1 Jim Thomas - LBL SSD Survey Update Jim Thomas Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 3/21/2013.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Welding Joints, Positions, and Symbols
Advertisements

1 Jim Thomas - LBL A Brief Introduction to the STAR Time Projection Chamber Jim Thomas Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory June 4 th, 2009.
Voltage in Electrical Systems
1 Short update Itzhak Tserruya HBD meeting BNL, April 11, 2006.
Spiral Stairs Assembly Instruction By Laser Dollhouse Designs
Survey(s) of TT8 10/12 TT 8 after wall1 16/12 TT 8 Standalone.
1 Jim Thomas - LBL A Quick Look at Some Systematic Errors in the TPC By Jim Thomas.
Alignment study 19/May/2010 (S. Haino). Summary on Alignment review Inner layers are expected to be kept “almost” aligned when AMS arrives at ISS Small.
Status Update on Mechanical Prototype in Rome November 6,
Dariusz Miskowiec, TRD status meeting Oct alignment... i.e. how to figure out where the detectors are, and how to use this knowledge in the reconstruction.
Sept G. Zech, Iterative alignment, PHYSTAT 2003, SLAC. 1 A simple iterative alignment method using gradient descending minimum search G. Zech and.
Engineering 28 University of California Lecture # 9 –Orthogonal projection –Multi-view presentation –Third-angle projection –First-angle projection.
Velo to T Alignment - Reminder General Strategy  Perform relative VELO-to-IT/OT alignment using  X,  Y at the center of magnet and  X,  Y (each.
Geometry of the Tracker in the Flight Instrument The following slides present an overview of the geometry of the tracker. Dimensions corresponding to constants.
T. Horn, SHMS Optics Update SHMS Optics Update Tanja Horn Hall C Users Meeting 31 January 2009.
DELTA Quadrant Tuning Y. Levashov, E. Reese. 2 Tolerances for prototype quadrant tuning Magnet center deviations from a nominal center line < ± 50  m.
1 CMS Tracker Alignment and Implications for Physics Performance Nhan Tran Johns Hopkins University CMS Collaboration SPLIT
Alignment Global-rotation tests of whole SECTORS were done with simulations to check procedures (not the best choice to start as it turns out!) Finding.
Semiconductor detectors
MUON_EDR-06 (Alignment) Enrique Calvo Alamillo February 28-March 1, 2002 Link Mechanics: Status.
1 TEC pilot run status Goal : test TEC module production rate capabilities - 15 R6 modules assembled on Brussels Gantry and bonded in Aachen I - 15 R7.
Update on alignment kit and stave 250 frame M.Gibson (RAL) 1.
1 Jim Thomas - LBL 4.2 Meters ~ 1 Meter The SSD: March Face to Face Meeting Jim Thomas Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory March 14 th, 2012 The SSD.
SCT Endcap Module Initial Alignments Using Survey Data Paul S Miyagawa University of Manchester.
1.Check Laser track of B=0 run and exclude some tracks in order to get precise GGV eff, which in turn is used when extract T1, T2 value by pos-B and neg-B.
1. Two long straight wires carry identical currents in opposite directions, as shown. At the point labeled A, is the direction of the magnetic field left,
ENTC 1110 OBLIQUE PICTORIALS.
Wall survey: With and without TT7. The wall targets are hybrid targets made of precise uncoded targets (the pin targets) which enter in the hole of the.
If the integral cannot be evaluated, we can use an approximate method.
1 Jim Thomas - LBL New Pad Plane Design Proposal & Specifications Jim Thomas, John Hammond, Bob Scheetz, Jon Wirth, etc., etc., and a cast of thousands.
LAV Software Status Emanuele Leonardi – Tommaso Spadaro Photon Veto WG meeting – 2015/03/24.
Design and development of micro-strip stacked module prototypes for tracking at S-LHC Motivations Tracking detectors at future hadron colliders will operate.
Unit 6 3D Modeling Concepts
LHCb VErtex LOcator & Displaced Vertex Trigger
1 Photogrammetry of TT7. 2 Front view Distribution of all targets All the plots are in the magnet reference system.
Strategy Using Strategy1. Scan Path / Strategy It is important to visualize the scan path you want for a feature before you begin taking points on your.
9 September 2004The Straw Tube Chamber1 The CDC Curtis A. Meyer Carnegie Mellon University Physics Requirements and Specifications Prototype Construction.
The HESSI Imaging Process. How HESSI Images HESSI will make observations of the X-rays and gamma-rays emitted by solar flares in such a way that pictures.
IRMOS Diffraction Grating Integral Tab Design  Performance of an optical system is highly sensitive to the surface distortion of the optics in the system.
Jonathan BouchetBerkeley School on Collective Dynamics 1 Performance of the Silicon Strip Detector of the STAR Experiment Jonathan Bouchet Subatech STAR.
Detector alignment Stefania and Bepo Martellotti 20/12/10.
The Detector Performance Study for the Barrel Section of the ATLAS Semiconductor Tracker (SCT) with Cosmic Rays Yoshikazu Nagai (Univ. of Tsukuba) For.
FIRST RESULTS OF THE SILICON STRIP DETECTOR at STAR Jörg Reinnarth, Jonathan Bouchet, Lilian Martin, Jerome Baudot and the SSD teams in Nantes and Strasbourg.
Opacity Correction (1/20/09) Schumacher, Ovchinnikov Materials: Copper (1/e absoption length taken as 22  ), Aluminum (72.4  ). Targets: Slab sandwich,
MQXF Workshop on Structure, Alignment, and Electrical QA Feb 2-4, 2016 Dan Cheng J. DiMarco, C. Hernikl, D. Humphries, S. Myers, X. Wang MQXFA Magnet Fiducialization.
STAR SVT Self Alignment V. Perevoztchikov Brookhaven National Laboratory,USA.
1) News on the long scale length calibration 2) Results of the two surveys performed on plane 7 Set 1: morning of 12/11/2004 Set 2: morning of 19/11/2004.
PIXEL ladder alignment Hidemitsu ASANO. Photo analysis & survey beam data (with zero magnetic field) ① SVX standalone tracking Global Tracking Strategy.
Jim Thomas - LBL 1 SSD News and Integration Notes Jim Thomas Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory September 11 th, 2007.
QXF Coil working group 2/11/16 Dan Cheng J. DiMarco, C. Hernikl, D. Humphries, S. Myers, X. Wang MQXFA Coil Fiducialization Proposal.
Grid Pix Field Simulations and precision needed for a module Peter Kluit, Jan Timmermans Prepared 16 May 2016.
Mechanical robustness & associated tension at the DSSD slant part connection Mar-5 th 2013 B2GM KEK S. Uozumi (KNU), T. Tsuboyama, N. Sato (KEK)
Feasibility of impedance measurements with beam N. Biancacci, N. Wang, E. Métral and B.Salvant COLUSM meeting 27/05/2016 Acknowledgements: A. Lafuente.
Tutorial On Fiducialization Of Accelerator Magnets And Undulators
Planar distortions for SCT Barrel Modules
Stave 4008 Z rubyballs coordinates
Grid Pix Field Simulations and precision needed for a module
Using a Compass What is a compass? How does a compass work?
Integration and alignment of ATLAS SCT
FNAL Production Experience
HPS Collaboration meeting, JLAB, Nov 16, 2016
“Teach A Level Maths” Vol. 1: AS Core Modules
Hall C Users Meeting 31 January 2009
“Teach A Level Maths” Vol. 1: AS Core Modules
University of Wisconsin-Madison
“Teach A Level Maths” Vol. 1: AS Core Modules
“Teach A Level Maths” Vol. 1: AS Core Modules
Aras Papadelis NIKHEF Vertex 2005, Nikko, Japan
SCT Wafer Distortions (Bowing)
Translation in Homogeneous Coordinates
Presentation transcript:

1 Jim Thomas - LBL SSD Survey Update Jim Thomas Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 3/21/2013

2 Jim Thomas - LBL The SSD Who: –Bob Connors is the expert. Joe Silber and Hans Georg have done Yeoman work. What: –Multiple targets on each Si module, measure relative to pin on end –Mounts on OSC need to be surveyed at LBL When: –Winter & Spring 2013 Where: –LBL shops Why: –Survey will give position of silicon sensor with respect to the mount points on the OSC How: –Optical survey machine at LBL (already exists) Schedule: –Expected to be able to survey 2 ladders per day, so approximately two weeks to do all 20 ladders … currently about 1 per week 

3 Jim Thomas - LBL The Theoretical Geometry Model Two “single” star targets, one on each end –visible on front and back Fourteen “double star” targets, seven on each side –visible only from the front side

4 Jim Thomas - LBL What do we know? Target distance is 780  m or they meant a different reference point * * Also two targets on edges. These are  m from edge of “box” The hallmark (or punch) on the guard ring is placed under the strip with the same number as the wafer ID Updates by Jim Thomas, based on LBL Survey 3/30/2013

5 Jim Thomas - LBL Detail on Module structure Targets are 780 microns from bottom of strip. Same top and bottom.

6 Jim Thomas - LBL Geometry – Assume “A” edge toward pin 75,000 40,000 42,000 “A” edge of chip – toward pin Pin side of ladder is labeled “P” side Pa and Pb stripes are face up for survey, Na and Nb are on the backside, normally not visible. “B” edge of chip – toward slot Not to Scale * * ** 780 1Pa 761Pa 12, x95 1Nb 761 Nb 20,000 74,500 The inner box is imaginary. It defines the area covered by 768 stripes. Inner box is wide enough for 768 stripes, edge to edge, with 95  m pitch. Thus the box is (768-1)*95 = 72,865  m wide and 40,000  m tall. Double star targets are centered on the middle of the wafer and spaced 128  m apart. STAR 1 is under strip 1, etc. Note that first star is for strip 0, which doesn’t exist. ** (768-1)x95 = 72,865 0/1 768/769

7 Jim Thomas - LBL ** Calculating the Coordinates of a hit 42,000 Not to Scale * * ** 1Pa 761Pa 1Nb 761 Nb 0/1 768/769 X Y X starts at the pin and points to the slot. Z is “up” as seen by the surveyor. See photo. Assume (0,0) at the center of the wafer for this work. Pa Stripes: Slope = , Intercept = (NumberPa-1)*95 Pa Stripes: Slope = , Intercept = (768-1)*95/ * (NumberPa-1)*95 Nb Stripes: Slope = , Intercept = (NumberNb-1)*95 Nb Stripes: Slope = , Intercept = -1*(768-1)*95/ * (NumberNb-1)*95 With 2 hits, one on each side of the wafer, then: x = (b(Nb)-b(Pa)) / 2*m(Pa) and y = (b(Nb) + b(Pa)) / 2 x = (768 - (NumberNb + NumberPa) + 1) * 95 / (2*0.0175) - 20,000 and y = (NumberNb - NumberPa) * 95/2 Assume straight lines of the form: y = mx + b For 1 hit, we must assume x = 0 and then: y = (NumberPa-1)*95 or y = (NumberNb-1)*95

8 Jim Thomas - LBL Pictures Target on end of wafer (backside) Targets on edges of wafer (front) Reference point

9 Jim Thomas - LBL To do (written 1 year ago … but still true) Philosophy: start from the module and work outwards Measure location of strips relative to targets (one wafer) Measure location of targets on wafers relative to pin (all) Repeat for all ladders Check gravity sag on one ladder (this can be done on Zeiss) –Assume that 0  and 90  are sufficient to characterize sag –Repeat 90  measurement on all ladders if necessary Record and manage data Design, glue, and survey location of mounts on OSC Develop mathematical transforms from strip to target to pin to OSC mount to STAR Global Coordinate system Record and store in STAR qualified DB

10 Jim Thomas - LBL Results We have surveyed 3 ladders We know the mean displacement of each wafer from its ideal location and rotation angle wrt ideal –Typically, the first wafer is far from the ideal location –Other wafers are usually very close (10 or 20  m) Z location of the center of each wafer is strongly dependent on location on ladder due to gravity sag dX dY dZ Rot(Rad) ResX0.009 ResY0.008 ResZ0.079 dX dY dZ Rot(Rad)0.000 ResX0.005 ResY0.007 ResZ Degree Face Down Face Up Bend in the “strong” direction at 90 Degrees

11 Jim Thomas - LBL Folded Wafers Curiously, most of the wafers are also “bent” in the middle –9 point survey so the bend is probably a smooth curve –Perhaps due to gravity sag during gluing on the ladder?

12 Jim Thomas - LBL Summary Data looks good –Reproducible –Accurate to at least 20  m … probably better –Survey procedures seems robust and reliable –Data formats are well defined and easy to use We have located two the errors in documentation –Targets top and bottom of “box” are 780  m off the box –Targets left and right are  m off the edges of the box Wafers are not in the theoretically designed position –X,Y misalignments up to 0.5 mm (usually first/last wafer on ladder) –Wafers are bent or folded. Of order 200  m Is this important? –Z displaced from neutral position by gravity 50 to 150  m Is this important? If so, will have to calculate the sag for each orientation on OSC

13 Jim Thomas - LBL Backup Slides

14 Jim Thomas - LBL Software proposal void GetHit( Int_t &nPa, Int_t &nNb, Int_t &Wafer, Int_t &Ladder ) { // Get and return nPa, nNb, Wafer number and Ladder number // nPa is the strip number on the P side, nNb is the strip number on the N side } void xyzLadder( Float_t xWafer, Float_t yWafer, Int_t Wafer, Int_t Ladder, Float_t xLadder[] ) { // Convert from local wafer coordinates to ladder coordinates // Compensate for rotation and bend of wafers but do not correct for gravity or phi (yet) } void xyzOSC( Float_t xLadder[], Int_t Wafer, Int_t Ladder, Float_t xOSC[] ) { // Convert from Ladder coordinates to OSC coordinates // Compensate gravity and phi location effects on OSC } void xyzSTAR( Float_t xOSC[], Float x[] ) { // Convert from OSC reference frame to STAR reference frame } Int_t xyWafer( Int_t nPa, Int_t nPb, Float_t &xWafer, Float_t &yWafer ) { // Convert hits on strips to local X,Y coordinates on the wafer // Wafer has 768 strips on each side of the wafer (starting from 1) Float_t Slope = ; // Slope of the strips on the wafer (Radians) Float_t Pitch = 95.0 ; // Distance between strips along the Y axis (microns) Float_t Width = ; // Width of active region on wafer along X axis (microns) if ( nPa == 0 || nPa > 768 ) && (nNb == 0 || nNb > 768 ) return 0 ; if ( nNb == 0 || nNb > 768 ) { xWafer = 0.0 ; yWafer = (768-1)*Pitch/2.0 - Slope*Width/2.0 - (nPa-1)*Pitch ; } else if ( nPa == 0 || nPa > 768 ) { xWafer = 0.0 ; yWafer = (768-1)*Pitch/2.0 - Slope*Width/2.0 - (nNb-1)*Pitch ; yWafer *= -1.0 ; } else { xWafer = (768 - (nNb + nPa) + 1) * Pitch / (2.0*Slope) - Width/2.0 ; yWafer = (nNb - nPa) * Pitch/2.0 ; } return 1 ; }

15 Jim Thomas - LBL 4.2 Meters ~ 1 Meter The SSD: Alignment Review Jim Thomas Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory The SSD

16 Jim Thomas - LBL The Lorentz Force affects the SSD Lorentz effect : –Trajectory of electrons/holes are modified due to the combination of the STAR magnet B-field and the SSD wafer E-field (vxB) Observation from data : –Shift in direction of the order of 200  m depending on the B-field orientation. –Oops. Not all shifts explained by sign and Mag of B. (?) Jonathan Bouchet

17 Jim Thomas - LBL Lorentz Effect Corrections … already in code Values from CMS  L = 21° for electrons and  L = 8° for holes T =280 K and V bias = 40 V Normalized to STAR B-Field d = drift distance along the E-field ( d =150 microns, half-thickness of the wafer)  x = 12  m for electrons  x = 4.2  m for holes  e = 4.4   h = 1.6  Thus the anode and cathode strips will experience different distortions on the two sides of the detector. When reconstructed, this leads to a distortion in the Z direction approximately equal to tan(  e -  h )*d / tan(  ac ) or about 210  m. Jonathan Bouchet