pixel detector simulation with magnetic field
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Pixel Detector Simulation with Magnetic Field

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 18

Pixel Detector Simulation with Magnetic Field - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 83 Views
  • Uploaded on

JC and Marina 12/18/00. Pixel Detector Simulation with Magnetic Field. Effects with magnetic Field Deflection Effective mobility Non-constant Hall mobility Comparison with magnet run. Magnetic Field. 0 V. n +. . e. e. B y. e. e. n. e. e. . e. e. e. e. e. e. e.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
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 simulation with magnetic field
JC and Marina

12/18/00

Pixel Detector Simulationwith Magnetic Field

  • Effects with magnetic Field
    • Deflection
    • Effective mobility
    • Non-constant Hall mobility
  • Comparison with magnet run
magnetic field
Magnetic Field

Syracuse University

deflection in magnetic field
0 V

n+

e

e

B y

e

e

n

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

e

p+

-V

Deflection in Magnetic Field

Effect of magnetic field  Effect of incident angle

Syracuse University

deflection in magnetic field1
Deflection in Magnetic Field

Assumption: mH = constant meff = m

The charge distributions are the same with B or q

Syracuse University

effective mobility
Effective Mobility

Very small effect:

B field  Cloud drifts slower Larger Spread

Syracuse University

e dependent mobility
P+ side larger E

N+ Side Smaller E

E-dependent Mobility

Larger E  Smaller mHall  Smaller deflection

Syracuse University

effect of magnetic field
Effect of Magnetic Field

With non-constant mHall(E), and meff

The charge distributions are slightly different

Syracuse University

conclusion
Conclusion

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

Syracuse University

magnet run
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 run1
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 field1
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
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

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
Lorentz Angle Comparison

Magnetic field: 1.4 Tesla

Udepletion is calculated with effective thickness of the sensor

Syracuse University

diffusion constant
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
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

angular fit with distribution1
15° Data

20° Data

10° Data

5° Data

Angular Fit with  Distribution

FPIX0-Pstop

Syracuse University

detector inclination angle
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

ad