SciPost Submission Page
Mass testing of SiPMs for the CMVD at IICHEP
by Mamta Jangra, Raj Bhupen, Gobinda Majumder, Kiran Gothe, Mandar Saraf, Nandkishor Parmar, B. Satyanarayana, R. R. Shinde, Shobha K. Rao, Suresh S Upadhya, Vivek M Datar, Douglas A. Glenzinski, Alan Bross, Anna Pla-Dalmau, Vishnu V. Zutshi, Robert Craig Group, E Craig Dukes
This is not the latest submitted version.
This Submission thread is now published as
Submission summary
| Authors (as registered SciPost users): | Mamta Jangra |
| Submission information | |
|---|---|
| Preprint Link: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.11446v1 (pdf) |
| Date submitted: | 2022-08-25 11:59 |
| Submitted by: | Jangra, Mamta |
| Submitted to: | SciPost Physics Proceedings |
| Proceedings issue: | 21st International Symposium on Very High Energy Cosmic Ray Interactions (ISVHECRI2022) |
| Ontological classification | |
|---|---|
| Academic field: | Physics |
| Specialties: |
|
| Approach: | Experimental |
Abstract
A Cosmic Muon Veto Detector (CMVD) is being built around the mini-Iron Calorimeter (mini-ICAL) detector at the transit campus of the India based Neutrino Observatory, Madurai. The CMV detector will be made using extruded plastic scintillators with embedded wavelength shifting (WLS) fibres which propagate re-emitted photons of longer wavelengths to silicon photo-multipliers (SiPMs). The SiPMs detect these scintillation photons, producing electronic signals. The design goal for the cosmic muon veto efficiency of the CMV is $>$99.99\% and fake veto rate less than 10$^{-5}$. A testing system was developed, using an LED driver, to measure the noise rate and gain of each SiPM, and thus determine its overvoltage ($V_{ov}$). This paper describes the test results and the analysed characteristics of about 3.5k SiPMs.
Current status:
Reports on this Submission
Anonymous Report 1 on 2022-9-29 (Invited Report)
- Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:2208.11446v1, delivered 2022-09-29, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.5795
Strengths
The paper is well written and provides detailed description of the experimental procedure.
Weaknesses
1 - Some figures may need minor cosmetic changes such as alignments of sub-figures etc.
2. Few terms used need clear definitions in the text.
Report
The submission can be accepted for publication with suggested corrections.
Requested changes
1. Figure 1: Labeling of mini-ICAL and CMVD detector as well as other components will improve clarity.
2. Sec 3 - Experimental Setup: Was the setup temperature controlled? Or was temperature recorded to make sure that gain and noise rate comparison is for same conditions?
3. Figure 3: Bus width (4) label should overlap the bus.
4. Figure 3 and 4: Align figure captions.
5. Sec 4 L1 "A typical example of LED ...": Following text might improve clarity.
A typical example of SiPM output signal in response to LED excitation is shown in Fig 5a.
6. Figure 5b: Not clear in the plot what the number means. It seems to be the difference between peaks. If yes, width arrow can be used to indicate properly.
7. Figure 5c: Can Y axis be defined as Gain (G)?
8. How Vbr is defined from Figure 5c? Add the text.
9. Following on previous comment (7), definition of dG/dV is not immediately clear. Describing y axis of figure 5c as Gain can improve that. Similarly, equation 2 and subsequent text use $\mu$ for gain which is not consistent with dG/dV .
10. Figure 6: Add more details to the caption.
11. Can you plot histograms for Figure 6a, Figure 6b and Figure 7 and discuss the spread quantitatively in the conclusion?