Loading in 5 sec....

Pixel Detector Simulation with Magnetic FieldPowerPoint Presentation

Pixel Detector Simulation with Magnetic Field

- 83 Views
- Uploaded on

Download Presentation
## PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Pixel Detector Simulation with Magnetic Field' - ariel-tucker

**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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript

### Pixel Detector Simulationwith Magnetic Field

12/18/00

- Effects with magnetic Field
- Deflection
- Effective mobility
- Non-constant Hall mobility

- Comparison with magnet run

Magnetic Field

Syracuse University

n+

e

e

B y

e

e

n

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

p+

-V

Deflection in Magnetic FieldEffect of magnetic field Effect of incident angle

Syracuse University

Deflection in Magnetic Field

Assumption: mH = constant meff = m

The charge distributions are the same with B or q

Syracuse University

Effective Mobility

Very small effect:

B field Cloud drifts slower Larger Spread

Syracuse University

P+ side larger E

N+ Side Smaller E

E-dependent MobilityLarger E Smaller mHall Smaller deflection

Syracuse University

Effect of Magnetic Field

With non-constant mHall(E), and meff

The charge distributions are slightly different

Syracuse University

Conclusion

We Don’t expect the magnetic field will reduce the ratio between two-pixel clusters and one-pixel clusters

Syracuse University

Magnet Run

- Track at 1.3 angle ( ~ 0.242 Tesla )
- Measurement: Rmin = 0.193
- Simulation ( Qth= 2.5Ke ): Rmin = 0.250

What is wrong ?

Syracuse University

Magnet Run

- Track at 1.32 ( 23 mrad ) ( ~ 0.245 Tesla )
- Measurement: Rmin = 0.193
- Simulation ( Qth= 4.0Ke ): Rmin = 0.197

Just to Play around

But there is no other evidence that threshold was wrong

Syracuse University

Magnetic Field

- Measured with Gauss meter: 45A 0.585 Tesla
- Assume overall scale of the magnetic field uncertain
- Use MC simulation to fit 0.517 Tesla (error?)
- Error of Hall factor (mHall/m =1.15) can make up the difference

Syracuse University

Summary

- MC simulation accurate both for drift and B field simulation
- Magnet Run data is not fully understood yet

Syracuse University

Lorentz Angle

Lorentz angle is not a constant along z, shown are overall effects

Larger bias voltage

Larger E field

Smaller mobility

Smaller Lorentz angle

Syracuse University

Lorentz Angle Comparison

Magnetic field: 1.4 Tesla

Udepletion is calculated with effective thickness of the sensor

Syracuse University

Diffusion Constant

Einstein equation:

D = k T m / q

Reduce Teff from 390K to 300K

Reduce fraction of doublet by 1.4%

Syracuse University

Angular Fit with Distribution

FPIX0-Pstop

Normal Incidence Data

- MC: 0.5 interval, interpolation between points
- Normal incident data: = (1.77 0.09)

Syracuse University

15° Data

20° Data

10° Data

5° Data

Angular Fit with DistributionFPIX0-Pstop

Syracuse University

Detector Inclination Angle

- In Minuit fit, the beam is assumed to normal incident on the first SSD, the overall rotation of the detector can not be fitted
- In fit, interpolation between MC points (0.5° interval) is used
- The error from the fit is about 0.1°, which should be smaller than error from MC model

Syracuse University

Download Presentation

Connecting to Server..