star-fst-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: Star-fst-l mailing list
List archive
Re: [Star-fst-l] noise vs bias for worst channel and typical channel?
- From: Gerard Visser <gvisser AT indiana.edu>
- To: "star-fst-l AT lists.bnl.gov" <star-fst-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
- Subject: Re: [Star-fst-l] noise vs bias for worst channel and typical channel?
- Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 15:53:14 -0400
hi Xu,
Thank you, this is interesting indeed. It would seem that an anomalous-noise channel has roughly the same dependence on detector capacitance as a typical-noise channel, which indicates this noise is really sampled from the frontend amplifier, not just something independent added after the sampling.
I think that rules out ADC timing issues -- which anyway you have already ruled out by having adjusted the ADC timing -- and it also rules out noise coupled from the power supplies that comes in response to the transient load of the readout process starting (since the samples in question are not being written at the time of the readout.
Your result is definitely worth documenting in reply to the list, so I do that here, re-attaching your plot. (X-axis is bias voltage, Y is ped rms of the channel; or correct me if I'm wrong there, Xu)
Sincerely,
Gerard
On 7/23/2020 3:38 PM, Xu Sun wrote:
Hi Gerard,
Please find the pdf attached.
Best,
Xu
On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 1:39 PM Gerard Visser <gvisser AT indiana.edu <mailto:gvisser AT indiana.edu>> wrote:
Hi Xu,
Can you do pdf or png? eps is kind of a pain windows machine, I
don't know
quite how to view it. Of ocurse I can transfer to linux machine etc. but
if you
can easily make a pdf it will be appreciated.
- GV
On 7/23/2020 2:37 PM, Xu Sun wrote:
> Hi Gerard,
>
> Sorry for the late reply.
> Please find the plot in the attachment.
>
> It took longer than I expected, the most time was used to determine the
channel
> number and corresponding readout order.
> And I found the following feature might be useful to determine the
source of
> those high noise channels.
> I have summarized all the noisy channels in each APV chips (I should do
this in
> the first place), you could find the table below:
>
> APV 0: Physical Channel: 0, 32, 64, 96
> APV 0: Readout Order: 0, 1, 2, 3
> APV 1: Physical Channel: 0, 32, 64, 96
> APV 1: Readout Order: 0, 1, 2, 3
> APV 2: Physical Channel: 0, 32, 64, 96
> APV 2: Readout Order: 0, 1, 2, 3
> APV 3: Physical Channel: 0, 32, 64, 96
> APV 3: Readout Order: 0, 1, 2, 3
> APV 4: Physical Channel: 0, 32, 64, 96
> APV 4: Readout Order: 0, 1, 2, 3
> APV 5: Physical Channel: 0, 32, 64, 96
> APV 5: Readout Order: 0, 1, 2, 3
> APV 6: Physical Channel: 0, 32, 64, 96
> APV 6: Readout Order: 0, 1, 2, 3
> APV 7: Physical Channel: 0, 32, 64, 96
> APV 7: Readout Order: 0, 1, 2, 3
> APV 8: Physical Channel: 0, 32, 64, 96
> APV 8: Readout Order: 0, 1, 2, 3
>
> It turns out the noisy channels are always the first 4 readout
channels.
> I am not sure how this will help to determine the source, but it seems
to
me a
> feature independent of the sensors and might be useful.
>
> Best,
>
> Xu
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 8:26 PM Gerard Visser <gvisser AT indiana.edu
<mailto:gvisser AT indiana.edu>
> <mailto:gvisser AT indiana.edu <mailto:gvisser AT indiana.edu>>> wrote:
>
> Actually if it is just as easy with and without the CMN
correction, I
guess do
> both. I don't know quite what to expect to find, I hope we'll learn
something
> from looking at these plots. Thanks...
>
> - Gerard
>
>
> On 7/20/2020 9:24 PM, Xu Sun wrote:
> > Hi Gerard,
> >
> > Thanks for the suggestion. I will make those plots and send them
to you.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Xu
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 7:44 PM Gerard Visser
<gvisser AT indiana.edu
<mailto:gvisser AT indiana.edu>
> <mailto:gvisser AT indiana.edu <mailto:gvisser AT indiana.edu>>> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Xu,
> >> Do you have a dataset that could be used to make a
plot of
> noise vs. bias
> >> similar to the left hand plot on your slide 10, for the two
cases of:
> >>
> >> - The channel (of a typical chip) which was the worst noise
i.e. this
> would be
> >> one of the few anomalous channels.
> >>
> >> - A single channel of same chip that shows the typical noise.
> >>
> >> This would show clearly if these anomalously noisy
channels'
> noise are related
> >> to the frontend amplifier ( <==> related to detector
capacitance) or
> not. For
> >> instances noise due to soe crosstalk from the digital header
(perhaps
> from ADC
> >> timing wrong) should not have anything to do with detector
capacitance.
> Noise
> >> that we may speculate coming from the power glitch that happens
when readout
> >> starts, would similarly have nothing to do with detector
capacitance.
> >>
> >> I suppose these plots are easiest and most meaningful
without a
> CMN correction,
> >> simply the raw noise seen in pedestal on the channel as a
function of
> detector
> >> bias as in that figure on slide 10.
> >> If it is not too hard to get such plots, I'd look
forward to
> seeing them. Thanks,
> >>
> >> Gerard
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Star-fst-l mailing list
> >> Star-fst-l AT lists.bnl.gov <mailto:Star-fst-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
<mailto:Star-fst-l AT lists.bnl.gov <mailto:Star-fst-l AT lists.bnl.gov>>
> >> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/star-fst-l
>
Attachment:
NoiseScan.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
-
[Star-fst-l] noise vs bias for worst channel and typical channel?,
Gerard Visser, 07/20/2020
-
Message not available
-
Message not available
-
Message not available
-
Message not available
-
Message not available
-
Re: [Star-fst-l] noise vs bias for worst channel and typical channel?,
Gerard Visser, 07/23/2020
- Re: [Star-fst-l] noise vs bias for worst channel and typical channel?, Zhenyu Ye, 07/23/2020
- Re: [Star-fst-l] noise vs bias for worst channel and typical channel?, Gerard Visser, 07/23/2020
-
Re: [Star-fst-l] noise vs bias for worst channel and typical channel?,
Gerard Visser, 07/23/2020
-
Message not available
-
Message not available
-
Message not available
-
Message not available
-
Message not available
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.