1 / 35

ILC Instrumentation and Simulation R&D at SCIPP

This document outlines the SCIPP/UCSC ILC R&D program, including the development of the LSTFE ASIC, SiD and ILD baseline designs, SiD KPIX/Double-Metal development, and charge division for longitudinal coordinate measurement.

jidella
Download Presentation

ILC Instrumentation and Simulation R&D at SCIPP

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. ILC Instrumentation and Simulation R&D at SCIPP DOE Site Visit Thursday, June 18, 2009 Bruce Schumm Santa Cruz Institute for Particle Physics

  2. The SCIPP/UCSC ILC R&D GROUP Faculty/Senior Vitaliy Fadeyev Alex Grillo Bruce Schumm Collaborator Rich Partridge (SLAC) Undergrads Sean Crosby* Jerome Carman Jared Newmiller Sheena Schier Kelsey Collier Amy Simonis Jeff Schulte* Chris Betancourt Alex Bogert Lead Engineer: Ned Spencer Technical Staff: Max Wilder All senior participants mostly working on other projects *2009 Senior thesis (graduation requirement)

  3. OUTLINE OF SCIPP ILC R&D PROGRAM • LSTFE Frint-End ASIC • Optimized for ILC (long ladders for barrel; high rates for forward tracking) • Applicable to both SiD and ILD • SiD KPIX/Double-Metal Development • SiD baseline; alternative to LSTFE • SCIPP has done group’s sensor testing, now beginning critical systems tests

  4. OUTLINE (Continued) • Fundamental (“Generic”) R&D • Use of charge division for longitudinal coordinate (with Rich Partridge) • Solid-state noise sources • Prospects for RadHard Sensors (far-forward Calorimetry • If funded, will support SLAC collaboration • ESA test beam: SCIPP sensor expertise plus SLAC operation and dosimetry

  5. OUTLINE (Continued) • SiD Simulation Projects • Tracking and momentum reconstruction validation • Non-prompt signatures

  6. ILC Tracker Baseline Designs ILD Baseline: Si tracking envelops TPC; outer layers at 1.8m SiD Baseline: Five barrel and 4 endcap layers, to R = 125cm

  7. The LSTFE ASIC Process: TSMC 0.25 m CMOS 1-3 s shaping time (LSTFE-I is ~1.2 s); analog measurement is Time-Over-Threshold

  8. 128 mip 1 mip Operating point threshold Readout threshold 1/4 mip High gain advantageous for overall performance (channel matching)

  9. Li Hi Li+1 Hi+1 Li+2 Hi+2 Li+3 Hi+3 Li+4 Hi+4 Li+5 Hi+5 Li+6 Hi+6 Proposed LSTFE Back-End Architecture Low Comparator Leading-Edge-Enable Domain 8:1 Multi-plexing (clock = 50 ns) FIFO (Leading and trailing transitions) Event Time Clock Period  = 400 nsec

  10. Expected Observed RMS 1 meter Gaussian Fit LSTFE SPACE-POINT RESOLUTION 167 cm Ladder Observed noise vs. capacitive load (LSTFE-I) Simulated space-point resolution for “expected” noise

  11. LSTFE-II Prototype Optimized for 80cm ladder (ILD barrel application) Institute “analog memory cells” to improve power-cycling switch-on from 30 msec to 1 msec Improved environmental isolation Additional amplification stage to improve S/N, control of shaping time, and channel-to-channel matching Improved control of return-to-baseline for < 4 mip signals (time-over-threshold resolution) 128 Channels (256 comparators) read out at 3 MHz, multiplexed onto 8 LVDS outputs Testing underway in SCIPP lab

  12. The SiD KPIX/Double-Metal Baseline Design 10cm2 modules tessellate the five barrel tracking layers Traces on 2nd (surface) metal layer to two 1024-node bump-bonding arrays

  13. SiD Double-Metal Sensor • SLAC/FNAL Design • Hamamatsu Fabrication • Testing at SCIPP

  14. SiD Tiles: Biasing and Plane-to-Plane Capacitance Sensors bias at ~50 V. Capacitance shown is for all 1840 strips, but strips to backplane only For now: single sensor (sensor #26)

  15. SiD Leakage Current (sensor #26): Average leakage for 1840 channels is about ~160 pA/channel • Next Steps: • Larger-scale testing (statistics) • Test of combined KPIX/Double-Metal perforamce to get underway at SCIPP this summer (pending DOE support)

  16. Longitudinal Resolution via Charge Division Proposed by Rich Partridge, based on seminal paper by Radeka: V. Radeka "Signal, Noise and Resolution in Position-Sensitive Detectors", IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 21, 51 (1974), which in turn references earlier work with planar sensors from R.B. Owen and M.L. Awcock, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 15, 290 (1968) Small ($16K) LCRD grant supports this work. Progress due to UCSC undergraduate physics major Jerome Carman Basic idea: For resistive sensor, impedances dominated by sensor rather than amplifier input impedance; charge should divide proportional to point of deposition.  Read out implant (SLAC/FNAL “charge division” sensor has 600 k implant)

  17. Charge Division Sensor Mock-Up 10-stage RC network PC board (Jerome Carman)

  18. Charge Division Sensor Mock-Up Model 600 k resistive implant with 10-stage RC network Read out at both left (“L”) and right (“R”) ends Amplifiers: First Stage: TI OPA657 Low-noise FET OpAmp Later Stages: Analog Devices ADA4851 rail-to-rail video amp Measure Noise (either end): 0.64 fC

  19. Mean Amplifier Response vs. Injection Point Right-Hand Amplifier P-Spice, including all parasitics Observed signal Fairly linear; little offset from 0  appropriate for charge division.

  20. Longitudinal Resolution Estimate Trying to measure fractional distance f from right to left end of strip: Rewrite: Then, and dL, dR apparently uncorrelated.

  21. Longitudinal Resolution Estimate: Conclusion • Depends upon location of hit (middle or near end of resistive implant) and the magnitude of the charge deposition. • Assume a 4 fC deposition in the middle of the strip (x=1): • However, note that , so this is not much better. • Optimize shaping time, implant resistivity, ? • Goal of better than 0.1 (1cm for SiD sensors).

  22. Readout Noise for Linear Collider Applications • Use of silicon strip sensors at the ILC tend towards different limits than for hadron collider or astrophysical applications: • Long shaping time • Resistive strips (narrow and/or long), with significant capacitance (for long ladders) But must also achieve lowest possible noise to meet ILC resolution goals. How well do we understand Si strip readout noise?

  23. Parallel Resistance Series Resistance Amplifier Noise (parallel) Amplifier Noise (series) Standard Form for Readout Noise (Spieler) Fiand Fv are signal shape parameters that can be determined from average scope traces. There is some circumstantial evidence that this may be an oversimplification, particularly for the case of series noise…

  24. Expected noise, assuming 75% reduction in strip noise Measured noise Strip Noise Idea: “Center Tapping” – half the capacitance, half the resistance? Result: no significant change in measured noise However, sensors have 237 m pitch  Currently characterizing CDF L00 sensors

  25. CDF L00 Sensor “Snake” CDF L00 “Snake” LSTFE1 chip on Readout Board

  26. CDF L00 Sensor “Snake” Plus much work eliminating environmental noise, constraining amplifier contributions…Thanks to Sean Crosby, UCSC undergraduate thesis student

  27. “Rigorous Calc”: Carefully measured shape factors Fi, Fv. Johnson-Noise-Dominated for greater than 6 strips Results rather surprising • Re-check methodology • Develop P-Spice simulation (as for charge-division studies) Sean’s understudy, Kelsey Collier, will grab the reigns…

  28. Radiation-Hard Silicon Sensors (SCIPP/SLAC) Far-Forward region: Need to tag electrons from two-photon events to remove SUSY backgrounds (to 20 mrad) Expected doses of 100s MRad anticipated for ILC running (5x limits for probed for ATLAS upgrade studies) UCSC experience with rad-hard sensors (e.g. Czochralski-process) and characterization, in combination with SLAC testbeams and dosimetry expertise Funding expected for studies in 2010-2011

  29. Simulation Studies for the SiD Concept • Tracking Performance Evaluation • Reconstruction Efficiency • Momentum Resolution • Non-Prompt Tracks • Reconstruction Algorithms • GMSB Signatures

  30. Tracking Performance Studies Efficiency vs. angular distance from jet core e+e-  qq at Ecm= 500 GeV [Jeff Schulte, senior thesis 2009]

  31. “Tri-Plot” Curvature-Error Performance Study From: Michael Young (UCSC Master’s), Snowmass 2005 Reproduction for current reconstruction by Alex Bogert

  32. 3-Hit Tracks & Non-Prompt Signatures Probably need 5+1 layers for prompt track If we require 4 hits for non-prompt tracks, sensitive region for kinked tracks is very limited.

  33. e.g.: Position-matching for isolated muons (mm) Non-Prompt Tracks and GMSB SCIPP algorithm for non-prompt tracks: match 3-hit seeds from tracker with stubs from calorimeter (developed by UCSC undergrads Meyer, Rice) • Approximately 60% for 3-hit tracks in Z  qq events • Being optimized for non-prompt recon-struction (GMSB signature) by undergraduate major Betancourt

  34. Concluding Remarks • Broad array of generic and specific tracking R&D: • Optimized Si strip readout (LSTFE) • SiD baseline concept development (KPIX/2Metal) • Generic study of strip noise sources • Radiation hardness • Exploring use of charge division for strip z coord • Sid tracking performance benchmarking • Non-prompt signature from GMSB • Excellent training ground for undergraduate physics/engineering majors (9 currently working on project) • Schumm also ALCPG Tracking group convener, on ALCPG EXEC Committee

More Related