Noise results from SR1 combined SCT barrel tests

Summary of some initial results

Alan Barr, UCLPepe Bernabeu, Valencia

2

Data Sources• Online calibration scans

– ROD and TIM triggered

• Physics mode scans + offline analysis– Triggered from pulser

• Analysis:– Online analysis of calibration scans

– Offline noise analysis & monitoringhttp://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=4146

http://pcphsctr02.cern.ch/cgi-bin/datadisplay.cgi

3

Overall noise occupancy

• The noise occupancy is within specification

5x10-45x10-4

Chip average noise occupancyCalibration run, asynchronousROD triggeredRun 2981, Scan 2Hybrid temperature ~28C1fC with cal correction factors

Chip average noise occupancyCalibration run, asynchronousROD triggeredRun 2981, Scan 2Hybrid temperature ~28C1fC with cal correction factors

4LMT

6:

LMT

7:

LMT

8:

LMT

9:

LMT

22:

LMT

23:

LMT

24:

LMT

6:

LMT

7:

LMT

8:

LMT

9:

LMT

10:

LMT

26:

LMT

27:

LMT

28:

LMT

29:

LMT

7:

LMT

8:

LMT

9:

LMT

10:

LMT

11:

LMT

12:

LMT

31:

LMT

32:

LMT

33:

LMT

34:

LMT

35:

LMT

36:

LMT

9:

LMT

10:

LMT

11:

LMT

12:

LMT

13:

LMT

14:

LMT

38:

LMT

39:

LMT

40:

LMT

41:

LMT

42:

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

1

2

3

4

5

6

24-26 26-28 28-30 30-32 32-34

B3B3 B4B4 B6B6B5B5

LMT

6:

LMT

7:

LMT

8:

LMT

9:

LMT

22:

LMT

23:

LMT

24:

LMT

6:

LMT

7:

LMT

8:

LMT

9:

LMT

10:

LMT

26:

LMT

27:

LMT

28:

LMT

29:

LMT

7:

LMT

8:

LMT

9:

LMT

10:

LMT

11:

LMT

12:

LMT

31:

LMT

32:

LMT

33:

LMT

34:

LMT

35:

LMT

36:

LMT

9:

LMT

10:

LMT

11:

LMT

12:

LMT

13:

LMT

14:

LMT

38:

LMT

39:

LMT

40:

LMT

41:

LMT

42:

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

1

2

3

4

5

6

0.00E+00-5.00E-05 5.00E-05-1.00E-04

1.00E-04-1.50E-04 1.50E-04-2.00E-04

2.00E-04-2.50E-04

Run 2981, Scan 2, Module average NO 1fC with cal correction factors

NoiseOccupancy(beforecosmics run)

Temperature Hybrid T1

5

Comparison to previous data

• Needs to be corrected for time biased, temperature etc

• The noise occupancy – Seems a little higher for single barrel test than

macroconstruction– more so for barrels 3 and 6– also perhaps a little higher for all barrels on than for

single barrel tests• ENC input noise (from 3 point gain)

– perhaps 40-50 electrons greater than macroconstruction results after temp corrections

– ENC input noise within 5 electrons of same-temp module assembly values

6

Noise in 3PG : ENCL

MT

6:

LM

T 7

:

LM

T 8

:

LM

T 9

:

LM

T 2

2:

LM

T 2

3:

LM

T 2

4:

LM

T 6

:

LM

T 7

:

LM

T 8

:

LM

T 9

:

LM

T 1

0:

LM

T 2

6:

LM

T 2

7:

LM

T 2

8:

LM

T 2

9:

LM

T 7

:

LM

T 8

:

LM

T 9

:

LM

T 1

0:

LM

T 1

1:

LM

T 1

2:

LM

T 3

1:

LM

T 3

2:

LM

T 3

3:

LM

T 3

4:

LM

T 3

5:

LM

T 3

6:

LM

T 9

:

LM

T 1

0:

LM

T 1

1:

LM

T 1

2:

LM

T 1

3:

LM

T 1

4:

LM

T 3

8:

LM

T 3

9:

LM

T 4

0:

LM

T 4

1:

LM

T 4

2: -6

-4

-2

1

3

5

1600-1625 1625-1650 1650-1675

1675-1700 1700-1725 1725-1750

1750-1775

3PG combined top + bottomHybrid temp ~28 C

3PG combined top + bottomHybrid temp ~28 C

B3B3 B4B4 B6B6B5B5

RUN 2871 before long cosmics run

7

Thresholds

• RMS noise occupancy decreases when using calibration-capacitor-corrected “Response Curve” 1 fC threshold– As we would hope

• No change in mean NO– From offline analysis

8

External Pickup?

• No hint so far of extra noise occupancy due to TRT– Offline analyses in progress

• Likewise for heaters:– Runs: Off / On / Switching / Off– Noise occupancy

9

Self pickup?

• Pickup from ABCD readout visible at end of pipeline– (±synch) double trigger noise test– Factor of ~1.8 increase over several time bins

at end of pipeline– Small effect when averaged out over 400 time

bins (for 100kHz triggers worst case)

10

Dependence on trigger rate

• Physics run: pulser rate varied from:• 5 Hz • 50 Hz• 500 Hz• 5k Hz• 50 kHz

– No evidence of increase in noise occupancy• Events sizes the same• Plots look very similar

11

Correlations• No increase in noise occupancy observed when using

synchronous triggers• No correlations seen so far between noise hits within

chips (“occupancy per event”)• No correlations seen so far between hits on different

modules – Except cosmic tracks!– Full correlation analysis in progress (Ewa)

Hits per eventNoise run1 fC uncorrected(trim target)Gaussian Tanaka et al

Hits per eventNoise run1 fC uncorrected(trim target)Gaussian Tanaka et al

Cosmics runCosmics run

12

Grounding schemes

• No significant change in the noise occupancy when we change the grounding scheme. – Grounding scheme in SR1 is not “final” – Final scheme only available in the pit

#chip=(252+216)x12=5616(2 modules are masked online)

Run 3084 3085Shorting out inMean 4.57x10-5 4.57x10-5

RMS 3.42x10-5 3.39x10-5

line red blue

Tanaka et al

13

Noise stability

-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 1 2 3 4 5 6LMT 6:

LMT 7:

LMT 8:

LMT 9:

LMT 22:

LMT 23:

LMT 24:

2.00E-04-2.50E-04

1.50E-04-2.00E-04

1.00E-04-1.50E-04

5.00E-05-1.00E-04

0.00E+00-5.00E-05

• Long runs exist to check overall stability in time

• Calibration runs show expected decrease in NO after long period biased– Also seen in “physics”

runs– Consistent with single

barrel tests-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 1 2 3 4 5 6

LMT 6:

LMT 7:

LMT 8:

LMT 9:

LMT 22:

LMT 23:

LMT 24:

2.00E-04-2.50E-04

1.50E-04-2.00E-04

1.00E-04-1.50E-04

5.00E-05-1.00E-04

0.00E+00-5.00E-05

B3 Before cosmics run (2981)

B3 After cosmics run (3102)

14

Noisy strips?

• A handful of strips cut out for offline analysis (of order ten)– In addition to channels masked online

• In some cases individual strip noises change between runs by factors ~3– Not understood– Poor individual channel trim?

• Usual modulation across module– Noise occupancy higher towards centre of chips– Link 1 noisier than link 0

• (Both as they has always have been in module tests)

15

16

Noise occupancy at end of test period

Run 3102 Top Sector Bottom Sector

B3 4.56e-5 4.14e-5

B4 3.41e-5 4.03e-5

B5 4.17e-5 4.27e-5

B6 6.63e-5 4.95e-5

• Overall average 4.13e-5• Similar to single barrel tests

17

Overall conclusions

• Unless small increase in Noise Occupancy seen for B6 or B3 scales badly with #modules we are in good shape for noise

• Ultimate test will be using final grounding scheme in the pit

18

Backups

19

Noise physics run at end of cosmics

20

Heater testsHeater tests

Reference 1Reference 1

Reference 2Reference 2

ONON SwitchingSwitching

21

Chip average noise occupancyCalibration run, asynchronousRun 2981, Scan 2Hybrid temperature ~28C1fC with cal correction factors

Chip average noise occupancyCalibration run, asynchronousRun 2981, Scan 2Hybrid temperature ~28C1fC with cal correction factors

22

Difference in ENC noise 3PGLM

T 6

: LM

T 7

: LM

T 8

: LM

T 9

: LM

T 2

2:

LM

T 2

3:

LM

T 2

4:

LM

T 6

: LM

T 7

: LM

T 8

: LM

T 9

: LM

T 1

0:

LM

T 2

6:

LM

T 2

7:

LM

T 2

8:

LM

T 2

9:

LM

T 7

: LM

T 8

: LM

T 9

: LM

T 1

0:

LM

T 1

1:

LM

T 1

2:

LM

T 3

1:

LM

T 3

2:

LM

T 3

3:

LM

T 3

4:

LM

T 3

5:

LM

T 3

6:

LM

T 9

: LM

T 1

0:

LM

T 1

1:

LM

T 1

2:

LM

T 1

3:

LM

T 1

4:

LM

T 3

8:

LM

T 3

9:

LM

T 4

0:

LM

T 4

1:

LM

T 4

2: -6

-4

-2

1

3

5

-6

-4

-2

1

3

5

40-60

20-40

0-20

-20-0

-40--20

-60--40

B3B3 B4B4 B6B6B5B5

(Combined Top & Bottom Sectors Run) minus (SCTDAQ reference)(Combined Top & Bottom Sectors Run) minus (SCTDAQ reference)

Hybrid temps~28C for both

Hybrid temps~28C for both

23

-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 1 2 3 4 5 6LMT 6:

LMT 7:

LMT 8:

LMT 9:

LMT 22:

LMT 23:

LMT 24:

2.00E-04-2.50E-04

1.50E-04-2.00E-04

1.00E-04-1.50E-04

5.00E-05-1.00E-04

0.00E+00-5.00E-05

B3 Standalone(2979)

B3 Standalone(2979)

-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 1 2 3 4 5 6LMT 6:

LMT 7:

LMT 8:

LMT 9:

LMT 22:

LMT 23:

LMT 24:

2.00E-04-2.50E-04

1.50E-04-2.00E-04

1.00E-04-1.50E-04

5.00E-05-1.00E-04

0.00E+00-5.00E-05

B3 with other barrels (2981)

B3 with other barrels (2981)