Studies and status of CMOS-based sensors research and development for ATLAS strip detector upgrade 1 Vitaliy Fadeyev, Zach Galloway, Herve Grabas, Alexander.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
HV/HR-CMOS sensors (A quick overview from personal perspective, which is biased on ATLAS strips work) V. Fadeyev SCIPP / UCSC SiD mtg at SLAC,
Advertisements

P. Fernández-Martínez – Optimized LGAD Periphery25 th RD50 Workshop, CERN Nov Centro Nacional de MicroelectrónicaInstituto de Microelectrónica.
G.Villani march 071 CALICE pixel Deep P-Well results Nwells P-well 3μm guard ring Diodes [3.6,1.8,0.9] x[3.6,1.8,0.9]μm 2 Bias: NWell 1.8/1V Diodes: 1.5V.
Test of Pixel Sensors for the CMS experiment Amitava Roy Purdue University.
TOF at 10ps with SiGe BJT Amplifiers
Chronopixel R&D status – May 2014 N. B. Sinev University of Oregon, Eugene In collaboration with J.E.Brau, D.M.Strom (University of Oregon, Eugene, OR),
Ivan Peric, Monolithic Detectors for Strip Region 1 CMOS periphery.
Embedded Pitch Adapters a high-yield interconnection solution for strip sensors M. Ullán, C. Fleta, X. Fernández-Tejero, V. Benítez CNM (Barcelona)
Ivan Peric, WIT Active Pixel Sensors in high-voltage CMOS technologies for ATLAS Ivan Perić University of Heidelberg, Germany.
SPiDeR  First beam test results of the FORTIS sensor FORTIS 4T MAPS Deep PWell Testbeam results CHERWELL Summary J.J. Velthuis.
Semiconductor detectors
TRAPPISTE Tracking Particles for Physics Instrumentation in SOI Technology Prof. Eduardo Cortina, Lawrence Soung Yee Institut de recherche en mathématique.
Charge collection studies on heavily diodes from RD50 multiplication run G. Kramberger, V. Cindro, I. Mandić, M. Mikuž Ϯ, M. Milovanović, M. Zavrtanik.
X-ray radiation damage of silicon strip detectors AGH University of Science and Technology Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Kraków, Poland.
First Results from Cherwell, a CMOS sensor for Particle Physics By James Mylroie-Smith
1 Nick Sinev LCWS08, University of Illinois at Chicago November 18, 2008 Status of the Chronopixel project J. E. Brau, N. B. Sinev, D. M. Strom University.
1 Monolithic Pixel Sensor in SOI Technology - First Test Results H. Niemiec, M. Koziel, T. Klatka, W. Kucewicz, S. Kuta, W. Machowski, M. Sapor University.
Sally Seidel 1 3D Sensor Studies at New Mexico Sally Seidel for Martin Hoeferkamp, Igor Gorelov, Elena Vataga, and Jessica Metcalfe University of New Mexico.
Semi-conductor Detectors HEP and Accelerators Geoffrey Taylor ARC Centre for Particle Physics at the Terascale (CoEPP) The University of Melbourne.
Medipix sensors included in MP wafers 2 To achieve good spatial resolution through efficient charge collection: Produced by Micron Semiconductor on n-in-p.
Annual Meeting WP2- Sensors Heinz Pernegger / CERN 20 November 2013.
RD50 participation in HV-CMOS submissions G. Casse University of Liverpool V. Fadeyev Santa Cruz Institute for Particle Physics Santa Cruz, USA HV-CMOS.
Fully depleted MAPS: Pegasus and MIMOSA 33 Maciej Kachel, Wojciech Duliński PICSEL group, IPHC Strasbourg 1 For low energy X-ray applications.
Time Resolution of Thin LGADs Results from the Nov 2014 Beam Test at CERN Improvement in hand: Sensor Capacitance Measurements with  Front TCT 1 Hartmut.
ALICE Inner Tracking System at present 2 2 layers of hybrid pixels (SPD) 2 layers of silicon drift detector (SDD) 2 layers of silicon strips (SSD) MAPs.
Specifications & motivation 2  Lowering integration time would significantly reduce background  Lowering power would significantly reduce material budget.
Foundry Characteristics
Heavy ion irradiation on silicon strip sensors for GLAST & Radiation hardening of silicon strip sensors S.Yoshida, K.Yamanaka, T.Ohsugi, H.Masuda T.Mizuno,
8 July 1999A. Peisert, N. Zamiatin1 Silicon Detectors Status Anna Peisert, Cern Nikolai Zamiatin, JINR Plan Design R&D results Specifications Status of.
Thin Silicon R&D for LC applications D. Bortoletto Purdue University Status report Hybrid Pixel Detectors for LC.
CMOS Activities K. Arndt, D. Bortoletto, T. Huffman, J.J. John, K. Kanisauskas, R. Nickerson, R. Plackett, L. Vigani With many thanks to V. Fadeyev (SCIPP.
Low Resistance Strip Sensors – RD50 Common Project – RD50/ CNM (Barcelona), SCIPP (Santa Cruz), IFIC (Valencia) Contact person: Miguel Ullán.
CERN, November 2005 Claudio Piemonte RD50 workshop Claudio Piemonte a, Maurizio Boscardin a, Alberto Pozza a, Sabina Ronchin a, Nicola Zorzi a, Gian-Franco.
AMS HVCMOS status Raimon Casanova Mohr 14/05/2015.
Technology Overview or Challenges of Future High Energy Particle Detection Tomasz Hemperek
Surface measurements with ATLAS12A Matthew Domingo, Hartmut F.-W. Sadrozinski, Vitaliy Fadeyev Zachary Galloway, Zhijun Liang SCIPP, UCSC 1.
1 Nicolo Cartiglia, INFN, Torino - RD50 - Santander, 2015 Timing performance of LGAD-UFSD 1.New results from the last CNM LGAD runs 2.A proposal for LGAD.
A. Rivetti Villa Olmo, 7/10/2009 Lepix: monolithic detectors for particle tracking in standard very deep submicron CMOS technologies. A. RIVETTI I.N.F.N.
26 Apr 2009Paul Dauncey1 Digital ECAL: Lecture 2 Paul Dauncey Imperial College London.
10th Trento Workshop on Radiation Detectors HVCMOS Sensors for LHC Upgrade Felix Michael Ehrler, Robert Eber Daniel Münstermann, Branislav Ristic, Mathieu.
Radiation hardness of Monolithic Active Pixel Sensors (MAPS)
9 th “Trento” Workshop on Advanced Silicon Radiation Detectors Genova, February 26-28, 2014 Centro Nacional de MicroelectrónicaInstituto de Microelectrónica.
TCT measurements with SCP slim edge strip detectors Igor Mandić 1, Vladimir Cindro 1, Andrej Gorišek 1, Gregor Kramberger 1, Marko Milovanović 1, Marko.
Paul Dolejschi Progress of Interstrip Measurements on DSSDs SVD.
A. Dorokhov, IPHC, Strasbourg, France 1 Description of pixel designs in Mimosa22 Andrei Dorokhov Institut Pluridisciplinaire Hubert Curien (IPHC) Strasbourg,
Lehman Review April 2000 D. Bortoletto 1 Forward Pixel Sensors Daniela Bortoletto Purdue University US CMS DOE/NSF Review April 12,2000 Progress.
Test structures for the evaluation of TowerJazz 180 nm CMOS Imaging Sensor technology  ALICE ITS microelectronics team - CERN.
Paul Dolejschi Characterisation of DSSD interstrip parameters BELLE II SVD-PXD Meeting.
Giulio Pellegrini 27th RD50 Workshop (CERN) 2-4 December 2015 Centro Nacional de MicroelectrónicaInstituto de Microelectrónica de Barcelona 1 Status of.
Simulation of new P-Type strip detectors 17th RD50 Workshop, CERN, Geneva 1/15 Centro Nacional de MicroelectrónicaInstituto de Microelectrónica de Barcelona.
P. Fernández-Martínez – Optimized LGAD PeripheryRESMDD14, Firenze 8-10 October Centro Nacional de MicroelectrónicaInstituto de Microelectrónica de.
ADC values Number of hits Silicon detectors1196  6.2 × 6.2 cm  4.2 × 6.2 cm  2.2 × 6.2 cm 2 52 sectors/modules896 ladders~100 r/o channels1.835.
L. Ratti a,b, M. Dellagiovanna a, L. Gaioni a,b, M. Manghisoni b,c, V. Re b,c, G. Traversi b,c, S. Bettarini d,e, F. Morsani e, G. Rizzo d,e a Università.
Ideas on MAPS design for ATLAS ITk. HV-MAPS challenges Fast signal Good signal over noise ratio (S/N). Radiation tolerance (various fluences) Resolution.
Hybrid CMOS strip detectors J. Dopke for the ATLAS strip CMOS group UK community meeting on CMOS sensors for particle tracking , Cosenors House,
Surface measurements with gamma radiated ATLAS12A samples Matthew Domingo, Mike Shumko, Hartmut F.-W. Sadrozinski, Vitaliy Fadeyev, Zachary Galloway, Zhijun.
Comparison of the AC and DC coupled pixels sensors read out with FE-I4 electronics Gianluigi Casse*, Marko Milovanovic, Paul Dervan, Ilya Tsurin 22/06/20161.
Low Mass, Radiation Hard Vertex Detectors R. Lipton, Fermilab Future experiments will require pixelated vertex detectors with radiation hardness superior.
QA Tests Tests for each sensor Tests for each strip Tests for structures Process stability tests Irradiation tests Bonding & Module assembly Si detectors1272.
TCT measurements with strip detectors Igor Mandić 1, Vladimir Cindro 1, Andrej Gorišek 1, Gregor Kramberger 1, Marko Milovanović 1, Marko Mikuž 1,2, Marko.
TCT measurements of HV-CMOS test structures irradiated with neutrons I. Mandić 1, G. Kramberger 1, V. Cindro 1, A. Gorišek 1, B. Hiti 1, M. Mikuž 1,2,
Rint Simulations & Comparison with Measurements
Dima Maneuski, Advances in rad-hard MAPS 2016, Birmingham
Development of HV/HR CMOS sensors for the ATLAS ITk
First production of Ultra-Fast Silicon Detectors at FBK
Charge collection studies with irradiated CMOS detectors
Graeme Stewarta, R. Batesa, G. Pellegrinib, G. Krambergerc, M
HVCMOS sensor technology R&D
HVCMOS Detectors – Overview
Enhanced Lateral Drift (ELAD) sensors
Presentation transcript:

Studies and status of CMOS-based sensors research and development for ATLAS strip detector upgrade 1 Vitaliy Fadeyev, Zach Galloway, Herve Grabas, Alexander Grillo, Zhijun Liang Hartmut Sadrozinski, Abraham Seiden University of California, Santa Cruz

CMOS sensors developments Implemented in commercial CMOS (HV) technologies (350nm, 180nm) ◦ Collection electrode is a large n-well/p-substrate diode Advantage: ◦ High granularity: pitch can be reduced to below 50um ◦ low material budget : Can be thinned down to 50um ◦ Monolithic: Front-end electronics and sensor can be built in the same chip ◦ Low cost Drawback: ◦ Low MIP signal : 1000~2000 e 2

CMOS sensors in ATLAS ATLAS agreed to explore the possible use of the technology for silicon strip detector upgrade Three-year plan: o Year 1: Characterization of basic sensor/electronics properties and architecture o Year 2: Fabricating and evaluating a large-scale device. o Year 3: Full prototypes of sensors and ABCN’ readout chip Two foundries are targeted : ◦ Tower-Jazz TJ180 ◦ Austrian Micro Systems AMS-H35. This talk will focus on the study of one of the test chip (CHESS chip) fabricated in AMS-H35 HV-CMOS process. designed by UCSC and SLAC contains passive pixel arrays, stand-alone amplifiers, active pixel arrays, transistors. The testing results of CHESS chip in this talk includes Characterize the diode properties of the pixel array Characterize the stand-along built-in amplifier 3

The concept of strip detector using CMOS technology one example design of the full size strip sensor based on CMOS technology. ◦ Strip Sensor is made of 512 strips ◦ Each strip is subdivided in 32 segments. Typical size of one segment of strip sensor is 40µm X 800µm Zoom in 3 X 3 segments 32 segments 512 strips 4

HV-CMOS pixel array design Need to understand the performance of the segment (pixel) for strip detector application For strip application, larger segment (pixel) size is considered in the last test chip ◦ 45µmX100µm, 45µmX200µm, 45µmX400µm 45µmX800µm ◦ 30%-50% N-well fraction  Expect better performance in higher Nwell fraction ◦ Electronics in the strip allow for strip segmentation ◦ – AMS provides options for high resistivity substrate  Substrate resistivity can be up to a few thousand Ω *cm 5

Layout of passive pixel arrays Groups of 3 x 3 pixels in a rectangular array ◦ the eight outer pixels are electrically tied together ◦ The inner pixel is connected to a separate probe pad ◦ An additional probe pad is added for substrate biasing. Pad for Periphery pixels Pad for signal Pad for Substrate Pad for signal 6 Pad for Periphery pixels

I-V curve for CMOS pixel Testing setup and major Challenge Leakage current as function of bias voltage (I-V) is one of the basic test ◦ Large Leakage current may induce noise in readout electronics  -> Lead to a low signal to background ratio Compared to conventional planar sensors for strip detector ◦ Leakage current in single pixel is about much lower, by five orders of magnitude ◦ Need setup for low noise measurement 7 Substrate: grounded Perimeter pixels: +HV Central pixel: +HV

Central pixel IV ◦ Design of pixel in CHESS1 chip  Two design rule in AMS HV-CMOS technology : 60V and 120V  pixel array layout in CHESS1 chip follows the 120V design rule ◦ I-V measurement result  Can Biased up to 120V without breakdown  Low leakage current (pA level)  Leakage current proportional to pixel size. 8

I-V curve after gamma Irradiation(1) 9 45X200um pixel, 50% N-well fraction ionizing doseLeakage 100Mrad0.07 nA 30 Mrad0.08 nA 10Mard0.09 nA 3Mard0.09 nA 1Mrad0.06 nA Before irradiated2 pA Five CHESS1 chip with different dose ◦ Irradiated by UNM group (Sally Seidel et al) at Sandia source ◦ From 1Mrad to 100Mrad ◦ Requirement in ATLAS strip detector phase two upgrade: 60Mrad ◦ I-V measurement result after gamma irradiation  Orders of magnitude higher in leakage current than before  No significant difference between 1Mrad and 100 Mrad irradiated chip  it is still less 1nA after gamma radiation.

I-V measurement in gamma irradiated CMOS chip (2) No break down in pixel array with 50% N-well fraction break-down like behavior in part of the pixels with 30% N-well fraction Perform two test in one of 30% N-well fraction pixel Break down in the first scan at about 70V. Leakage current increase by order of magnitude The leakage current remain high after the first test. Bias Voltage (V) Leakage current (A) Pixel size: 45X200µm with 30% N-well fraction 30 Mrad gamma radiation Bias Voltage (V) Leakage current (A) Pixel with 30% N-well fraction Pixel with 50% N-well fraction Pixel size: 45X200µm With 30% N-well fraction 100 Mrad gamma radiation 10

Inter-pixel resistance measurement 11  Inter-pixel resistance is the resistance between pixels  Low Inter-strip resistance  May lead to charge spread to nearby pixels -> low position resolution  fixed oxide charges in the Si–SiO2 interface  may lead to a conductive layer of electrons at the surface  One solution is use metal guard ring on top of p+ implant ++ + e- Ideal case with high R_int silicon oxide layer One possible case with low R_int Deep N-well Depletion region Deep N-well metal guard ring (grounded) one solution with metal guard on top of p+ implant

Inter-pixel resistance measurement simulation Two type of pixel arrays are designed ◦ Pixel array with guard rings  Guard ring grounded the region between pixels  get a better isolation and larger inter-pixel resistance  Draw back : may lead to inefficiency in regions between two pixels ◦ Pixel array without guard rings  Need to understand the surface condition and its inter-strip resistance Without guard rings between pixels With guard rings between pixels Simulated by Julie Segal from SLAC 12

Test setup for inter-pixel resistance Vary the bias voltage of the perimeter pixels by 1 V. ◦ The variation in central pixel current reflect inter-pixel resistance 13 Substrate: grounded Perimeter pixels: from 98V to 100V Central pixel: 99V

Inter-pixel resistance (2)  The inter-pixel resistance is obtained by measuring  “current in center pixel”  “voltage difference between the central and peripheral pixels”  The pixel without guard ring may lead to low inter-pixel resistance  It turned out that Inter-pixel resistance is large in both case w/wo guard ring. Without guard ring With guard ring Pixel size: 45X200µm with 30% N-well fraction 14

inter-pixel resistance Vs Bias voltage Comparing inter-pixel resistance for pixel with and without guard ring ◦ Inter-pixel resistance (R_INT) is similar at high bias voltage ◦ At zero bias case, R_INT goes down to Mohm level for the pixel without guard ring. With guard ring Without guard ring 15 Pixel size: 45X200µm with 30% N-well fraction 100 Mrad gamma irradiation

I-V curve for the pixel w/wo guard ring Found negative leakage current for the pixel without guard ring. May be due to inversion layer after radiation predicted by simulation ◦ However, inversion layer hypothesis is in contradiction with the high inter- pixel resistance. ◦ high resistance for non-guard ring array is a puzzle we are trying to understand Biased voltage (V) Leakage current (A) With guard ring Without guard ring 16

capacitance measurement Capacitance of the pixel is very important ◦ Very important input to the design of readout frontend electronic ◦ Related to the readout noise Simulations predicts that ◦ Single N-well capacitance without in-pixel electronics : ~50fF ◦ Single N-well capacitance with in-pixel electronics: ~100fF Need measurement to verify that. P-well size: 25um x 14um (from CHESS1) Single n-well pixel capacitance without p- well: 46fF With p-well: 104fF Simulated by Julie Segal from SLAC 17

Capacitance measurement of central pixel with different size 18 The central pixel capacitance at low bias voltage is roughly proportional to pixel size. Bias voltageMeasurement Result (fF) Prediction from simulation (fF) 60V V5255 The simulation predictions are fairly consistent the measurements for the case of single N-well capacitance without in-pixel electronics

Capacitance of pixel array with different diode area fraction 19 Pixel with 30% N-Well fraction Pixel with 50% N-well fraction Observe lower capacitance for pixel with lower diode fraction Expected ratio between the bulk capacitance of Pixel with 30% N-well fraction and pixel with 50% N-well C(30% N well)/C(50% N-well) V_bias(V)

Design of amplifier signal is relatively low due to thin depletion region. A monolithic design of a built-in low-noise amplifier is needed  The pixel array and amplifier are designed in the same chip ◦ The amplifier design must be radiation hard  radiation tolerant layout techniques is used ◦ The raise time should be fast as well for LHC application  16ns raise time for active pixel signal after amplification 20 Schematic from Ivan Peric Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 582 (2007) 876–885

Amplifier testing Amplifier testing Preliminary study of stand-alone amplifier in CMOS chip Response time to narrow signal pulse input is about 20~30ns. ◦ Close to simulation prediction (16ns) ◦ Fully functional after 1Mrad gamma radiation More study to do done for input noise and the gain. ◦ Still getting pickup noise, and mis-adaptation at the input. ◦ Need better shielding and input setup in next step Time (10 -7 s) Voltage (V) 16ns Voltage (V) Fast Pulser Build-in Amplifier In CMOS test chip Build-in Amplifier In CMOS test chip Simulation Measurement Narrow pulse <1ns width Signal output Irradiated HVCMOS Test chip 1Mrad gamma radiation 20-30ns 21

Summary of CMOS sensor testing Preliminary I-V and capacitance results for pixel array in test chip ◦ I-V measurement  Before radiation  Can Biased up to 120V without breakdown  Low leakage current (pA level)  After gamma radiation  No breakdown for Pixels with 50% N-well fraction  Soft breakdown for part of the pixels with 30% ◦ C-V measurement  Capacitance at low bias voltage is roughly proportional to pixel size.  Observe lower capacitance for pixel with lower diode fraction ◦ Inter-pixel resistance  Very good isolation between pixel even after 100MRad Gamma radiation  inter-pixel resistance is high even in pixel array without guard ring.  This is not understood yet, further study is needed. ◦ Build-in Amplifier testing in CMOS test chip  Response time is about 20~30ns  Agree with simulation 22

Next step for CMOS sensor development ◦ Next test chip in March 2015 is planned.  It will be a large array.  128 strips made of 32 pixels.  plan to prototype the readout architecture.  Strips with active amplifier and discriminators  Strip hit for groups of 128 strips with LVDS readout.  Engineering run with AMS HV-CMOS technology with multiple substrate resistivity 23

Backup 24

I-V curve after gamma radiation 30% N-well fraction 45X200um pixel, 30% N-well fraction 25

Capacitance with embedded p-well P-well size: 25um x 14um (from CHESS1) Single n-well pixel capacitance without p- well: 46fF With p-well: 104fF P-well to n-well: 57fF All the usual disclaimers apply, but more (don’t know process details, especially diffusion profiles, etc) For n-well to substrate capacitance simulation, we know substrate doping Did not include p-diff or Gate ox capacitance for PMOS transistors in n-well 26