Estimate particles in a cluster by 1+N8
• N8 = number of pixels with all 8 neighbours also hit
![Page 11: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 11
Depends on threshold and noise valuesThreshold = 150eV
![Page 12: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 12
Depends on threshold and noise valuesThreshold = 200eV
![Page 13: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 13
Depends on threshold and noise valuesThreshold = 300eV
![Page 14: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 14
Depends on threshold and noise valuesThreshold = 400eV
![Page 15: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 15
Depends on threshold and noise valuesThreshold = 500eV
![Page 16: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 16
Depends on threshold and noise valuesThreshold = 900eV
![Page 17: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 17
Efficiency for MIPs• Expect ~95% efficiency
• Perfectly OK for a DECAL
• Not so good for a tracker!
![Page 18: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 18
Resolution effect of noise
• Choosing threshold ~500eV gives same resolution as with no noise
• Close to ideal resolution of Lecture 1: ~10% worse
• Following plots with noise of 120eV
• Pessimistic: actual measured noise is 70eV
Ideal DECAL
![Page 19: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 19
Resolution effect of charge diffusion
• With no charge diffusion, signal is ~3 times bigger; threshold cut has almost no effect over this range
• With charge diffusion and correct threshold, resolution is only slightly degraded
• Small disagreements of charge diffusion modelling not significant
Ideal DECAL
diffusion
![Page 20: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 20
Resolution with and without deep p-well
• Without deep p-well, a lot of charge is lost to circuit n-wells
• Average signal is ~25% of deep p-well case
With deep p-well Without deep p-well
Q Fraction Q Fraction
![Page 21: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 21
Resolution with and without deep p-well
• Without deep p-well, approximately only ¼ of number of pixel hits seen
• Contributes as N so gives factor of two worse resolution
• Deep p-well essential
Deep p-well
No deep p-well
Ideal DECAL
![Page 22: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 22
Resolution effect of dead areas
• Small frequent dead areas reduce the number of pixels hit for all showers by the same amount
• Gives N fluctuations to all showers
• Large infrequent dead areas lose many hits for some showers and none for others
• Gives big fluctuations for some fraction of showers
![Page 23: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 23
Resolution effect of dead areas• Dead memory storage pixels on
TPAC1 give 11% dead area
• Strips of 250m wide
• One strip every 2.35mm
• Small(ish) compared to EM shower so goes as N
• ~5% degradation
• Also shown is 15% dead area
• Includes estimates 4% extra dead area from sensor edges
Ideal DECAL
![Page 24: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 24
Resolution effect of clustering
• Charge diffusion means one MIP can (usually) give between 1 and 4 pixel hits
• Ruins resolution if counting pixels with no clustering
• Basic clustering using 1+N8 essential to achieve good resolution
• Scope to play with clustering algorithms and improve further?
Ideal DECAL
![Page 25: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 25
Effect on Particle Flow?
16mm2 AECAL cells
5050μm2 DECAL pixels
ZOOM
![Page 26: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 26
Remember...• Most of this is purely simulation
• Almost definitely wrong!
• Could be many “real detector” problems not yet found; we have heard about
• Guard rings, temperature dependence, fibre-PMT alignment, sparking, electromagnetic pickup, etc, etc...
• We don’t know what the DECAL problems will be yet
• No detailed measurement of shower density at very small granularity
• GEANT4 not tested at 50m so core density may be much higher
• GEANT4 may not give right number of low energy (~keV) photons
• We MUST do these measurements to take this concept seriously
![Page 27: Digital ECAL: Lecture 3](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032414/568133e4550346895d9ad7bb/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
26 Apr 2009 Paul Dauncey 27
Future measurements• Next version of TPAC1 being made now
• Due within one week
• Must do beam test this summer to measure hit densities in showers
• Carefully compare against GEANT4
• TPAC1 only ~1×1cm2
• Cannot see whole shower or measure energy resolution
• Design larger version, TPAC2, size ~2.5×3cm2, and make ~20 layer DECAL in 2010
• Find out if concept really works!
• (Funding permitting )