Energy and Timing Measurements

Part 2. Timing Measurement

Lecture 6-b
 Time Measurements….
measuring the arrival time of the signal pulse
 Rise time form vs. number of stages

the influence of TFAs – how many stages ?!

 Rise time form vs. multiple RC integrators

 One dominant time constant best for timing measurements

 about the ratio τdiff / τint

• Note that the need to limit the pulse width incurs a

significant reduction in the output signal amplitude
• e.g. at a differentiator time constant τdiff = 100ns = 10 τint
the output signal amplitude is only 80% of the value for
τdiff =∞, i.e. a system with no low-frequency roll-off
 Choice of rise time in a timing system

σt - Timing Jitter
< >

tc - detector-FEE rise time

noise dominates rise time degradation
time resolution  time resolution
tra - amplifier (chain) rise time

 the cumulative rise time

- the noise bandwidth in a single

RC time constant is ~ 0.55 / tra
- as the number of cascades
increases, the noise bandwidth is:
maximum
slope
point
 Time walk
Accuracy of timing
measurement is limited
by two factors:
- time jitter (due to noise)
- time walk *)
(due to amplitude & rise time variations)
*) - if the rise time is known and constant,
the “time walk” can be compensated in
software event-by-event by measuring the
pulse height and correcting the timing !!
- if rise time vary (e.g. HP-Ge Det.) this
technique fails!

Hardware: -threshold lowest practical level (i.e. > noise)

or compensation technique (e.g. CFD)
Leading edge vs Zero Crossing
 Time Walk and Time Jitter in Timing Measurements

Time Walk in LE discriminator due to:

- amplitude and rise time variations
- charge sensitivity

Time jitter in LE discriminator due to:

- noise on the Input Signal
T.J. Paulus, IEEE Trans. on Nucl. Sci., Vol. NS-32, No. 3, June 1985
- pulse high variation
Timing Electronics and Fast Timing Methods with Scintillation Detectors
Influence of noise on “machine time” signals

Time jitter (nothing to do

with time walk)
 Explanation of the WALK effect

Reducing the walk effect by zero-crossing

 → ∫(t)

The pulse shape at the detector output

Principle of constant fraction timing

 Constant Fraction Timing

- two ways of implementing CFD

The CFD can be analyzed as a

Implementing an “active threshold”, namely Pulse Shaper, comprising the
the threshold is derived from the signal passing - delay (td)
it through an attenuator Vt = f Vs ( f < 1) - attenuator (f)
- subtraction
for simplicity assume a linear
Leading Edge 

and 

so the signal applied to the input is 

when the input signal crosses the

threshold level 

and the comparator fires at the time “t”

at a Constant Fraction of the rise time
independent of peak amplitude 
If the delay td is reduced so that the pulse
transitions at the signal and threshold inputs
overlap, the threshold level VT 

That means the comparator fires at “t”:

Independent of both amplitude and rise time …

 Amplitude Rise time Compensation ( ARC) Ortec 584
Signal formation in a CFD & ARC-CFD
Constant-Fraction Discrimination
for TFC Bipolar Signals

vs.
Constant-Fraction Discrimination
for or ARC Timing
Signal formation in a CFD & ARC-CFD
 - r.m.s. value of the input noise
- CFD attenuation factor
- mean-square value of the
input noise
- autocorrelation function of
the input noise
- CFD shaping delay
- for uncorrelated noise /signals:
Timing uncertainty due to noise-
induced Jitter for TFF timing signal noise
For ARC timing with linear input
signal the slope of the CFD signal
at zero crossing is

Combining former equations, we get

the expressions for noise-induced jitter
With linear input signals:
- for TCF timing

- for ARC timing

ORTEC- Timing Spectroscopy AN-42

Ortec 583B , Ortec 584, Ortec 935, ESN-4000

ORTEC- Timing Spectroscopy AN-42
a) Timing measurements 
Detectors for Timing and their FEE
- Scintillator & Photomultiplier assembly
- MCPs & MCP-PMT and Fast Preamplifiers
and very briefly about other ultra-fast detectors
- Semiconductor detectors (Si, Diamond) & their
Preamplifier ( CSP vs. Current )
 Transmission Lines
• Internal resistance of the source ( Ri )
• Characteristic impedance of the line ( ZL )
• Load resistance ( RL )
• Length of the line ( L )

Wave propagation along a Transmission Line

 for all cases ZL ~ 50 Ω

Ri ~ 50 Ω RL ~ 50 Ω

RL ~ 60 Ω

Ri ~ 40 Ω RL ~ 50 Ω
 Scintillators & Photomultiplier tubes (PMT)
Detector

Photomultiplier tube - (PMT)

Gain ~ 106  sec. secondary electrons / photo-electron

Different geometries of PMT

Circular-cage type PMT

 Signal output problem and the solution

Countermeasures for very fast response circuits

(the “miraculous” (small) series resistor and not parallel capacitor)

The effect of damping

resistor on ringing

( remember the influence

of resistor in the quality
factor of an oscillator or
larger capacitor value in a
low-pass frequency filter :)
C - filter-change the frequency !
Rs –oscillation damper !
How to extract a signal for the pulse shape analysis
from the last dynode

Extracted
dynode
current
path

If the Op. Amp has less than 10 Ghz BW

and 20 dB gain….

I strongly advise you do not believe

in some other “MVP“ in the field, who
are wrongly advising you to use the
dynode signal for best timing
performance…It is simple wrong!
 Going from PMT ( Photomultiplier Tube)
to MCP (Microchannel Plate)

• from a discrete dynode structure to a

continuous distributed dynode structure but also
• more than 8 orders of magnitude (volume) scaled down
design in volume (102 in length and > 103 in diameter)
Multi-channel Plate Detectors

Electroding
(on both face)

Channels - e initial velocity ( ~1eV)

- channel length/diameter ratio

Kc - constant
 Metallized ++ Metallized+

• Much stable operation vs. external high magnetic fields in comparison with PMT
• lower gain but in chevron configuration the gain ~106
• lower power consumption (gain vs. HV)

Spacer ??
- Cu-Be
- FR4
- Cu (soft)
- Cu-Au plated
MCP assembly in chevron configuration
Alankrita Isha Mrigakshi- Study and Test of MCPs used in dual Ion Spectrometer of MMS mission by NASA
MCPs in Single, vs. Chevron and Z-stack configurations

Gain:
103-104

106

108
 MCP gain dependence vs.
MCP gain dependence vs.
α - parameter and
channel diameter and technology
stage configuration

Comparison of gain characteristics of

Comparison of gain characteristics of three different types of 2-stage MCPs
various single and multi stage MCPs
 Comparison of timing characteristics of Chevron 2-stage
MCP-PMT, one with 6 µm and another with 12 µm pore diam.

20 0.5 ns/div
mV
/div
 MCP based PMT & Anode Return Path Problem
Current out of MCP is inherently fast- but return path depends on where
in the tube the signal is, and it can be long and so rise-time is variable

Incoming
Photocathode to MCP Input gap < 1mm
Particle
Trajectory
Photocathode
MCP Input
MCP Output
Signal
Anode surface path

MCP Output to anode gap < 1mm

The Signal is a
Would like to have return path be short, and located right next current and not
to signal current crossing MCP-OUT to Anode Gap a potential
10cm wire; 0.2mm diam  150 nH 10 pF ~ impedance Signal & Return
Impedance @ 1Ghz ~ 1 kOhm @ 1GHz ~ 1.5 kOhm Load
 AC coupled return path compensation solution

Anode Signal - Return GND Current Current from MCP-OUT

issue & Ion Feedback Current effect
- MCP-PMT window
- Photocathode

- MCP Input
- MCP Output

- Anode/Grid structure

G--- grid
A --- Anode
 CVD - Diamond Detectors

• a 30 x 30 mm2 detector with 9 strips; pitch of 3.1 mm

• a 20 x 20 mm2 pixel detector ( pixel size of 4.5 x 4.5 mm2
(the first large-area CVD diamond detectors installed at SIS)

E. Bierdermann et al, CVD-Diamond Detectors…Nucl. Phys. B 78 (1999), 533

• Large area ~ 36 cm2
• Electron/hole saturation velocity of 107cm/s
• Very high breakdown field 107 V/cm
• Highest room temperature thermal
conductivity of any material
 Two “optical grade” CVD and ~ 100µm thickness

The largest diamond detector of 60 x 40 mm2

and ~200µm thickness <0> in the focal plane
detector of a magnetic spectrometer

E. Bierdermann et al, The use of CVD-Diamond for heavy ions… Diamond and Related Materials 10(2010),1770
b) Ultra-fast Timing Circuits and Signal
- Time-stamp
- Time-walk & Time-jitter as perturbation effects
* Timing – time stamp but actually timing means
measurement of time intervals ( from fs to ms )
Walk effect - variation of time stamp (timing) caused
by signal variation in amplitude and/or rise time
Jitter effect - timing fluctuations caused by noise and/or
statistical fluctuations in the detector (intrinsic noise)
 two identical signal will not always trigger at the
same point (time stamp) time variation dependent
on the amplitude of fluctuation – slope/noise ratio
Ultra-fast branch of a CSP
 Standard current amplifier solution

G1 G2

G1 > G2  to minimize S/N ratio

HSMP 3862 series

tr ~ 1.2 ns
(10 to 90%)
Imax (1µs)~ 1A
Peak Inverse Voltage ~50V
THS 3201/ THS 3202 Tj –Max. Junction Temperature ~ 150°C
ultra-fast current feedback amplifier (OK to be used in vacuum)
The use of Mini Circuits microwave monolithic
integrated circuit (MMIC)

• de facto, Darlington amplifiers

offers the RF designer multi-stage
performance in packages that
look like a discrete transistor

• wide bandwidth, impedance match,

and a choice of gain and output power
levels result from their being monolithic
circuits, most of which contain InGaP -
HBT (indium-gallium-phosphide
heterojunction bipolar transistors)
48
 The use of Mini Circuits
microwave monolithic integrated circuit (MMIC)

Mini-Circuits
PSA-5454+ ; (PSA-5451)
(an E-PHEMT based
Ultra-Low Noise MMIC –Amp.)
• bandwidth 50 MHz to 4 GHz
• ultra low noise (0.8 dB) and
• high IP3: 25-29 dB;
• I/O internally matched to 50 ohms
• single 5V @ 20mA; (or 3V @30mA)

49
Fast Pulse Shaping
- the Ortec 579 – to slow for fast timing

New ultra-fast amplifiers:

- Ortec 9327 (1 GHz Amplifier

and Timing Discriminator)
- Ortec 9309-4 ( Quad Ultra-Fast
Amplifier)
- Ortec 9306 (1-GHz Preamplifier)
 Ultra-fast FEE with Current Feedback Op Amp

Gain ~10 Gain ~5

(th. 20) (th. 10)

Current Feedback Amplifier

THS-3201 Main features:
- 1.8 GHz;
- 6700 V/µs @ G= 2V/V;
RL =100 Ohm
- 18mA @ +/- 3.3V
(120mW  vacuum ?)
tr ~ 1.2 ns
(10 to 90%) * - attention…☻
• 10 cm wire; 0.2 mm diam.  150 nH
…impedance @ 1Ghz ~ 1 kΩ
Simulation results of the amplifiers with • 1 pF ~ impedance @ 1GHz ~ 150 Ω
THS 3201 ultra-fast current feedback amplifier
 Wire impedance  skin effect ( skin depth calculator)

R0 = 1 /πro2 σ (DC & low

frequencies)
- σ bulk conductivity
- r0 wire radius
L0 = μ / 8π
- μ permeability
(μ0 = 4π.10-7 Henry/Meter)
Rs = 1/ (σδ);
q = √2 r0 / δ
δ is the “skin depth”  (πfμσ)-1/2

* to remember about skin effect:

• - this “calculator” only cover the range
- Material dependence
q < 8 which roughly correspond to r0 /δ < 5
(e.g. Ni vs. Cu ~ skin effect
… above this value the Bessel functions
depth one order of magnitude)
become hard to evaluate…
- Frequency dependence
going from LE to CFD
CFD a realistic approximation
• In the case of MCP real
signals i.e. - non-linear rise
times
Mirror Sensitive Centroid Method
The development of MSCD method for
picosecond lifetime measurement.
J.-M. Regis- PhD work 2010
• the prompt curve determination
 energy dependent walk in CFD
• the prompt curve has to be calibrated for
each branch but the timing asymmetry in
the branch timing characteristic is
canceled when a new physical quantity is
defined, namely the Centroid Difference:
ΔC = C(D)stop – C(D)start
 (a) CFPHT

M.A. El-Wahab et al, CFT with scintillation detectors, IEEE Trans. On NS, Vol.36, No.1,(1989) 401-406
(b) ARC-Timing

M.A. El-Wahab et al, CFT with scintillation detectors, IEEE Trans. On NS, Vol.36, No.1,(1989) 401-406
 CFD

ARC- • Variation of resolving time (W*1/2) with

CFD (a)
the attenuation factor for three
cases of CFD timing:
ARC-
CFD (b)
(1) - CFPHT, ~equivalent to LE timing
Attenuation factor A
(2) - ARC timing where ts = tr
td and tm from numerical solution
(3) – ARC timing where F(tm) =A;
F(tm-td)=A² and ts calculated
LE from Eq.10

CFD • Variation of resolving time (W*1/2) with

attenuation factor for different delay times

Attenuation factor A

M.A. El-Wahab et al, CFT with scintillation detectors, IEEE Trans. On NS, Vol.36, No.1,(1989) 401-406
LE

Walk

CFD
 Anode Anode

Dynode Dynode
Ortec 113 Ortec 113
Preamplifier Preamplifier

T1 T2
• Anode vs Dynode
as timing signal is still
Ortec 572 Ortec 572
an open dispute ☺ ?!
Filter Amplifier E1 E2 Filter Amplifier

Typical Fast / Slow Timing system for gamma-gamma coincidence

measurements with scintillators and photomultiplier tubes
 Timing MCA
a) Classical approach TPHC (TAC) – ADC

b) TDC
- direct Time-Digitizer (TDC)
- Time - Expansion (Time-to-Charge)
- direct Digital Interpolation TDC-
-single Stop / - multi Stop !
Principle of TPHC (TAC)

 ADC (13-14 bit)

Dead Time 1-4 µs
Principle of Direct Time Digitizer
Time expanding (multihit) TDC
Principle of Interpolating in Direct Time Digitizers