Compton Photon Calorimeter - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

Compton Photon Calorimeter

Description:

Compton Photon Calorimeter – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:25
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 12
Provided by: fran6
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Compton Photon Calorimeter


1
Compton Photon Calorimeter Gregg Franklin, B.
Quinn Carnegie Mellon
  • Design Considerations
  • Light Yield and Photoelectrons
  • Detector Geometry, EGS Simulations, Linearity
  • Decay time
  • Crystal Properties

2
  • Light yield and Photoelectrons

Calculate contribution of finite photoelectrons
per MeV energy deposited
First, write mean total photoelectrons as
(integrated flux) x (Compton cross section d?/dE)
x (bin size)
3
Probability of getting npe photoelectrons from
Compton Photons of energy Ei
? photons giving npe photoelectrons
? photons
Convolution of two gaussians gives variance for
npe,i
If ? energy independent, error on summed energy
is
Finite photoelectron term small if ?Emax large
4
Photoelectrons not a big issue for integrated
energy BUT Electron tagged data may be easier
to analyze with more photoelectrons Other
calibration issues?
1MeV
20 MeV
5 MeV
Measured energy deposited for 1 Mev, 5 MeV, and
20 MeV energy deposions
Simulation includes only photoelectron statistics
and PMT gain variance
Measured Energy Deposited (MeV)
5
  • Detector Geometry, EGS Simulations, Linearity

EGS simulation by Brian Quinn
12.75 MeV photons ISaint-Gobain BrilLanCe
380 LaBr3(Cd)
1 inch diam. 4 inch thick ( 5.3 rad lengths)
511 keV escape peaks
Density 5.29 g/cm3
Energy Deposited
6
Infinite slab still looses energy due to
backscattering
Finite slab energy loss goes up with photon energy
7
Linearity improves with thickness, but is it
important?
4 inches
8
3.0
Analyzing Power of summed Deposited Energy as
function of Deposited Energy Threshold
1.5
EDep Thresh.
25 MeV
change in Analyzing Power
1 change in analyzing power
1 MeV
EDep Thresh.
5 MeV
9
  • Decay Time Consideration
  • Why not use BGO (decay time 300 nS)?
  • Bremstrahlung
  • If 10 kHz and deadtime 3 300 ns, get 1
    deadtime
  • Other
  • Coincidence and singles data
  • Electronics set up for 100 nS gate
  • Larger background from tails
  • Prefer faster decay time (50 ns?)

10
  • Crystal Properties

PbWO4 BGO GSO CeF3 BriLanCe 380 PreLude 420
Density (6/cm3) 8.30 7.13 6.70 6.16 5.29 7.1
Rad Length (cm) 0.90 1.12 1.39 1.68 1.9 1.2
Moliere Radius (cm) 2.0 2.3 2.4 2.6 ? ?
Decay time (ns) 50 300 56600 30 16 41
Light output ( NaI) 0.4 9 45 6.6 165 84
photoelectrons ( / MeV) 8 170 850 125 3150 1600
4 in max Natural decay
11
This summer
  • Need to settle on crystal (at least for test)
  • Test FADC algorithm at CMU this summer
  • Gated and integrating modes (simulate summing
    algorithm)
  • Does ADC sum represent photoelectrons?
  • Test resolution on sources
  • Need to slow down signal?
  • Possibly clip large pulses?
  • Better linearity simulations
  • GEANT4 (Optimization by Guido, some work at CMU)
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com