Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1. Introduction............................................................................................. 4
Chapter 2. Prototype Design Objectives .................................................................. 4
2.1. Main Chassis ............................................................................................... 5
2.2. Central Shaft................................................................................................ 5
2.3. Source Cap .................................................................................................. 5
2.3.1. Filter Holder ....................................................................................... 6
2.4. LAP Cap...................................................................................................... 7
2.5. Power Supply and Power Circuitry ............................................................. 7
2.6. Connections, Controls, and Displays .......................................................... 7
Chapter 3. Prototype Electrical Systems.................................................................... 9
3.1. Power System Design.................................................................................. 10
3.1.1. Power System Connections, Switches, and Controls ......................... 11
3.1.2. Internal Power Supply ........................................................................ 11
3.1.3. Voltage Regulators ............................................................................. 11
3.2. Input Circuit Design .................................................................................... 11
3.2.1. Light Emitting Diode (LED) .............................................................. 11
3.2.2. LED Intensity Control and LAP Size Selection Control.................... 13
3.3. Output Circuit Design ................................................................................. 13
3.3.1. Large Area Photodiodes (LAPs) ........................................................ 13
3.3.2. Amplifier Circuit ................................................................................ 14
3.3.3. Voltmeter/Display .............................................................................. 15
3.4. Circuit Analysis........................................................................................... 15
3.4.1. Analysis of Output Circuit ................................................................. 17
3.4.2. Analysis of LED/LAP Interaction ...................................................... 18
3.4.3. Analysis of Input Circuit .................................................................... 19
3.4.4. Conclusions Based on Numerical Analysis........................................ 19
Chapter 4. Viability Testing ..................................................................................... 19
4.1. Experimental Set Up ................................................................................... 19
4.2. Data from Viability Tests ............................................................................ 20
4.3. Conclusions from Viability Tests................................................................ 20
Chapter 5. Prototype Construction ........................................................................... 22
5.1. Design of Mechanical Components ............................................................ 22
5.1.1. LAP Cap............................................................................................. 22
5.1.2. LED Cap............................................................................................. 24
5.1.3. Central Shaft....................................................................................... 25
5.1.4. Main Chassis ...................................................................................... 28
5.2. Construction of Mechanical Components ................................................... 28
5.3. Selection and Purchase of Electrical Components ...................................... 28
5.4. Assembly of the Prototype .......................................................................... 28
5.5. Troubleshooting .......................................................................................... 29
5.5.1. Readout Fluctuation ........................................................................... 29
2
1. Introduction
The ATLAS detector calorimeters will use over ten thousand photomultiplier tubes
(PMTs). Due to the large number of PMTs, these will be tested at a number of locations
using identical test benches, constructed for this purpose. It is important that the results
from different PMT testing stations be comparable at the same level. To this end, a
method of intercalibrating the test stands has been developed. The various test benches
assess the quality of PMTs by comparing their response when stimulated by an
assortment of light emissions to the response of a central photodiode. Consequently, we
can intercalibrate the different test stands by testing their internal LAPs. Though no
specific requirements on the accuracy of this intercalibration were specified in the
technical design report of the ATLAS tile calorimeter, it offers a general statement that
the calibration of PMTs during operation should be ~1%. Thus, our goal will be to
achieve similar accuracy.
There are two possible ways of achieving our goal. Either we bring the LAPs to one place
for testing, or we ship the test equipment to each different location. Having the versatility
to operate in either of these ways is preferable and easily obtainable. This requires that
our unit must be compact enough to be easily shipped. Our prototype will operate solely
in DC mode in which the LAP is excited by a continuous, steady level of light. This will
be the most simple to construct, allowing testing to commence as soon as possible. Our
basic design will allow for increased capabilities to be added to future versions. One
improvement is the inclusion of a pulse mode, where the LAP is excited by a short burst
of light. Another possibility is the addition of an intermittent mode, where the photodiode
is excited by the emissions of a radioactive source. The emissions of a radioactive source
are more consistent that other sources, and this could lead to more accurate
measurements. We could also include a control port, which will allow an outside
computer to control all of these modes.
In this thesis, we will discuss the design and construction of a unit to test LAPs in DC
mode. We will present how this design achieves our goals. We will then present the
results of extensive studies of the performance of the test unit.
Another major concern is the elimination of crosstalk. In other words, we must ensure
that electrical signals directed to the source will have no effect upon the LAP's output
signal. The impact of noise is also an issue, and care must be taken to reduce noise
wherever possible. This is especially important in those locations where our signal to
noise ratio is low. Since the signal coming from the LAP is very small, we must be
particularly concerned with minimizing noise prior to amplification of this signal. Finally,
as with all electrical systems, the appropriate measures of electrical protection are needed
to minimize the possibility of damage due to shorts and surges.
2.1. Main Chassis
Unlike the central shaft, the outer casing is not required to be light tight. It must be
durable enough to withstand rough handling during shipping. The main chassis needs to
provide a stable base for our testing, and it must have ample room to place controls and
displays. It should be composed of a conducting metal, which can be grounded. This will
provide shielding against the influence of external electromagnetic fields.
2.2. Central Shaft
The central shaft is where the light from our source will propagate to the LAP under
testing. It must be light tight, meaning that it no outside light can penetrate into its
interior. At one end, it must connect to the source cap, which will hold the light source.
At the other end, it will connect to the LAP cap, which will hold the LAP to be tested.
This design of changeable source and LAP caps will allow us to use this unit with a
variety of input and output sources. Care must be taken to ensure that the connections
between the central shaft and the caps do not allow outside light to enter.
2.3. Source Cap
The source cap will hold our light source, and it must be removable to allow replacement
of that source. By making it interchangeable, we can perform a variety of tests using
different light sources with minimal adjustment to the basic unit. Our design will only
include a light emitting diode (LED) as a light source, but having the ability to upgrade to
allow operation with a pulsed or radioactive source will provide a more complete test of
the LAP characteristics. The cap must lock into position with the central shaft to ensure
that the spacing between the source and the LAP is identical in every test. As mentioned
earlier, this connection must also be light tight. The design will allow for the addition of a
filter holder, but this may not be necessary. A general layout for our test unit is shown in
figure 1.
7. Meter Scale Switch: This adjusts the maximum voltage displayed by the meter,
thereby maximizing the precision of each reading.
8. Power Input Socket: This will be used to connect the test unit to external
power, namely a wall outlet.
9. Source Selection Switch: This adjusts the internal settings to accept either
110VAC or 220VAC as external power.
close enough to 480nm to suit our needs, with a nominal intensity of half a candela. The
specifications for this LED can be found in appendix B.
12
In order to determine the total power emitted by the LED we must then integrate over all
possible wavelengths:
The fraction of this luminous power that reaches the photodiode will be determined by
the geometry of our experimental layout.
3.2.2. LED Intensity Control and LAP Size Selection Control
The function of both of these controls is to determine the amount of current sent to the
LED. Our goal is to produce a LAP output voltage near 5VDC for the high setting of the
LED intensity control and a LAP output voltage near 0.1VDC for the low setting of the
LED intensity control. It should produce these results for each size of LAP being tested.
This is complicated by the LEDs non-linear relationship between the input current and
intensity. In order to produce the desired results, we will combine the LED intensity
control with the LAP size selection control in the same configuration as a digital
multiplexer. Each of the fifteen possible settings of these two controls will divert the
current through a resistor unique to that setting. The resistor chosen will restrict the flow
of current to the LED to produce the required light intensity. The values of the resistors
were determined by experiment using a control photodiode. The original design neglected
to include the diodes in series with each resistor. Failure to include these allowed the
current to flow back through many different paths, increasing the current delivered to the
LED.
3.3. Output Circuit Design
The purpose of the output circuit is to measure the light produced by the input circuit and
display the results. It will consist of the photodiode, the photodiode amplifier circuit, and
the meter/display. It is essentially a powerful light meter. A schematic of the output
circuit is shown in figure 6.
3.3.1. Large Area Photodiodes
The photodiodes to be tested will be Hamamatsu model numbers S3590-03, S2744-03,
and S6337-01. Their active surface areas are 100 sq. mm, 200 sq. mm, and 400 sq. mm,
respectively. These photodiodes have shunt resistances which are greater than 1M (as
we will see, an exact figure is unnecessary), and generate an output current of 0.26A per
watt of incident light at 480nm. This is a slight approximation since our chosen LED will
emit light centered on 465nm. The equivalent circuit for these photodiodes can be seen in
figure 8.
13
14
15
17
IL = IF
Now we substitute the values of these currents:
0.26PI = VP/20
Finally, we obtain VO in terms of PI:
VO = 2x105VP = 2x1055.2PI = 1.04x106PI
3.4.2. Analysis of LED/LAP Interaction
The power of light incident on the photodiode (PI) is dependent upon the intensity (I0) of
the LED, the area (A) of the photodiode, and the distance (d) between the LED and the
photodiode. The intensity of the LED will be given in candelas (cd). To keep things
simple, we will use the approximation that the distance between the LED and every part
of the photodiode is the same. We will use the result shown earlier in section 3.2.1 for the
combined intensity emitted by the LED, which relates the total power emitted by the
LED, ITotal, to the power emitted at the peak frequency, I0:
We can determine the power that reaches the LAP from simple geometry:
Here, A is the active area of the LAP, and d is the distance between LED and LAP.
This ignores associated with adding filters in the light's path. It also ignores additional
losses that might be caused by the directivity of the LED where the power is not
uniformly distributed across the face of the LAP.
We can now combine this result with the formula from section 3.4.1 to obtain a value for
VO:
18
At this point, all we need is to determine the LED intensity (I0) in terms of the voltage
applied to the LED. Unfortunately, this relationship is non-linear. In addition, the
specifications we want are given as graphs rather than equations or equivalent
components, and this further complicates matters. A quick order of magnitude estimate
will shed some light on the situation. Assuming that A and d2 are of the same magnitude
simplifies things dramatically. We discover that to produce an output voltage on the order
of 1VDC, we need an intensity of 1mcd (millicandela).
In order to produce the low light levels required, the current supplied to the LED will be
very small. This region of operation is not shown in the product specifications. This limits
what may be accomplished with calculations, and forces us to rely upon experimentation
to obtain the desired operating voltages and currents.
3.4.4. Conclusions Based on Numerical Analysis
The primary factors that will determine the output for a given LED are the intensity of the
LED and the LED/LAP separation. The LED intensity will be controlled through the
choice of resistors in our circuit, and these values will be refined through further
experimentation. The LED will be operating at very low current levels to produce the
values needed for our tests. The LED/LAP separation will be a fixed parameter, and once
it is built into the design it will not change. Thus, the choice for this separation is a very
important element that we need to determine through viability tests.
4. Viability Testing
4.1. Experimental Set Up
Our goal at this stage was to ensure that the LED would operate normally in the region we
expect it function, and to ensure that there were no major surprises waiting for us. To this
end we set up an extremely crude version of our apparatus. A variable resistor was placed
in series with a standard power supply in order to create a variable power supply. This
was used to supply power to our LED, while a meter was attached to measure the voltage
across the LED. This measurement is what we have called the input voltage. The S359003 LAP, which has an active surface that is 10mm on a side, was attached to an amplifier
circuit. This pair was then laid in the light tight box facing the LED. A second power
supply was used to power the amplifier, and its output was run to a second voltage meter.
This voltage is what we have called the output voltage. The LAP/LED separation (d) was
set using a ruler. The alignment of the two components was made by visual inspection
while the components lay on their sides in the box. The LAP and LED were not secured
in these positions.
4.2. Data from Viability Tests
19
We took measurements for separations of 5cm, 7.5cm, 10cm, and 12.5cm. For each
distance the input voltage was varied from 2.4VDC (the lowest our setup would allow),
and increased until our output voltage reached the level of amplifier saturation (around
9.7VDC). The results from this test are shown in table 1, and this data is also presented as
a plot in figure 10.
mixer) or by changing to an LED with a broader illumination. Of course, this effect also
disappears by increasing the LED/LAP separation. We have decided to operate at a
separation of 5cm. At this range the separation is large enough that fringe effects are still
minimal. It is also large enough to allow for the insertion of a filter holder and filters. At
this range, the LED is strong enough that any losses in such filters will pose no serious
problem.
21
5. Prototype Construction
5.1. Design of Mechanical Components
The design of the mechanical components began with the LAP and proceeded outward.
The LAP cap was designed around the photodiode. Next, the LED cap was made to
match up with the LAP Cap, and then the central shaft was designed to hold both caps.
Finally, the main chassis was designed around the central shaft.
5.1.1. LAP Cap
Checking the dimensional outlines of the various LAPs gave us the minimum size
required for the LAP frames, which are designed to hold the LAPs in precise position. In
order to accommodate three different sizes of photodiodes we need three different frames.
The three frames were made with the same outer dimensions and placement of retaining
22
screw holes, making them interchangeable. The mounting surface was recessed to allow
the LAP frames to be positioned correctly.
Making our cap function with any of the three sizes of LAPs created another problem.
The placement of the pins is different for each size of photodiode. The different pin
placements were confined to a small enough space that using separate connections for
each LAP size would have been problematic. Instead we elected to make the connections
by hand, after the LAP and frame had already been attached to the cap. Since the
separation between the two pins was the same for each size, a two-pin connector was
used to make the connection.
A second layer, to which the amplifier would be attached, was placed a short distance
behind the first. Placing the amplifier as close to the LAP as possible will minimize the
effects of noise. Any noise entering the system prior to amplification would be amplified
along with our signal. Despite this, enough space was kept in between so that we could
make our manual connections.
Both layers are held in place inside a rectangular tube. This tube would fit snugly inside
the central shaft. The overlap of end caps and central shaft would help to eliminate any
possibility of light passing in between and reaching the central shaft. Rails were allowed
to extend along opposite sides with the intention of having them slide into grooves inside
the central shaft. This would help us to precisely position the LAP cap.
A retaining pin was designed to pass through both tubes, the LAP cap, and the central
shaft, as another aid to LAP cap positioning. A plate was installed inside the LAP cap to
isolate the retaining pin holes from that end of the light tight chamber.
A second pair of holes were added, one to allow us to bring in power to the amplifier and
one to take our signal out. We elected to make external connections so that we can ensure
good electrical connections. Our initial intention was to fill these holes after our signal
and power lines were passed through, but it turns out that these holes do not degrade the
light-tight nature of our central shaft.
A plate was placed over the rear of the cap to seal it, and a rim was left extended around it
to provide something to grip when removing the cap. The interior surface was painted flat
black to minimize reflection. Finally, decals were added to identify the lines leaving the
LAP cap and ensure its proper orientation. A scale drawing of the LAP cap is shown in
figure 12.
23
25
Figure 15. Scale Drawing of the Central Shaft with Caps Attached.
27
28
5.5. Troubleshooting
A number of difficulties arose during the construction of this prototype. What follows is a
short description of each problem and how we resolved them.
5.5.1. Readout Fluctuation
The first problem encountered were small, random fluctuations in the readout. Initially it
was thought that the cause might be the absence of a load resistor. A one mega-ohm load
resistor was installed, but this did not solve the problem. We discovered that the problem
occurred in the power provided to the digital panel meter. Originally we had supplied
power to the digital panel meter via a dedicated voltage regulator, which received its
power from the units power supply. Unfortunately, the meter required an independent
source, completely isolated from the signals power supply. This was solved by adding a
9V battery with the sole purpose of providing power to the meter. The previous diagrams
include this modification.
5.5.2. Low Output
The next difficulty was that the meters readings were significantly different from our
expectations. The resistors selected by the intensity control and the LAP size selection
control were chosen to achieve the appropriate output levels for each setting. When we
tested photodiodes, our reading were less than half of what we had intended. We found
that the original multiplexer design allowed current to flow through more than one
resistor by flowing back through other resistors. This was solved by the installation of
diodes in series with each resistor in order to prevent these currents. These diodes are
shown in the previous diagrams. Addition of the diodes forced us to change the values of
all of these resistors. The output values still differ from our desired levels, and we believe
that the new resistor values are at fault. It was decided that correcting these resistors
would be postponed until a later date since the output range is adequate for our
measurements.
5.5.3. Internal Capacitance
Our next hurdle was a capacitance problem. When testing the stability of our
measurements with time we discovered that the output values would slowly fall. After
taking readings for two weeks we found that this decay was very close to an exponential
function with a time constant of about 6 days. This data is shown in figure 16.
The large time constant could only occur with a large value of resistance. Consequently,
we examined the circuit around the largest resistors. It was found that the connection
between the one mega-ohm load resistor and ground was loose. At this time we realized
that the amplifier circuit has a built-in ten kilo-ohm load resistor, making the one mega29
ohm load resistor redundant. We removed the redundant resistor, and this solved the
problem.
30
32
33
34
The temperature correction seems to work well for the small photodiodes. Though the
first two points, the data from the first session, do not match up with the other data points,
they agree with each other. This may indicate that another environmental factor is
affecting our data. The temperature corrected data for the large photodiodes, however,
seems to be worse than the uncorrected data. This indicates that the temperature
correction, derived from and used successfully on the small photodiodes, cannot be
applied to the data for the medium and large LAPs.
It appears that the data taken in each session was more closely related than the overall
standard deviation. A compilation of the data by session is shown in tables 7 and 8. When
the data is separated out on a session to session basis, the high intensity data has an
average standard deviation of 0.64%. Temperature corrections were made, and this data is
shown in tables 9 and 10. The high intensity data then has a standard deviation of 0.69%.
It should be noted that the data improves significantly for the small photodiodes, and the
standard deviation is approximately 0.40%. The same correction applied to the larger
photodiodes makes the data worse. Once again, this indicates the need for a separate set
of temperature corrections for the larger photodiodes.
As suggested earlier, the correlation of the data from session to session indicates that
there may be additional environmental factors that are affecting our readings. The shift in
our data from one session to the next may be caused by a single factor, such as humidity
for example. It may be possible to make corrections similar to those made for
temperature.
One possible method of taking all possible environmental factors into account is to
simply compare the performance of the photodiode being tested with the performance of
a control photodiode. We can approximate this to a limited degree in the data already
taken by treating the first photodiode as our control. Since the temperature drifted over
the measurements, temperature corrections are included. This is shown in table 11.
The standard deviation of the ratio of the high intensity readings is less than 1.00% for
most of the photodiodes. It is curious that the standard deviation deteriorates as we move
down the chart. This may be a result of the delay between the testing of the photodiode
and the control. Since the diodes were tested in order, the further down the diode is listed,
the larger the delay between its test and that of the control.
To present this data in the form of a graph, we have taken the ratio of these data points
and scaled them by a factor of 3.20 in order to compare them easily with previous graphs.
These graphs are shown in figures 27 and 28.
41
42
7. Conclusions
The test unit is functioning as designed, and by comparison with a control we exceed the
precision we had sought. In normal operation, straight measurement of the diode
response, it gives results good to 1.89%. This falls just short of the precision sought. By
comparing our measurements with those of a control we can give results good to
approximately 0.80%, which exceeds our expectations.
43
44
Table 10. Compilation of Large LAP Data by Session with Temperature Corrections
45
47
Name
Amplifier
9V Battery Holder
9V Battery
Power Cord
Panel Meter
110VAC Fuse
220VAC Fuse
Fuse Holder (2)
Power Selector Knob
Intensity Control Knob
Area Selector Knob
Meter Scale Knob
Source LED
+15 Power Indicator
-15 Power Indicator
100mm2 LAP
200mm2 LAP
400mm2 LAP
Power Supply
Power Switch
Power Selector Switch
DC Test Switch
LED Intensity Control
LAP Area Selector
Meter Scale Switch
AC Power Inlet
Thermometer
Input V Regulator
+Output V Regulator
-Output V Regulator
Description
LAP output amplifier (UTA)
Radio Shack #27-326
Duracell 9V Battery
IEC-US Power Cord (Standard Computer Cord)
4 Digit LCD Digital Panel Meter (MPJA#7160ME)
0.50A Fuse, 5mm x 20mm
0.25A Fuse, 5mm x 20mm
Bussman HTB-62M for 5mm x 20mm fuses
Mouser #5164-1510
Mouser #5164-1500
Mouser #5164-1500
Mouser #5164-1510
Nichia #NSPB310A
Mouser #351-5004
Mouser #351-5004
Hamamatsu #S3590-03
Hamamatsu #S2744-03
Hamamatsu #S6337-01
International Power IHAD15-0.4 (MPJA#6638)
Rocker Switch On/Off (Mouser #107DS850S-22)
Rotary, 2 Pos/3 Poles, Non-Short (Mouser #10WA166)
Miniature Toggle Switch (Mouser #10TA420)
Rotary, 5Pos/1 Pole, Non-Short (Mouser #10WA164)
Rotary, 3 Pos/1 Pole, Non-Short (Mouser #10WA164)
Rotary, 3 Pos/3 Pole, Non-Short (Mouser #10WA166)
IEC Plug (Mouser #161-0707-7-187)
Taylor 9940 Panel Mount Thermometer
+5VDC Voltage Regulator (511-L7805CV)
+12VDC Voltage Regulator (511-L7812CV)
-12VDC Voltage Regulator (511-L7912CV)
48
Appendix B. Specifications
B.1. Large Area Photo Diode Specifications
B.1.1. S3590-03 and S2744-03 Data
49
50
51
52
53
character height
9VDC powered
Input impedance > 100M
Auto polarity
Through panel mounting
WT: 1 lb.
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
REFERENCES
1. P. Horowitz and W. Hill, The Art of Electronics, Cambridge University Press
(1980)
2. Mohammed S. Ghaussi, "Electronic Devices and Circuits: Discrete and Integrated",
Holt, Rinehart, and Winston (1985)
3. The manual of "Photomultipliers Data Handbook", Philips Corporation (1990)
4. M. Bosman et al., Development of a Scintillator Tile Sampling Hadron Calorimeter
with Longitudinal Tile Configuration, CERN/DRDC (1993)
5. ATLAS Technical Proposal, CERN/LHCC (1994)
6. E. Berger et al., Construction and Performance of an Iron-Scintillator Hadron
Calorimeter with Longitudinal Tile Configuration, CERN/LHCC (1994)
7. The manual of "Silicon Photodiodes and Charge Sensitive Amplifiers for Scintillation
Counting and High Energy Physics", Hamamatsu Corporation (1995)
8. The manual of "Photodiodes", Hamamatsu Corporation (1995)
9. Z. Ajaltouni et al., Response of the ATLAS Tile Calorimeter Prototype to Muons,
CERN/PPE (1996)
10. ATLAS Tilecal Collaboration, ATLAS Tile Calorimeter Technical Design Report,
CERN/LHCC (1996)
11. ATLAS Collaboration (Calorimetry and Data Acquisition), Results from a
Combined Test of an Electromagnetic Liquid Argon Calorimeter with a Hadronic
Scintillating Tile Calorimeter, CERN/PPE (1996)
12. ATLAS Tilecal Collaboration, Technical Specifications of the Test Bench for the
Test of the ATLAS Tile Calorimeter Photomultipliers, CERN/LHCC (1996)
13. V. Reece, ITC Submodule Assembly Handbook, CERN (1998)
14. ATLAS Collaboration (Calorimetry and Data Acquisition), Results from a new
Combined Test of an Electromagnetic Liquid Argon Calorimeter with a Hadronic
Scintillating Tile Calorimeter, CERN/PPE (2000)
98