1 / 11

Activities During 4/11/07 IR Access

Activities During 4/11/07 IR Access. HBD Working Group Meeting 4/17/07 B.Azmoun, T.Hemmick, J.Kamin, S.Stoll, C.Woody Brookhaven National Lab / SUNY SB. 4/11 Access: Flash Lamp Tests. 4/11/2007 CF4 VGEM = 100V Vref = 6.5V 2x16nS New Scope (1Mohm) H2O ppm (W/E) = 3.3/6.2

isolde
Download Presentation

Activities During 4/11/07 IR Access

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. Activities During 4/11/07 IR Access HBD Working Group Meeting 4/17/07 B.Azmoun, T.Hemmick, J.Kamin, S.Stoll, C.Woody Brookhaven National Lab / SUNY SB

  2. 4/11 Access: Flash Lamp Tests 4/11/2007 CF4 VGEM = 100V Vref = 6.5V 2x16nS New Scope (1Mohm) H2O ppm (W/E) = 3.3/6.2 O2 ppm (W/E) = 4.0/2.7 Flow (W/E)=3.75/4slpm 12/24/2006 CF4 VGEM = 100V Vref = 6.5V 2x16nS New Scope (1Mohm) H2O ppm (W/E) = 16.7/8.9 O2 ppm (W/E) = ? Flow=2slpm G-M Short • QE Degradation between 4/11/07 – 12/24/06 (is it real???) • Consistency between Lamp Up/Down Results are Reproducible (+/- 10?) • We know lamp orientation is same on 4/11 - 12/14, at least in E-Lamp Bot. measurement. • In cases where the rel. QE is above 1.0 may be explained by the variability in the measurement and/or lower ppm levels on 4/11 • Look for Correlations that could explain these alarming results B.Azmoun, BNL

  3. History of Flash Lamp Tests: 12/14/06 – 12/04/06 12/14/2006 Ar VGEM = 100V Vref = 5.5V --> Correction: 6.5V/5.5V--> 1.35 2x16nS --> Correction: 4x16nS/2x16nS--> 0.65 New Scope (1Mohm) H2O ppm (W/E) = 16.7/8.9 O2 ppm (W/E) = ? Flow=2slpm 12/4/2006 Ar VGEM = 100V Vref = 6.5V 4x16nS + 18" RG59 New Scope (1Mohm) H2O ppm (W/E) = 4.5/10.6 O2 ppm (W/E) = 7.9/6.9 Flow=2slpm • Results are consistent btw 12/14 and 12/4 No QE degradation • Before CF4 Flow • Before HV ON B.Azmoun, BNL

  4. History: 12/04/07 - 10/18/07 12/4/2006 (BNL) Ar Assumed: VGEM = 100V Vref = 6.5V 4x16nS + 18" RG59 New Scope (1Mohm) --> Few % diff. btw old&new H2O ppm (W/E) = 4.5/10.6 O2 ppm (W/E) = 7.9/6.9 Flow=2slpm 10/18/2006 (SUNY SB) Ar VGEM = 100V Vref = 6.5V 4x16nS + 18" RG59 Old Scope (1Mohm) H2O ppm (E)~20.5 O2 ppm (E)~3.1 Flow~6slpm ??? • Comparison of PC response at SUNY SB and BNL • Clear correlation btw sectors along phi implies • some systematic error like a difference in lamp • Orientation in the two measurements B.Azmoun, BNL

  5. History: 10/18/06 - 10/17/06 10/18/2006 (SUNY SB) Ar VGEM = 100V Vref = 6.5V 4x16nS + 18" RG59 Old Scope (1Mohm) H2O ppm (E) ~20.5 O2 ppm (E) ~3.1 Flow~6lpm ??? 10/17/2006 (SUNY SB) Ar VGEM = 100V Vref = 6.5V 4x16nS + 18" RG59 Old Scope (1Mohm) H2O ppm (E) = 20.5 O2 ppm (E) = 3.1 Flow~6lpm ??? • The consistency in results here (where nothing has presumably changed in 2 days) makes a statement about the stability/reproducibility of the lamp intensity  this is the best we can do since we don’t have a lamp monitor. B.Azmoun, BNL

  6. Correlations: GEM Resistor Values 0 = inf. • Hypothesis: Larger resistor values compensate for (extra) corona current, which may damage the CsI. • The top GEM, likely the most important, shows little correspondence btw Resistor values and Flash lamp response (higher resis. values even correspond to a ratio ~1.0) B.Azmoun, BNL

  7. CsI Thickness • Hypothesis: Thinner CsI layers are damaged more readily by • harmful mechanism responsible for diminished response of PC’s. • There is no obvious correspondence btw CsI thickness • and Flash Lamp Response B.Azmoun, BNL

  8. Abs. # of Trips • Hypothesis:Damage incurred by the PC’s is proportional to the absolute number of trips sustained by the GEM module. • There is no obvious correspondence btw the abs. # of trips and Flash Lamp Response B.Azmoun, BNL

  9. Enhanced Gain through Photon Feedback? • Hypothesis: Photon Feedback is responsible for the enhanced gain observed for many HBD modules, and thus should correlate with PC QE. • There is no obvious correspondence btw the gain of the HBD modules and Flash Lamp Response B.Azmoun, BNL

  10. Gotta keep looking…any ideas?

  11. Gas Trans. w/ HBD in Bypass Mode As suspected, the heightened H2O/O2 levels observed in the return gas from the HBD is coming from the HBD itself. B.Azmoun, BNL

More Related