silicon photomultipliers for accelerator and medical applications

Sergey Vinogradov 3rd oPAC Topical workshop on Beam diagnostics Vienna 8 May 2014 1

Silicon Photomultipliers for

accelerator and medical applications

Dr Sergey VinogradovDr Sergey Vinogradov

The QUASAR group at the University of Liverpool and the Cockcroft Institute, UKThe QUASAR group at the University of Liverpool and the Cockcroft Institute, UK

The Solid State Physics Department, P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute, Russia The Solid State Physics Department, P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute, Russia

Content

◙ IntroductionSiPM features and parameters

◙ Photon detection with SiPM Photon detection types

◙ SiPM application overviewTokai-to-Kamioka (T2K) – neutrino detectionPositron Emission Tomography (PET) – medical imagingBeam Loss Monitoring (BLM) – Cherenkov fiber BLM

◙ Summary


Conventional SiPM:photon number resolving detector

SiPM = Array of independent limited Geiger mode APD pixels

with poly-silicon resistors for breakdown quenching

and with common output producing a sum of binary signals

Initially developed by MEPhI/Pulsar, Russia (~ 2000)

Most popular SiPM on market – Hamamatsu MPPC

(MultiPixel Photon Counter, 2008)

Yu. Musienko, CERN, 2011

R. Mirzoyan et al., NDIP, 2008 (SiPM MEPhI)


SiPM drawbacks:Crosstalk, Afterpulsing, Nonlinearity

primary avalanche

afterpulsesΔ time

Output

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Number of photons, Nph

Nu

mb

er o

f fi

red

pix

els

, Ns

Ideal response<Ns>=<Nph>

Nonlinear response<Ns>=f(<Nph>)

Output SignalDistribution

Equivalent SignalDistribution

Incident PhotonDistribution


SiPM parameters

◙ High gain low noise fast time multiplicationAccompanied by high gain related drawbacks

―Crosstalk and afterpulsing

◙ Key parameters―Photon Detection Efficiency ~ 20 – 40%―Dark count rate ~ 0.1 – 1 Mcps/mm2

―Crosstalk ~ 5 – 40%―Afterpulsing ~ 5 – 20%―Pixel recovery (single electron response) time ~ 10 – 300 ns―Pixel density ~ 103 – 104 mm-2

―Spectral range ~ 350 … 900 nm (for Si, but also IR InGaAs)―Active areas: 1x1 … 6x6 mm-2

―Arrays: 1x 16 … 8x8 (monolithic), 12x12 (hybrid)

◙ A lot of space for improvements in performance byNew designsAdvanced technology


Detection types

◙ Single photon counting - binary detection (PDE, DCR, dead time) –Single photon counting - binary detection (PDE, DCR, dead time) – disadvantageousdisadvantageous◙ Detection of short weak light pulsesDetection of short weak light pulses - - highly competitive with PMT and APDhighly competitive with PMT and APD

◙ Photon number resolution (SNR, noise-to-signal ratio, Photon number resolution (SNR, noise-to-signal ratio, σσnn//μμnn) )

◙ Time-of-flight detection (transit time spread, time resolution, Time-of-flight detection (transit time spread, time resolution, σσtt) )

◙ Detection of time-varying signals (MTF, signal reconstruction)Detection of time-varying signals (MTF, signal reconstruction) - - challengeablechallengeable


SiPM application areas

◙ AcceleratorsSiPM (MEPhI) small HCAL (MINICAL), DESY, 2003

MPPC (Hamamatsu), T2K, 2005-2009

MAPD vs. MPPC at LHC CMS HCAL, 2009-2012

Various SiPM at NA61/SHINE, LHC

RICH for ALICE (LHC)

CALICE Hadronic Calorimeter for ILC

FermiLab, Jefferson Lab calorimeter upgrade projects

CLIC STF3, Beam Loss Monitoring

◙ AstrophysicsSiPM (MEPhI) cosmic ray study at International Space Station, 2005

MPPC, First G-APD Cherenkov telescope (FACT), 2011

Cherenkov light detection of air showers (MAGIC upgrade, CTA)

◙ TelecommunicationsDeep space optical links (NASA & JPL Mars exploration program)

Quantum cryptography (Paul Scherrer Inst., Geneva Univ.)Sergey Vinogradov 3rd oPAC Topical workshop on Beam diagnostics Vienna 8 May 2014 7

Tokai-to-Kamioka (T2K)Tokai-to-Kamioka (T2K)long-baseline neutrino oscillation


Selection of SiPM for T2K

◙ RequirementsOperational in a magnetic field

Compact to fit the limited space inside the magnet

Good stability and low cost for a large number of readout channels (60 000)

Green light sensitivity (WLS fiber)

Photon detection efficiency > than that of a MAPMT

Sub-ns time resolution

◙ UncertaintiesMetrology / characterisation / selection

Reproducibility

Reliability / aging


Results of T2K with SiPM

◙ T2K collaboration selected MPPC in 2005T2K collaboration selected MPPC in 2005◙ Mass production of MPPC started in 2008 Mass production of MPPC started in 2008 ◙ 60K MPPCs have been tested and installed in 2008 – 200960K MPPCs have been tested and installed in 2008 – 2009◙ Experiment started in 2009Experiment started in 2009◙ Observation of neutrino oscillations has been reported in 2011Observation of neutrino oscillations has been reported in 2011

◙ KEKKEK◙ TRIUMPHTRIUMPH◙ ImperialImperial◙ INRINR


SiPM in medical imaging applications


PET with SiPM

◙ Positron Emission Tomography (PET) – medical imagingPositron Emission Tomography (PET) – medical imaging


Magnetic Resonance Imaging + PET

◙ Key constrains:Magnetic field

Limited space


Time-Of-Flight PET

Target objective for SiPM time resolution: 100 ps


Selection of SiPM for PET

◙ Energy resolution (Photon Number Resolution)~ 10% @ 511 KeV ~ PMT (limited by scintillator at ~8%)

◙ Time Resolution~ a few ns for conventional PET

→ 100 ps for TOF PET

◙ MRI compatibility for PET/MRI◙ Hamamatsu MPPC 3x3 mm2, 50 um pixel (GE, Siemens)

◙ Philips digital SiPM 4x4 mm2 (Philips TOF-PET scanner)

◙ SensL SPM 3x3 mm2 (Samsung brain PET/MRI)

◙ Brain PET/MRI Scanner ◙ (Samsung Research)


BLM: Cherenkov fiber detection


BLM: first evaluation of SiPM

D. Di Giovenale et al., NIMA, 2011SPARC accelerator, Frascati, INFN

FERMI@Elettra, Synchrotrone Trieste

MPPC, 1mm2, 400 pixels

Quartz fiber 300 μm, 100 m

Dark count noise: negligible

Electronic noise: negligible

Spectral dispersion in fiber: n( ) →∆t( ) 𝜆 𝜆 ~ 3 ns @100 m

τfall ~ 10 ns → deconvolutionSummary◙Compact low cost BLM

~1m-scale resolution @100m


BLM: first experiment at CTF3

QUASAR group, University of Liverpool, Cockcroft

Institute, CERN

(L. Devlin et al., 2012-2013)

More info: welcome to 11:45, May 09 E. Nebot del Busto


Challenges for SiPM in BLM:saturation, recovering, duplications

◙ Transient nonlinearity of SiPM responseLarge rectangular light pulse: Nph > Npix; Tpulse > Trec

Peak – initial avalanche events in ready-to-triggering pixels

Plateau – repetitive recovering and re-triggering of pixels

Fall – final recovering (without photons, but with afterpulses!)

4 us pulse 50 ns pulse


Summary

◙ SiPM technology: breakthrough in photon detectionPhoton number resolution at room temperature

Silicon technology / mass production / reliability / price

Highly competitive in short (< μs) pulse detection

Fast progress in improvements

◙ Welcome to SiPM applicationScintillation

Cherenkov

Laser pulse

And more…

SNR performance (relative to ideal) in nanosecond light pulse detection by 1mm2 PDs

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%

1.E+0 1.E+1 1.E+2 1.E+3 1.E+4 1.E+5 1.E+6 1.E+7 1.E+8 1.E+9

Number of photons per pulse

Det

ecti

ve Q

uan

tum

Eff

icie

ncy

SSPM potential

DAPD Amplification Tech.

MPPC-50 Hamamatsu

APD

PIN - photodiode

PMT


Sergey Vinogradov Seminars on SiPM at the Cockcroft Institute 2 December 2013 21G. Collazuol, PhotoDet, 2012

Acknowledgement & References

Thanks to my colleagues on CLIC BLM project @QUASAR group

L. Devlin and C.P. Welsch (University of Liverpool, Cockcroft Institute)

E.N. Del Busto and M. Kastriotou (University of Liverpool, CERN)

References[1] CLIC collaboration, “A multi-TeV linear collider based on CLIC technology - CLIC Conceptual Design Report”, Technical report, CERN, Geneva, 2012.

[2] D. Di Giovenale, L. Catani, and L. Fr¨ohlich, “A read-out system for online monitoring of intensity and position of beam losses in electron linacs,” NIMA 665, 33–39, 2011.

[3] M. Panniello, L. Devlin, P. Finocchiaro, A. Pappalardo, and C. P. Welsch, “SPECTROSCOPIC CHARACTERIZATION OF NOVEL SILICON PHOTOMULTIPLIERS,” Proc. BIW2012, Newport News, VA, USA, 2012.

[4] E.B. Holzer, J. van Hoorne, S. Mallows “Fiber Based BLM System R&D at CERN – Quantitative loss measurement with long bunch trains”, Proc. HB2012, Beijing, China, 2012.

[5] L. Devlin et al., “UPDATE ON BEAM LOSS MONITORING AT CTF3 FOR CLIC”, Proc. IBIC2013, Oxford, UK, 2013.

[6] E.N. Del Busto et al, “Monte Carlo simulations of beam losses in the test beam line of CTF3”, Proc. IBIC 2013, Oxford, UK, 2013.


The end

Thank you for your attention

Questions?

[email protected]

+44 1925 60 31 97


mailto:[email protected]

SiPM performance metrics for BLM

◙ Loss scenarios (single or a few separate locations)Amplitude → photons → particles per location (PNR)

Transit time to rising edge → loss location (TTSpread)

Separation of loss locations ― Modulation transfer function (MTF) ?― Pulse pair resolution ?

PNR

TTS

New metrics ?


silicon photomultipliers for accelerator and medical applications

Documents

beam diagnosticsvienna

popular sipm

sipm parametershigh

conventional sipm

various sipm

sipm drawbacks

cockcroft institute

sergey vinogradovseminars