Diploma Thesis

Diamond Detectors for Ionizing Radiation

University of Technology, Vienna

Committee:
Univ. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Fallmann
Institute of Applied Electronics and Quantum Electronics, University of Technology Vienna

Univ. Prof. Dr. Meinhard Regler

Institute of High Energy Physics, Austrian Academy of Sciences

Markus Friedl
Belvederegasse 19/8
A-1040 Vienna
[email protected]

January 1999

Electronically available at http://wwwhephy.oeaw.ac.at/u3w/f/friedl/www/da/

Contents
1 Synopsis 4
2 Introduction 6
3 Material Properties 9
3.1 General Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.2 Electrical Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.3 Types of Diamond . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.4 CVD Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4 Solid State Detector Theory 15
4.1 Bethe-Bloch Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.2 Landau Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.3 Principal Detector Layout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5 Detector Material Comparison 20
5.1 Diamond Detectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5.1.1 Charge Collection Distance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5.1.2 Collection Distance vs. Electric Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.2 Si Detectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.3 Ge Detectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
5.4 GaAs Detectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
6 Characterization 26
6.1 Characterization Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
6.1.1 Particle Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
6.1.2 Detector Ampliers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
6.1.2.1 Charge-Sensitive Amplier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.1.2.2 Grounded Base Amplier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6.1.3 Readout Electronics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6.1.4 Data Acquisition Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
6.2 Calibration and Noise Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
6.3 Fit Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

2
CONTENTS 3
7 Radiation Hardness 37
7.1 Radiation Defects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
7.2 Pumping Eect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
7.3 Irradiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
7.3.1 Pion Irradiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
7.3.1.1 Collection Distance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
7.3.1.2 Beam Induced Charge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
7.3.2 Electron Irradiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
7.3.3 Photon Irradiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
7.3.4 Proton Irradiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
7.3.5 Neutron Irradiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
7.3.6 Alpha Irradiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
7.4 Comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
8 Detector Geometries 48
8.1 Dots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
8.2 Strips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
8.2.1 Spatial Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
8.2.2 Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
8.3 Pixels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
9 Summary 55
Acknowledgements 57

Appendix
A Abbreviations and Symbols 58
B My Work with Diamonds 62

Bibliography 63
Chapter 1
Synopsis
Diamonds are a girl's best friend.
M. Monroe
In fact, diamonds are more than that. Widely known for its hardness, industrial
diamond has been successfully applied to drilling and cutting tools all over the world.
However, articially grown diamond can also serve for particle detection, similar to semi-
conductors such as silicon or germanium. Due to its expected radiation hardness, diamond
is a candidate for future high energy experiments.
The RD42 collaboration at CERN (European Laboratory for Particle Physics, Geneva,
CH) has been installed in 1994 to develop diamond detectors and readout electronics for
the experiments at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), which is planned to start running in
2005. The projected features of this machine will exceed the limits of present technology
in many elds. In the past years, several institutes joined the RD42 collaboration, which
has now approximately 80 scientic members from 24 institutes all over the world.
In 1995, I began to work with the HEPHY [1] (Insitute of High Energy Physics, Vienna,
A) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences. Soon I got in touch with diamond detectors
and became a member of the RD42 collaboration. In 1995, we built a characterization
station for solid state detector samples, especially diamonds. It took quite a lot of time
to understand and optimize the device, as we developed almost everything from scratch,
from the mechanical support to the software. I laid special emphasis on achieving the
lowest noise possible in the design of this characterization station. In the autumns of
1995, 1996 and 1997, we performed three irradiation experiments in a pion beam at
the Paul Scherrer Institute (PSI, Villigen, CH). Because of my essential contribution to
preparation, realization and data analysis, ample space is devoted to these projects within
this thesis. Also numeric calculation of electric elds was included in my further analysis.
A summary of my personal \diamond career" is given in appendix B.
This thesis is divided into several chapters, each of which deals with a certain aspect
of diamond detectors. A general introduction and the motivation for diamond detector
research is given in chapter 2. The growth and properties of diamond are described in
chapter 3, while chapter 4 gives a brief overview of the theoretical background of particle
detection. Under this aspect, diamond is compared to other solid state detector materials,

4
CHAPTER 1. SYNOPSIS 5
primarily silicon, in chapter 5. The characterization of diamond detectors is dealt with in
chapter 6. In chapter 7, the radiation hardness studies are described with emphasis on the
pion irradiation. The various detector geometries, including the latest test results of strip
and pixel detectors, are dealt with in chapter 8. Finally, chapter 9 summarizes the results
which have been achieved. Abbreviations and symbols are explained in appendix A.
As the study of diamond detectors for the application in future high energy experi-
ments has begun only in the 1990s, I am restricted to discuss the present state of investi-
gations. Up to now, more than 150 diamond samples have been investigated by the RD42
collaboration. The results look very promising and I expect that diamond detectors may
be widely used in future applications. The latest results, all RD42 publications as well as
several photos and gures can be obtained at http://www.cern.ch/RD42/ .
Chapter 2
Introduction
Diamond is a material with a set of very unique characteristics. It is mainly known as
a gem, but also for its hardness. There is a third property that is not so well known;
diamond shows extremely high thermal conductivity while it is electrically insulating.
Besides that, diamond has the reputation of being radiation hard since the 1950s, but
only recently this has been examined systematically using modern irradiation facilities.
One eld of future applications of CVD (chemical vapor deposition) diamond could be
particle detection in high energy physics experiments, where fast, radiation-hard detectors
are required.
The goal of the RD42 collaboration is the development of tracking detectors1 made of
CVD diamond for the LHC. The group is involved in both the ATLAS (A Toroidal LHC
Apparatus) and the CMS (Compact Muon Solenoid) experiments, which are projected
for the LHC. As I am aliated with CMS, I will give a short description of the possible
utilization of diamond there.
Fig. 2.1 shows the complete CMS experiment. Only the pink cylinder in the very
center is the solid state tracking detector, containing strip and pixel detectors. While the
strip detectors will be denitely made of silicon, the material for the pixel detectors could
be either silicon or diamond.
The reason for this diamond option is the extreme radiation in the vertex environ-
ment. Present standard silicon detectors are operable up to a uence of approximately
1014 particles cm,2 [2]. With this uence, the radiation defects do no longer allow meaning-
ful measurements. The total uences of photons, neutrons and charged hadrons expected
in the CMS experiment over the scheduled 10 years of LHC operation is shown in g. 2.2.
z is the distance from the vertex along the beam axis, while the parameter is the radius
from the beam axis.
Two permanent pixel layers are planned at radii of 7 and 11 cm and a third one at
r = 4 cm only for the low luminosity period in the beginning of LHC operation. The
photon and neutron uences are silicon-compliant. The charged hadrons, however, most
of which are pions with a momentum below 1 GeV c,1 , are a challenge, which can be
accomplished with diamond detectors.
1 position-sensitive detectors with good spatial resolution

6
CHAPTER 2. INTRODUCTION 7

Figure 2.1: The CMS experiment at CERN.

Not only the LHC groups are interested in CVD diamond. Proposals have been
submitted for using CVD diamond detectors for monitoring of heavy ion beams at GSI-
Darmstadt [4] and for a research program for a vertex detector upgrade at Fermilab [5].
Besides the narrow eld of high energy physics, one can imagine to produce semi-
conductor devices based on diamond. However, presently there is one major technical
restriction. While intrinsic diamond is easily engineered to a p-type semiconductor by
implantation of boron acceptors, no reasonable donor material has been found yet.
CHAPTER 2. INTRODUCTION 8

-2 -2
Dose (Gy) Neutrons (cm ) Ch. Hadrons (cm )

7 cm
10 6 10 15
7 cm
10 14 7 cm
21 cm
21 cm
5 14
10 10
21 cm 49 cm
49 cm

75 cm
10 4 75 cm 49 cm 10 13
75 cm
111 cm

111 cm 10 13 111 cm
0 100 200 0 100 200 0 100 200
z (cm) z (cm) z (cm)

Figure 2.2: The expected radiation uences of photons, neutrons and charged hadrons in the
CMS experiment over 10 years of operation. [3]
Chapter 3
Material Properties
3.1 General Properties
Diamond is composed of carbon atoms arranged in the tetrahedron diamond lattice
(g. 3.1). The atoms stick together through strong sp3 -type bonds. The small car-
bon atoms give a very dense, but low weight lattice. These facts give reason for the
extraordinary characteristics of diamond.

Figure 3.1: The diamond lattice [6].

Quantity Value Applications

Refraction index n (at  = 550 nm) 2.42 Gem
Hardness (after Mohs1 ) 10 Drills, Cutters
Thermal conductivity T [W cm,1 K,1 ] 20 Heat Sink
Table 3.1: Some outstanding features of diamond.

1 Friedrich Mohs, *1773 in Gernrode, y1839 in Agordo, Austrian mineralogist who devised a hard-
ness scale for minerals in 1812.

9
CHAPTER 3. MATERIAL PROPERTIES 10
Tab. 3.1 lists some outstanding features of diamond material. The refraction index,
which is quite high for an optically transparent material, together with special cutting,
e.g., the brilliant type, gives reason for a number of total re ections and diraction of
white light on its long path through the diamond. This leads to the sparkling of the gems,
well known by everyone. Glass imitations show less sparkling, because the refraction index
of glass is only about n = 1:5, reducing the angle range where total re ection occurs. Thus
the path length of the light is shorter, which gives less opportunity for diraction.
Diamond is the hardest mineral known, therefore it is used for drilling and cutting
applications. One really wonders how diamond itself is cut... The answer, of course, is:
with another diamond, mechanically enforced by fast rotation, or, more recently, by a
laser.
The thermal conductivity of diamond is the highest of any material known; at room
temperature it is ve times higher than that of copper. Even more, it is coupled with
electrical insulation, which is a very rare combination in nature. Specially treated syn-
thetic diamond crystals conduct heat even better, a value of 33 W cm,1 K,1 has been
reported [7]. Therefore, diamond heatsinks are used, e.g., in Pentium Processors, where
a huge amount of thermal power has to be dissipated in a very small volume.

3.2 Electrical Properties

For the detector application mainly electrical properties are of interest, along with some
atom related gures. Tab. 3.2 shows the properties [6, 7, 8, 9, 10] of diamond, silicon,
germanium and gallium arsenide, all of which are candidates for solid state radiation
detectors. The features of the materials can be compared using this table. To start with
the advantages of diamond, the low atomic number minimizes particle scattering and
absorption, a property which is desirable for a tracking detector. The radiation length,
stating the mean distance over which a high-energy electron loses all but e,1 of its energy
by bremsstrahlung, also scales with the inverse variance of the Coulomb scattering angle.
Thus, the angle spread per unit length is slightly smaller in diamond compared to silicon.
Furthermore, the high band gap, causing the low intrinsic carrier density and thus the
extremely high resistivity (or negligible dark current), allows detector operation without
a pn-junction, i.e., without depletion by a reverse bias voltage, unlike the other materials.
The high carrier mobilities give reason for fast signal collection. Finally, the low dielectric
constant implies low capacitive load of the detector and thus, together with the negligible
dark current, a lower noise gure.
There is only one major disadvantage with diamond, its low signal output, which has
two reasons. Due to the large band gap, the ionization, or more exact, electron-hole
generation, is signicantly smaller compared to the other materials. Secondly, the charge
collection eciency is quite low, caused by the polycrystalline structure of CVD diamond
(this will be discussed in detail in section 5.1.1).
Perhaps the most important characteristic of diamond as a new detector material is
its hardness against all types of radiation, which is described in chapter 7.
CHAPTER 3. MATERIAL PROPERTIES 11
Quantity Diamond Si Ge GaAs
Atomic number Z 6 14 32 31, 33
Number of atoms N [1022 cm,3 ] 17.7 4.96 4.41 4.43
Mass density  [g cm,3 ] 3.51 2.33 5.33 5.32
Radiation length X0 [cm] 12.0 9.4 2.3 2.3
Relative dielectric constant  5.7 11.9 16.3 13.1
Band gap Eg [eV] 5.47 1.12 0.67 1.42
Intrinsic carrier density ni [cm,3 ] < 103 1:45  1010 2:4  1013 1:79  106
Resistivity c [
cm] > 1012 2:3  105 47 108
Electron mobility e [cm2 V,1 s,1 ] 1800 1350 3900 8500
Hole mobility h [cm2 V,1 s,1 ] 1200 480 1900 400
Saturation eld Es [V cm,1 ] 2  104 2  104 2000 3000
Electron saturation velocity
vs [106 cm s,1 ] 22 8.2 5.9 8.0
Operational eld Eo [V cm,1 ] 104 2000 1000 2000
Electron operational velocity
vo [106 cm s,1 ] 20 3 3 10
Energy to create e-h pair Eeh [eV] 13 3.6 3.0 (@77 K) 4.3
Mean MIP ionization qp [e m,1 ] 36 108 340 130
Table 3.2: The properties of solid state detector materials at T = 300 K.

3.3 Types of Diamond

In the early 20th century, natural diamonds were divided into type I, containing nitrogen
impurities, and type II, relatively free of nitrogen. Later, by rening the analysis methods,
subgroups were introduced to the type terminology as shown in tab. 3.3. Natural diamond,
Type Impurities Comments
Ia Aggregated nitrogen up to 2500 ppm Most natural diamonds
Ib Substitutional nitrogen up to 300 ppm Most synthetic diamonds
IIa Substitutional nitrogen < 1 ppm Detector material
IIb Boron doped p-type semiconductor
Table 3.3: The diamond type terminology.

which is found mainly as type Ia, is not applicable as a detector because of its nitrogen
impurities. Reasonable detector material, synthesized in the CVD process, must contain
less than 1 ppm of nitrogen (type IIa). With natural or synthetic boron implantation,
p-type semiconducting behavior is introduced to the material.

3.4 CVD Process

Diamond detectors are grown in the chemical vapor deposition (CVD) process. A small
fraction of hydrocarbon gas, such as methane, is mixed with molecular hydrogen and
CHAPTER 3. MATERIAL PROPERTIES 12
oxygen gas. When the gas mixture is ionized, carbon based radicals are reduced and
settle on a substrate, usually silicon or molybdenum, and link together with -type bonds,
forming a diamond lattice. Successful diamond deposition is restricted to a well dened
area within the C-H-O ternary diagram shown in g. 3.2. Outside this area, either non-
diamond carbon or nothing at all is grown.

Figure 3.2: The C-H-O ternary diagram. CVD Diamond growth is restricted to the white area
in the center [7].
The properties of the diamond grown in this process depend on the gas mixture,
temperature and pressure. Although this is an easy principle, the growth process is
extremely dicult to control in order to grow material suitable for detector application;
the parameters are not constant throughout the process. The growth speed is typically
about 1 m h,1. There are several types of CVD reactors, which dier in the way the gas
is ionized; e.g., this is done by microwaves or by a heating wire. After the growth process,
the substrate is etched from the diamond lm, which is then cut and cleaned.
Initially, there is a large number of small crystal seeds on the substrate, each oriented
individually. As deposition continues, the grains grow together, forming columnar single-
crystals with grain boundaries between. On the substrate side the lateral grain size is very
small (in the order of micrometers), while the size continuously increases in the growth
CHAPTER 3. MATERIAL PROPERTIES 13
direction, reaching a diameter in the order of 100 m with a diamond lm thickness of
500 m. The section of a CVD grown diamond, visualizing this \cone"-like structure is
shown schematically in g. 3.3 and as a SEM (scanning electron microscopy) photograph
in g. 3.4.
Growth Side
y=D

y=0
Substrate Side

Figure 3.3: Schematic section of a diamond lm.

Figure 3.4: Photograph of the section of a diamond lm.

The dierent grain sizes of substrate and growth sides are clearly visible with the SEM
photographs in g. 3.5. The grain size expands from approximately 2 m at the substrate
side (y = 0) to about 80 m at the growth side (y = 415 m).
The CVD diamond samples used by the RD42 collaboration have been grown by
the commercial manufacturers St. Gobain/Norton [11] and De Beers [12]. Most of the
samples were grown on 4" wafers in a research reactor and then laser cut into 1  1 cm2
pieces. Recently, several 2  4 cm2 samples were delivered from a production reactor. The
as-grown thickness of the CVD samples ranges from 300 m up to almost 3 mm.
For the detector application, the diamond lm is equipped with contacts on either
side. First a chromium layer of typically 50 nm is sputtered onto the sample, which forms
a carbide with the diamond, providing an Ohmic contact. Then, a gold layer (typically
CHAPTER 3. MATERIAL PROPERTIES 14

Figure 3.5: Left: Substrate (left) and growth (right) sides of the same diamond sample (415 m
thick). Note the dierent scales of the images: 2 m for the substrate side and 100 m for the
growth side.

200 nm) is sputtered to prevent oxidation and to provide a surface suitable for wire-
bonding. Besides this standard contact, also a Ti/Au combination was used. For the
indium bump bonding of pixel detectors (see section 8.3), Cr/Ni/Au and Ti/W processes
were developed.
Chapter 4
Solid State Detector Theory
When a heavy charged particle traverses material, energy is mainly transfered due to
Coulomb interactions between the particle and the atomic electrons in the material. In
solids with an atomic lattice, which can be described by the band model, the electrons
are excited from the valence to the conduction band when the particle transfers enough
energy. This process is known as electron-hole generation. At very high incident particle
energies, also radiation is emitted when collisions occur, which is called bremsstrahlung.

4.1 Bethe-Bloch Theory

H.A. Bethe1 and F. Bloch2 developed a theory based on energy and momentum
conservation for the energy loss of charged particles other than electrons at high energies
(v  c) traversing material, stated in terms of dE=dx, when radiative energy loss is
negligible [13, 14].
" ! #
1 dE Z
,  dx = 4NAre me c z A  2 2 ln
2 2 2 1 1 2 m e c2  2 2 Tmax 
, , 2
2 ( ) (4.1)
I2
Eq. 4.1 represents the dierential energy loss per mass surface density [MeV (g cm,2),1 ],
where ze is the charge of the incident particle, NA, Z and A are Avogadro's number, the
atomic number and the 2atomic mass of the material, me and re are the electron mass and
its classical radius ( 40eme c2 ). Tmax is the maximum kinetic energy which is still detected
in the material, I is the mean excitation energy,  = v=c, = (1 ,  2),1=2 and ( ) is
a correction for the shielding of the particle's electric eld by the atomic electrons, the
density eect caused by atomic polarization.
For 0:1 <  < 1:0, the dE=dx curves (g. 4.1) approximately fall proportionally to
,
 , then show a broad minimum at  = 3 to 4 (decreasing with Z ) and nally slowly
2
1 Hans Albrecht Bethe, *1906 in Strasbourg. Most of the time he worked with the Cornell Univer-
sity, interrupted by sabbaticals leading him to CERN and other research centers. For his contributions
to the theory of nuclear reactions he was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1967.
2 Felix Bloch, *1905 in Zurich, y1983. He was working with a number of universities and research
centers, like Stanford and CERN. The Nobel Prize was awarded to him in 1952 for nuclear magnetic
precision measurements.

15
CHAPTER 4. SOLID STATE DETECTOR THEORY 16
rise with higher energies. This is known as relativistic rise. A heavy charged particle
10
8

− dE/dx [MeV g−1cm2]

H2 liquid
5
4
He gas
3
C
Al
Fe
2 Sn
Pb

1
0.1 1.0 10 100 1000 10 000
βγ = pc/M

0.1 1.0 10 100 1000

Myon Momentum [GeV/c]

0.1 1.0 10 100 1000

Pion Momentum [GeV/c]

0.1 1.0 10 100 1000 10 000

Proton Momentum [GeV/c]

Figure 4.1: Energy loss (dE=dx) curves for various materials [13].
with an energy in the minimum of the dE=dx curve deposits the least amount of energy
possible; it is therefore called MIP (minimum ionizing particle).
Uncharged particles do not show any interaction within the Bethe-Bloch theory, only
secondary reactions involve Coulomb forces. In fact, the energy deposit is smaller by
orders of magnitude, which has been shown, e.g., with the neutron irradiation of dia-
mond [15].

4.2 Landau Distribution

Particles that are stopped in a thick layer of material transfer their whole energy to the
bulk. The mean range of these particles can be obtained by integration of eq. 4.1. Due
to uctuations, the eective range spectrum is of Gaussian shape.
In the case of thin layers, when the particle traverses the material, the deposited energy
is only a small fraction of the incident particle energy. Furthermore, excited  electrons3
may leave the bulk. The Bethe-Bloch formula must be adapted to this case by applying
certain cuts [16, 17]. This implies that the relativistic rise ends up by a plateau due to the
compensation of the remaining relativistic rise by the energy dependence of the shielding
3 electrons receiving a large amount of energy from a heavy collision with the incident particle, also
referred to as \knock-on electrons"
CHAPTER 4. SOLID STATE DETECTOR THEORY 17
eect in the highly relativistic domain. Moreover, the dE=dx minimum shifts to higher
energies. Thus, for practical reasons, all particles with energies above the MIP energy are
considered as approximately minimum ionizing in solid state detectors.
The energy spectrum observed in thin layers was described by L.D. Landau4 [18]. It
resembles a Gaussian distribution with a long upper tail, resulting from a small number
of  electrons, which have experienced a large energy transfer from the primary particle.
This energy is deposited by a subsequent cascade. The exact analytic notation of the
Landau distribution is an inverse Laplace transform,
L(x) = L,1ss (4.2)
Several approximations exist, the simplest way is to use the Gaussian function, if the
intention is to t at the most probable (peak) region only. J.E. Moyal states an \ex-
plicit expression of Landau's distribution" [19], given in eq. 4.3, which in fact is only an
approximation.
 
L(x)  P4 exp , 2 A + e1 
, A (4.3)
A = P3 PP1,+Px
2 1
The approximation by K.S. Kolbig and B. Schorr [20] is part of the CERN Computer
Center Program Library [21]. Using basically a piecewise polynomial approximation,
an accuracy of at least seven digits is ensured. Fig. 4.2 shows the exact (numerically
integrated) Landau distribution and the two approximations mentioned above.
The Landau distribution is an approximation for particles traversing thin layers of
material, which agrees well with the observed spectra. Its limit is the long tail, which the-
oretically extends to innite energies, while the energy deposited by an incoming particle
cannot exceed its own energy. The convolution of two Landau distributions results in an-
other Landau distribution. This property can be illustrated by the energy loss of a particle
traversing a layer of thickness D or two subsequent layers of thickness D2 , respectively.
The overall energy loss must be the same in both cases, implying the convolution property
mentioned above. The Landau distribution has a nite area, however, it is impossible to
state a mean value or moments of higher order. One possible workaround is to cut the
Landau tail, which implies the loss of the convolution property. The method we used,
which is closer related to the measured spectrum data, will be discussed in section 6.3.
Protons, pions and other types of charged particles, which are in most cases close to
MIPs, all produce approximately Landau-distributed spectra when traversing diamond
lm. Electrons from a beta source are also close to minimum ionizing when low energetic
particles ( ,2 range) are excluded, as discussed in section 6.1.1. Alpha particles, i.e., He
nuclei, however, are stopped in diamond after a few ten micrometers, and therefore trans-
fer all their energy on to the diamond bulk, delivering much higher, Gaussian-distributed
signals than MIPs do.
4 Lev Davidovich Landau, *1908 in Baku, y1968 in Moscow. The work of the Soviet physicist covers
all branches of theoretical physics. In 1962 the Nobel Prize was awarded to him for his pioneering theories
about condensed matter, especially liquid helium.
CHAPTER 4. SOLID STATE DETECTOR THEORY 18

Landau distribution

L(x)
0.18

0.16 Exact ≅ CERN Library

0.14 Moyal’s Function

0.12

0.1

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0
-5 -2.5 0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20

Figure 4.2: The exact Landau distribution, which is covered by the CERN Library approxima-
tion in this plot, and Moyal's approximation.

4.3 Principal Detector Layout

Most solid state detectors are made for particle tracking. Thus, the absolute signal value
is irrelevant in most cases. However, as the signal coming from a MIP traversing the
detectors is only in the order of several thousand electrons, one aims to maximize the
signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). While the signal size depends on the detector material and
geometry, the amplier usually dominates the noise gure.
In order to minimize particle scattering and absorption, tracking detectors are made of
thin layers of material, usually in the order of a few hundred micrometers, with electrodes
on opposite sides to apply the \bias" voltage and drain the particle induced signal. One
electrode can be formed as strips or pixels to obtain position information, as discussed in
chapter 8. Nevertheless, for a simple model we will assume pad contacts.
Fig. 4.3 shows the detector function, which is in principal a charge movement inside a
capacitor.
In the band model, the number of charges in the conduction band per unit volume at
equilibrium, called intrinsic carrier density ni, is given by
Eg
n2i = NC NV e, kT ; (4.4)
NC;V = h23 2me;hkT 2 :
 3
CHAPTER 4. SOLID STATE DETECTOR THEORY 19
charged particle track

+
-
+
-
+
E - D
+
-
+
-

Figure 4.3: A charged particle traversing the detector generates electron-hole pairs along its
track.

NC and NV are the weights of conduction and valence bands, Eg is the band gap, k the
Boltzmann constant, T the absolute temperature, h is the Planck constant, me and mh
are the eective masses of electrons and holes, respectively. The intrinsic carrier density
strongly depends on the band gap and the temperature. Materials with a low band gap,
implying a large number of intrinsic carriers, need either cooling down to temperatures
where the carriers are no longer excited or a reverse-biased pn-junction, which results in
a space charge zone free of carriers.
Initially, all free carriers inside the bulk are drained by the applied electric eld. There
is no charge movement in the bulk, except for thermally excited electron-hole pairs, which
immediately drift to the electrodes.
When a charged particle traverses the detector, electron-hole pairs are created along
the particle track. In the case of a MIP perpendicularly traversing a detector of thickness
D, the number of generated pairs is Qp = qpD. The electrons move towards the positive
electrode, while the holes drift in the opposite direction. As these carriers move, a charge
is induced at the electrodes, which can be observed by a charge-sensitive amplier, or, in
the case of high particle rates, measured as a DC current in the bias line. It is irrelevant
whether the generated charges nally reach the electrodes or not, only the length of their
path contributes to the (integral) signal. Especially when trapping or recombination
occurs (as in CVD diamond), many charges do not reach the electrodes.
Seen from the point of a subsequent amplier, the detector is electrically represented
by a (pulse) current source in parallel to a capacitance (g. 4.4).

i(t) C

Figure 4.4: The electric representation of a detector, a current source in parallel to a capaci-
tance.
Chapter 5
Detector Material Comparison
5.1 Diamond Detectors
With a band gap of Eg = 5:5 eV, diamond is regarded as an insulator. This implies
negligible intrinsic carrier densities even at room temperature, allowing to operate intrinsic
diamond lm as a detector. Electrodes are applied to the diamond lm on opposite sides
to form Ohmic contacts. As there is no pn-junction, the polarity of the electric eld is
irrelevant. The dark current of the diamond samples, including both bulk and surface
currents, is less than 1 nA cm,2 at an electric eld of 1 V m,1 [22].
According to the high carrier mobilities in diamond, the charge collection is very fast,
taking about 1 ns in detectors of approximately 500 m thickness. It has been shown that
CVD diamond detectors are able to count heavy ion rates above 108 cm,2 s,1 with a single
readout channel.

5.1.1 Charge Collection Distance

Due to the polycrystalline nature of CVD diamond, the charge collection is not straight-
forward as in homogeneous detector materials. The grain structure (g. 3.3) results in a
quality gradient along the y coordinate (depth axis). The grain boundaries are suspected
to provide charge trapping and recombination centers.
On the substrate side (y = 0), the lateral grain size is at its minimum, resulting in
a large amount of traps. Thus, the mean free path for the carriers is very short. With
ascending y the single-crystal volumes expand, causing the trap density to shrink and the
mean free path to increase. A linear model has been proposed [23] for the local mean free
path as a function of y, starting from (almost) zero at y = 0 up to a certain value for
y = D. This model satises experimental data [24].
Neglecting border limits, the sum of the mean free paths for electrons and holes gives
the overall average distance that electrons and holes drift apart in an electric eld. This
value has been established as the charge collection distance dc, describing the quality of
the diamond sample. The border limits are irrelevant as long as dc  D. The collection
distance, or sum mean free path, can be stated as the product of carrier velocity and

20
CHAPTER 5. DETECTOR MATERIAL COMPARISON 21
lifetime, summed for both carriers,
dc = dc;e + dc;h = vee + vhh = (ee + hh) E : (5.1)
Taking the border limits into account, the collection distance obtained from measure-
ments is smaller than the average mean free path because at the electrodes, electrons and
holes are drained and do no longer contribute to the drift path, thus reducing the total
drift length or the signal induced at the electrodes, respectively.
The number of charges (electron-hole pairs) generated by a MIP is [8]
Qp = qpD with qp = 36 e m,1 : (5.2)
The value of qp includes not only the primary excitation, but also the contribution of
secondary interactions by eventually generated  electrons. The charge collected at the
electrodes is approximately represented by the ratio of the carrier drift length, or charge
collection distance, to the lm thickness,
Qc  Qp dDc : (5.3)
Substituting Qp with the expression in eq. 5.2 results in
Qc  qpdc : (5.4)
The charge collection eciency, which is dened as the ratio of measured charge to the
total generated charge, is given by
cce  dDc : (5.5)
Eq. 5.4 tells that the charge collected at the electrodes is a function of the mean col-
lection distance only. However, with thicker lms more charge is generated, thus more
charge is collected and the charge collection increases. Thus, the charge collection dis-
tance, together with the sample thickness, state the material quality.
In order to increase the signal size, the diamond lm can be grown thicker. On
the other hand, tracking detectors must be kept as thin as possible. The solution that
complies with both requirements is to grow a rather thick diamond lm and then remove,
by lapping, material from the substrate side, where the collection distance is very low.
Due to surface limits, the mean charge collection passes its maximum and decreases, if too
much material is removed. It has been shown by theory and experiment [23] that there
is an optimal remaining thickness for given detector parameters. The collection distance
increase using this technique ranges up to 40% with present diamond samples. Fig. 5.1
shows the charge collection distances of two dierent diamond samples after several steps
of lapping. The measured values agree with the theory well. For the application as a
tracking detector is the target to achieve a thin detector with sucient signal output.
Apart from the local collection distance dependending on the depth as discussed above,
the diamond lm is considered to be laterally homogeneous. Measurements have shown
CHAPTER 5. DETECTOR MATERIAL COMPARISON 22
10000

Mean Signal [e-]

Pion beam
90
Sr source

Sample B

5000

Sample A

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000
Thickness after lapping [µm]

Figure 5.1: Charge collection distance vs. thickness remaining after lapping for two dierent
diamond samples. The solid line shows the prediction from a calculation including border limits.

that this is not true with CVD diamond samples. Signicant lateral variations of the
collection distance have been encountered on the scale of a few ten micrometers. On some
samples, clusters with higher or lower local dc than the average have been observed in
the sub-millimeter range, which may correspond to the grains. These eects are currently
under investigation. Fig. 5.2 shows a preliminary distribution plot of the charge collection
distance in 100  100 m2 bins. Each bin contains approximately 120 hit entries and the
shade represents its mean collection distance. The white column to the right corresponds
to a dead readout channel. The histogram at the bottom shows the distribution of the
overall collected charge, which is not exactly Landau-shaped due to the inhomogeneity.
It is intended to achieve smaller binning and higher statistics in the future.
Whenever a charge collection distance value is stated within this work, it is meant
to be the average over a comparatively large volume of the diamond lm. The radiation
hardness studies in particular have been made on diamond samples with pad electrodes
covering an area of 2:5 mm2 and more.
Natural diamond has a charge collection distance of about 30 m. Starting in the early
1990s, the dc of CVD diamond was far below this value. From that time, the collection
distance was permanently improved by rening the manufacturer's growth process as
shown in g. 5.3. By the end of 1997, diamond detectors with a charge collection distance
of up to 250 m (corresponding to a mean signal of 9000 e) were available. Although those
detectors were rather thick (almost 1 mm), a recent sample shows dc = 230 m while it is
only 432 m thick, resulting in a charge collection eciency of 53%.

5.1.2 Collection Distance vs. Electric Field

As in all solid state detectors, the charge collection speed depends on the strength of the
electric drift eld. This behavior origins in the carrier drift velocities, which are a function
of the electric eld, approximated in the linear region by
v = E : (5.6)
CHAPTER 5. DETECTOR MATERIAL COMPARISON 23
Local dc Distribution of CVD Diamond
- PRELIMINARY -
[mm]

[mm]

[ADC counts]

Figure 5.2: Spatial distribution of the local charge collection distance. The histogram at the
bottom gives the distribution of the overall collected charge.

The velocities saturate with higher electric eld. As the target is to achieve the highest
possible charge collection eciency, one aims to apply an electric eld close to saturation.
On the other hand, high voltages are dicult to handle and there is the danger of electric
break-through. Thus, the usual eld strength for CVD diamond characterization has
become 1 V m,1, resulting in an applied voltage of several hundred Volts, depending on
the sample thickness.
In g. 5.4, the dependence of the charge collection distance on the applied electric
eld for a high-quality diamond is shown. Measurements with reverse polarity of the
electric eld show that there is no signicant asymmetry, thus there is no sign of long-
term polarization eects.

5.2 Si Detectors
Most solid state tracking detectors presently used are made of silicon, a material that
is easily available from the semiconductor industry and well understood. However, sili-
con for detector application must be of higher quality and purity than the material for
semiconducting devices.
The intrinsic carrier density of silicon is too high to operate a silicon detector as-is.
This should be illustrated by a comparison [25] for a commonly used detector thickness of
300 m and an area of 1 cm2. The number of intrinsic carrier pairs inside the bulk volume
is 4:35  108, while one MIP traversing the detector generates a mean signal of only 32400
CHAPTER 5. DETECTOR MATERIAL COMPARISON 24

400

Collection Distance [µm]

Signal [e-]
350

300
10000
250

200

150
5000

100

50 Natural type IIa diamond

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998

Time [year]

Figure 5.3: The history of the charge collection distance of CVD diamond.
250

8000
Collection Distance (µm)

200

Mean Charge (e)

6000
150

4000
100

50 2000

0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Electric Field (V/µm)

Figure 5.4: The collection distance vs. the electric eld.

pairs.
In order to remove the intrinsic charge from the bulk, a pn-junction is introduced.
Usually starting with a weakly doped n-type silicon wafer, a thin layer on one side is
heavily doped with boron acceptors, and a thin layer on the opposite side with arsenic
donors, resulting in a p+nn+-diode. Alternatively, the bulk material can be of p-type,
which makes no principal dierence. Finally, the surfaces are metallized to form Ohmic
contacts. When the pn-junction is reverse-biased, all free carriers are drained from the
bulk, and the detector is sensitive to ionizing radiation. Fig. 5.5 shows such a silicon
detector with the applied bias voltage, which is above the depletion voltage1, and the
resulting electric eld. The implant layers are much thinner in reality, thus a the electric
1The depletion voltage is the minimum bias voltage required to establish a space charge zone across
the whole bulk
CHAPTER 5. DETECTOR MATERIAL COMPARISON 25
eld is approximately constant throughout the bulk. Principally, the silicon detector is a
wide-area diode.
y
+
p -implant

n-type bulk
+

+
n -implant
E

Figure 5.5: Schematic cross-section of a silicon detector with implant thicknesses not to scale.
The electric eld results from a bias voltage above the depletion voltage.

Silicon detectors are made of very pure material, minimizing the number of charge
traps and recombination centers. Nearly all charges excited in the bulk reach the elec-
trodes, implying a charge collection eciency of (almost) 100%. According to the charge
mobilities, the charge collection after a particle traversed the bulk takes a few nanosec-
onds.

5.3 Ge Detectors
Germanium was the rst technically used semiconductor material. As the specic energy
loss dE=dx is quite high in germanium compared to silicon, it better suits for calorimetry
than for tracking purposes. For instance, lithium-drifted germanium detectors [26] with
an active crystal volume of several cm3 are used in nuclear spectroscopy. These detectors
achieve an excellent energy resolution, however, they must be permanently cooled to
liquid nitrogen temperature (T = 77 K). The low temperature not only conserves the
arrangement of the lithium atoms inside the crystal, but also reduces the intrinsic carrier
density dramatically. Only this fact permits the functioning of the device.
Later, it became possible to produce extremely pure germanium material, which is
more convenient to use. Still low temperature operation is essential, but an interruption
of the cooling is no longer disastrous.

5.4 GaAs Detectors

Gallium-arsenide is a III-V-type semiconductor. The semiconducting junction is intro-
duced through a Schottky contact on the bulk material. Unlike silicon, the electric eld
does not extend throughout the bulk [9], in fact, there is a passive layer with zero eld
and the eld in the active layer is decreasing from a maximum at the Schottky contact to
zero. Depending on the sample purity, there is a certain number of inter-band gap traps.
Thus the charge collection eciency of the best samples is presently at the order of 50%
to 80%.
Chapter 6
Characterization
An important issue for judging the quality of a detector is the measurement of its charge
collection distance, therefore called characterization. In a laboratory environment, the
detector under test is exposed to a source and the pulse height spectrum is recorded.
Principally, it is the same measurement that is also made in test beams or detectors in
experiments, although in the laboratory more emphasis is laid upon precise measurements,
well-dened parameters, reproducibility and a clean analysis.

6.1 Characterization Setup

The main elements of a characterization setup are the detector itself, a particle source
and a front-end amplier as well as trigger and readout electronics. A few institutes
participating in the RD42 collaboration have built such characterization stations. As an
example, the setup at the HEPHY is shown schematically in g. 6.1. When a particle from
Collimated Source Charge
(e.g. 90Sr) Sensitive
Amplifier

ADC
Detector Under Test
Si Trigger Detector
Trigger

Fast
Bias Trigger
Voltages Amplifier

Figure 6.1: Schematics of the characterization station.

the source traverses the detector under test and the trigger detector, a readout cycle is
initiated, the amplier output is converted to digital numbers and stored in the computer.
Apart from the detector itself, the involved parts will be discussed in the following
sections.

26
CHAPTER 6. CHARACTERIZATION 27
6.1.1 Particle Source
Penetrating particles are necessary for tracking detector measurements, either coming
from an accelerator, a radioactive source or from cosmic radiation. The characterization
of tracking detectors usually refers to minumum ionizing particles (MIPs), which transfer
the least amount of energy possible (see section 4.1).
The muons of cosmic radiation are not suitable for detector tests, since the sensitive
area is usually very small (< 1 cm2), which results in a very low cosmic rate. Exact
reference measurements require a well dened particle beam, which is only available from
high energy accelerators such as the SPS (Super Proton Synchrotron) at CERN.
However, for practical reasons, it is much easier to use a radioactive source such as
90 Sr, which delivers only beta electrons. In the setup shown in g. 6.1, the detector under
test is located between the source and the trigger detector. Electrons with low energies
thus stop in the test detector without triggering. This method requires a source with
rather low activity, otherwise such a stopping electron and a subsequent (or previous)
penetrating electron could overlap within the time constant of the amplier, leading to
false signal pulse heights and pile-up eects.
Assuming a 500 m thick diamond detector, electrons with a kinetic energy below
roughly 0:5 MeV are absorbed. The penetrating particles are a good approximation to
MIPs; in 500 m thick diamond they deposit 108% of the MIP energy [8]. Strontium
decays in  , mode to 90 Y, emitting electrons with a maximum energy of 0:55 MeV [13, 27],
most of which do not penetrate the detector under test. The half-life of this rst decay
is 28:8 years. The 90 Y isotope again decays in the  , mode with a half-life of 64:1 hours
to the stable 90 Zr isotope; the maximum energy of the electrons is then 2:28 MeV. The
practical result of this decay chain is in fact a 90 Y decay with a half-life of 28:8 years
rather than 64:1 hours [28].
The advantages of 90Sr compared to other isotopes are the lack of decays, the
relatively narrow energy spread and the long half-life, which results in almost constant
activity over years. For most applications it is neccesary to collimate the source, as
the electrons are emitted in all directions. Furthermore, the collimator has the task of
protecting the person handling the source.
Due to the low energy, the range of such  electrons in solid matter is only a few
millimeters, depending on the kind and amount of material in the particle track. For
measurements where further penetration of the particles is essential, a high energy particle
beam from an accelerator is essential. This may be the case when particle tracks are
monitored with a telescope (see section 8.2) or the response of the detector to specied
particles and energies is under investigation. However, these studies are usually described
as test beam measurements and not as characterization.

6.1.2 Detector Ampliers

After a particle has traversed the detector, a certain charge is induced in the electrodes.
In the case of MIPs, this charge is of the order of several thousand electrons (and holes),
which have to be amplied to a reasonable voltage (or current) level.
CHAPTER 6. CHARACTERIZATION 28
The preamplier, which is physically connected to the detector, is the rst stage
of the amplier chain. There are two principal congurations [10, 29], the feedback
preamplier (or charge-sensitive amplier), which is slow but accurate, and the grounded
base amplier, which is fast but contributes more noise.
The performance of the preamplier is primarily determined by the noise gure, which
is usually stated in terms of equivalent noise charge (ENC ). As the electronic noise is ap-
proximately Gaussian distributed, the ENC states the RMS value of a noise charge source
at the input of the (ctive) noise-free amplier. The ENC depends on the electronic pa-
rameters of the input stage and approximately linearly increases with load (detector)
capacitance.
Within the characterization station, both types of preampliers are used. A low-
noise, slow charge-sensitive amplier is connected to the detector under test, while a fast
grounded base amplier, connected to a silicon diode, is used as a trigger detector.
6.1.2.1 Charge-Sensitive Amplier
The feedback preamplier basically relies on the current integrating capability of a ca-
pacitor, given by Z
CV = Idt = Q : (6.1)
There are various realisations of charge-sensitive ampliers in both discrete and inte-
grated circuits. It is easily seen that the latter have a much better noise gure. As an
example, I want to give some details of the VA2 chip, which was used for the characteri-
zation station at the HEPHY. The VA2 chip, produced by the IDE AS company [30], is a
lower noise redesign of the original Viking chip [31, 32] for silicon strip detector readout.
It has 128 equal input channels, one of which is connected to the detector under test.
The schematics of the input stage of one channel is shown in g. 6.2, composed of the
preamplier, which actually converts charge to voltage, and the shaper. The preamplier

Figure 6.2: Schematics of one VA2 input stage, consisting of preamplier and shaper.
integrates the input current, while resistor R1 slowly discharges the integrating capacitor
C1 to avoid pile-up eects. The output of the preamplier is connected to a CR-RC shaper,
which lters the preamplier output in order to minimize the noise. Both preamplier
and shaper make use of operational transconductance ampliers (OTAs). The resistors
CHAPTER 6. CHARACTERIZATION 29
and amplier bias currents are adjustable to optimize the output signal with respect to
the detector parameters.
When a particle traverses the detector, a current pulse is injected into the detector
with a duration of approximately one (diamond) or a few (silicon) nanoseconds. With
respect to the system's time constants, this input current can be simplied in both cases
without loss of accuracy to a Dirac delta pulse. The preamplier integrates this current
pulse, resulting in a step pulse, while the discharging eect of resistor R1 can be neglected
comparing the time constants. This step pulse is now shaped by the CR-RC stage, which
has the (Laplace domain) transfer function
H (s) = VVout = A (1 +sTsTp )2 : (6.2)
po p
Tp is the peaking time of the output signal, i.e., the time from the charge injection
to the maximum of the output voltage and thus the point to sample. According to
the bias settings, it can be adjusted in the range of 0:5 : : : 3 s. The internal logic of
the VA2 provides a sample/hold circuit and an output multiplexer, shifting out all 128
sampled values in an analog queue, which are digitized externally. Basically two reasons
do not allow an on-chip ADC: the eects on the system noise and the additional power
consumption (note that several thousands of such chips are utilized in a vertex detector
in a comparatively compact volume at an operating temperature of slightly below 0 C).
Due to the long integration time, the noise gure of this amplier is excellent. For
the original Viking chip a value of approximately ENC  135 e + 12:3 e pF,1, slightly
depending on the peaking time, is stated, while the noise of the VA2 redesign, which is
optimized for lower load capacitance, could be reduced to ENC  82 e + 14 e pF,1.
6.1.2.2 Grounded Base Amplier
A second particle-sensitive detector is necessary in order to trigger a readout cycle of the
amplier connected to the detector under test. Often these are one or more scintillators
connected to photomultiplier tubes. In our setup we decided to use a standard silicon de-
tector connected to a very fast, discrete amplier described below. The major advantages
of this trigger compared to a scintillator-photomultiplier combination are its compact size
and the lack of high voltage, which would be essential for a photomultiplier. Apart from
that, as both the trigger and the test detector are solid state detectors, they sense the
same set of particles, i.e., only charged particles. Scintillators, however, are also sensitive
to neutral particles.
The trigger amplier utilized in the Vienna characterization station is a very fast, non-
integrating grounded base amplier [33]. This circuit, shown in g. 6.3, directly converts
the input current to an output voltage, allowing to monitor the charge collection duration
in various detector types.
The preamplier makes use of low cost HF transistors (2SC4995), which have a transit
frequency of ft = 11 GHz, a DC gain of hfe = 120 and a noise gure of aF = 1:1 dB at
f = 900 MHz. A monolithic amplier (INA-02186) giving a gain of 30 dB and a pass-band
at to 1 GHz, is implemented after the preamplier, capable of driving a 50
line. In
CHAPTER 6. CHARACTERIZATION 30

Figure 6.3: Schematics of the grounded base trigger amplier.

order to cut o low frequency (1=f ) noise, a miniature transformer was utilized in the
prototype tests discussed in [33]. In our setup we used a simple RC combination of low
and high pass, providing similar signal processing.
The risetime of the amplier is specied to be < 600 ps, while the noise is stated to
be ENC  1000 e + 60 e pF,1. Compared to the integrating charge-sensitive amplier
discussed above, basically accuracy is sacriced for speed.

6.1.3 Readout Electronics

The front-end electronic is very sensitive against any kind of electric in uence. Therefore,
a central ground point is essential, together with the shielding of the complete setup.
In the Vienna characterization station, the front-end has been packed into a copper-
shielded box, which is kept closed during measurement. This is also necessary as the
detectors and the VA2 chip are sensitive to light. Fig. 6.4 shows a photograph of the box.
During measurements, the lid is closed and the collimator with the source mounted onto
it. Fig. 6.5 shows the detailed schematics of the Vienna characterization station. The
diamond detector is AC coupled to the VA2 to allow dierent potentials. As the VA2 chip
output stage obviously is not very powerful, a repeater card (designed by A. Rudge and
the Ohio State University) is foreseen, which buers both incoming and outgoing VA2
signals.
For calibration purposes, a well dened step pulse is attenuated and sent to the VA2
input over a small capacitance, injecting a charge of
Q = C
V : (6.3)
There are two separated voltage dividers in the attenuator, because inevitable stray ca-
CHAPTER 6. CHARACTERIZATION 31

Lid (Holds Collimator

and Source When Closed)

Repeater Board

Diamond Sample
on Ceramic Support

VA2 Hybrid (Covered)

Trigger Detector
and Amplifier

Figure 6.4: The Vienna characterization station.

pacitance results in capacitive rather than galvanic coupling if the division ratio becomes
too high.
The data acquisition and control in the Vienna setup is done using CAMAC modules
and an Apple Macintosh IIfx computer. The CAMAC crate is equipped with a non-
standard Bergoz MAC-CC controller, while the Mac utilizes a Micron card to establish
the connection.
The detector bias voltage is provided by a commercial CAMAC HV module (Struck
CHQ203A). A module built by the Ohio State University (OSU M663A) handles the VA2
triggering and readout, while a home-made CAMAC module is responsible for general
control, trigger decision and calibration pulse generation.

6.1.4 Data Acquisition Software

On the Macintosh computer, a data acquisition program called Diamond Station has
been written in the LabView 3 environment by H. Pernegger and myself. This software
controls the CAMAC modules and reads out the VA2 analog data when a trigger condition
occurs. The data is lled into a histogram, collecting the signal pulse height spectrum,
which is displayed online and written to disk for oine analysis. The program is also
capable of automatically recording a measurement series with one detector, sweeping the
bias voltage and taking pedestals before and after. In previous versions, a common mode
correction (CMC) algorithm was included, which turned out to have no signicant eect
except slowing down the whole measurement. Fig. 6.6 shows a screenshot of the Diamond
Station program.
CHAPTER 6. CHARACTERIZATION 32

Collimated 90Sr β- Source

VA2 Repeater
Diamond Collimator
+HV To
CAMAC
10nF Module
8.2MΩ 100MΩ
Si Trigger Diode
3.3pF
+45V
50Ω line 50Ω line Calibration
100kΩ Pulse
10kΩ
100nF
39Ω 50Ω

11Ω
Trigger
Amplifier
To
CAMAC
Module

Figure 6.5: Schematics of the Vienna characterization station.

6.2 Calibration and Noise Measurements
With a pedestal measurement, the overall noise performance of the characterization setup
can be determined. However, this is only given in ADC counts, as long as there is no
absolute calibration, which can be done through the injection of a known step pulse into
the VA2 input as described above.
To obtain an accurate calibration, it is essential to know the involved parameters,
in particular the exact capacitance value (C ) and the voltage step size at the capacitor.
The capacitor has been measured with a Hewlett Packard 4285A precision LCR meter,
while the small voltage step cannot be measured directly with required precision. Thus,
the attenuation of the voltage dividers (r) has been measured with DC voltages much
higher than used in the calibration. The step pulse output of the CAMAC module can
be switched alternatively to both DC levels to precisely measure the voltage dierence
before attenuation (
V ). The number of electrons injected into the VA2 is given by
N = Qe = Cre
V : (6.4)
The rise time of the step pulse is indierent, as long as it is substantially shorter than the
integration time of the VA2, which is also the minimum length of the pulse.
Fig. 6.7 shows a measurement of both pedestal and calibration peaks in the pulse
height spectrum, tted with Gaussian distributions. In this case, the parameters were
C = 3:37 pF,
V = 227:6 mV (terminated) and r = 1022, yielding an injected charge of
4691 e. From the histogram t parameters, a pedestal RMS of 3:192 ADC counts and a
peak location dierence of 70:9 ADC counts are obtained.
CHAPTER 6. CHARACTERIZATION 33

Figure 6.6: Screenshot of the Diamond Station data acquisition software.

Finally, the calibration constant is Ccal = 66:2 e ADC,1, and the noise gure is
 = 211 e. With a diamond detector connected, the latter slightly increases due to
additional wiring to the order of  = 270 e. VA2 channels which are not connected show
an ENC of approximately  = 93 e. This gure comes close to the value stated by the
VA2 manufacturer. The reason for the excess noise of the input channel is the external
wiring. The placement and values of the elements in this circuit are critical and have been
optimized empirically, but they still add thermal and other noise and stray capacitance.
The pedestal mean value is subjected to a mid-term drift due to temperature varia-
tions, while the calibration constant (or, gain) turned out to be quite stable. Therefore,
the pedestal has been taken before and after each measurement series, while the calibra-
tion was done occasionally.

6.3 Fit Model

With a homogeneous detector material, a \perfect" Landau distributed pulse height spec-
trum is expected. In practice, a small fraction of particles, due to misalignment and
scattering, traverse the trigger, but not the test detector, thus adding a small pedestal
contribution to the spectrum. The signal and pedestal parts are well separated with silicon
detectors. However, with diamond samples, especially those with low collection distance,
the two contributions cannot easily be distinguished. Fig. 6.8 shows two examples of pulse
CHAPTER 6. CHARACTERIZATION 34

Pedestal and Calibration Pulse

140
Entries 1000
120 Constant 121.6
Mean 465.0
100 Sigma 3.192

80

60

40

20

0
440 460 480 500 520 540 560

cal_261197_0136_ped.hist

Entries 1000
120 Constant 120.5
Mean 535.9
100 Sigma 3.198
80

60

40

20

0
440 460 480 500 520 540 560

cal_261197_0153_cal.hist

Figure 6.7: Pedestal and calibration measured histograms with Gaussian ts applied.
height histograms. The left gure corresponds to a sample with low collection distance,
where pedestal and signal parts cannot be separated. On the contrary, the right histogram
is of a high quality sample, where separation is easier.
Neglecting any noise contributions, we would expect a Dirac delta needle at the
pedestal position plus a Landau distribution. Taking the electronic noise into account,
we have to convolute the spectrum with a Gaussian distribution, having a width  as
observed from the pedestal contribution, resulting in
HF = [(pedestal) + L(signal)]  G () = G (pedestal;) + L(signal)  G () : (6.5)
This model is illustrated by g. 6.9.
However, as CVD diamond has a columnar structure in the growth direction and also
considerable lateral inhomogeneities (see section 5.1.1), the spectrum does not exactly
follow this shape. In fact, a superposition of various Landau distributions occurs, yielding
a broader shape. Therefore, we convolute the signal related to the Landau part in eq. 6.5
with a Gaussian distribution with a  greater than that of the pedestal.
Thus, the nal t model is
HF = G| (pedestal
{z
; )} + L| (signal){z  G (L)} with L >  : (6.6)
pedestal signal
The solid lines in g. 6.8 show the t results with this function. When the pedestal mean
and , which are known from pedestal runs, are kept constant and reasonable initial
CHAPTER 6. CHARACTERIZATION 35

Low Quality Diamond Pulse Height Spectrum High Quality Diamond Pulse Height Spectrum
ID 8 120 ID 8
Entries 4999 Entries 5000
300 Mean 475.4 Mean 510.5
RMS 13.74 RMS 37.93
0. / 235 338.4 / 235
P1 0.8000 100 P1 6.573
P2 475.0 P2 495.1
250 P3 3700. P3 4723.
P4 900.0 P4 149.3
P5 463.7 80 P5 440.2
P6 4.249 P6 4.300
200 P7 4.900 P7 16.74

60
150

40
100

20
50

0 0
440 460 480 500 520 540 400 450 500 550 600 650 700

u3_011297_1523_447v.hist 74p2_201197_2336_600v.hist

Figure 6.8: Typical diamond pulse height spectra. The histogram to the right shows a high
dc sample, where pedestal and signal are clearly separated, which is not the case in the left
histogram of a low dc diamond. The solid line shows the applied t function (see text below).

Pedestal + Ideal Signal Noise Measured Spectrum

(Landau) (Gauss)

Figure 6.9: A model for tting histograms.

values are given, the t also works with low quality diamonds, as shown in the left plot
of g. 6.8.
After obtaining the t parameters, the question of the mean signal remains. As dis-
cussed in section 4.2, the ideal Landau distribution does not have a mean value. The
Landau t, however, provides a weight, which corresponds to the area below the curve.
With the mean value and the area below the Gaussian pedestal t curve, which are also
resulting from the t, the pedestal contribution can be subtracted from the mean value
of the measured histogram, resulting in a signal mean. Finally, we obtain the charge
collection distance by multiplying the dierence between signal and pedestal means with
the calibration constant (Ccal ),
!
area(signal) + area(pedestal)
dc = Ccal area(signal)
(mean(H) , mean(pedestal)) : (6.7)
For diamonds with reasonable pedestal separation (right histogram in g. 6.8), it is
CHAPTER 6. CHARACTERIZATION 36
much easier to calculate the charge collection distance by simply cutting out or subtracting
the pedestal contribution. This approach has been cross-checked with the t method,
yielding similar results.
Usually, the pedestal contribution in the pulse height histograms makes up a few
percent of all events and thus is negligible. Yet, in some cases, the pedestal may even
dominate the spectrum. If the metallization dot on the diamond sample is smaller than
the collimator hole, a considerable amount of particles cross the diamond without inducing
a proper signal. Due to the fringe eld, the signal is non-zero, but signicantly smaller
than the true signal. The result is a \merging" of pedestal and signal distributions.
Another reason for increased pedestal contribution is given when measuring in between
irradiation periods, where the diamond itself, the metallization and the ceramic support
are activated. These parts emit particles that reach the trigger but do not traverse
the diamond, generating \false triggers". Various isotopes with dierent lifetimes are
produced; one major product, coming from aluminum in the Al2O3 ceramic support, is
24 Na with a half-life of 15 hours. Generally, it takes a couple of weeks until the activity
of all isotopes drops to a negligible rate.
Chapter 7
Radiation Hardness
7.1 Radiation Defects
The properties of diamond may be aected by impurities in the lattice. Especially, the
charge collection distance strongly depends on the presence of inhomogeneities.
Atoms that do not t into the diamond lattice or lattice positions that are not occupied
are called defects in general. In the virgin state, CVD polycrystalline diamond has a
certain number of defects, depending on the growth parameters. In particular, there
are considerable nitrogen impurities. Additionally, the grain boundaries are suspected
to provide a signicant number of charge traps and recombination centers. The defects
introduce energy levels inside the band gap. As the carrier transition between valence
and conduction bands becomes more probable with the introduction of intermediate levels,
the intrinsic carrier density increases, resulting in a higher leakage current. However, as
diamond has a very large band gap, and the impurities in detector material are below the
ppm range, the bulk current remains negligible in practice. In fact, no signicant eect
has been observed on the leakage current before and after the irradiation experiments.
Additional defects are introduced with irradiation [6]. Depending on the incident
particle type and momentum, various defects may occur by atom displacement. With
low momentum particles, only simple defects are probable. These are vacancies, where
a lattice position is unoccupied and interstitials, where an atom is posed in between the
lattice. Due to the conservation of matter, these two always occur together, called Frenkel
defects. Heavy particles, especially ions, usually have a very short range in the order of
micrometers. They are stopped in the diamond lms, transfering their whole energy
and additionally placing themselves in the diamond lattice. For this reason, the damage
induced by ions, is by orders of magnitude higher than that of traversing particles.
All of these defects aect the charge collection eciency by the creation of trapping
and recombination centers, which decrease the carrier lifetime and thus the drift distance.
Considering the tightly bound, compact lattice, diamond has a reputation of being
quite insensitive to radiation. However, as theoretical prediction is dicult, experiments
have been carried out to observe the damage introduced by various kinds of particles.

37
CHAPTER 7. RADIATION HARDNESS 38
7.2 Pumping Eect
A diamond detector that has never been irradiated before is in a virgin state, called
\unpumped". With moderate irradiation uence, the signal output, or charge collection
distance, increases signicantly. The cause for this unique behavior are defects of the
material. There are non-diamond atoms in the bulk, generating energy levels inside
the band gap, which act as charge traps. With irradiation, these traps are lled and
made inactive, thus they do no longer absorb electrons or holes. When all such traps
are passivated, the diamond is called \pumped" and this state is conserved until the
diamond is exposed to UV light. By UV absorption, the trapped charges are released
again, resetting the diamond to its original, or unpumped state. Present understanding
is that this procedure is fully reversible and there is no limitation in the number of
pumping/unpumping cycles.
The pumping transition occurs with all types of particles and needs a radiation uence
of approximately 1010 particles cm,2. With this uence, the collection distance increases
by 30 to 100%, depending on the sample. Fig. 7.1 shows the pumping eect by exposure to
a 90Sr source. Recent measurements show that the uence needed for complete pumping
increases after intense irradiation, indicating an increased number of traps in the diamond
bulk, as expected. A linear relationship between pumping uence and irradiation uence
has been observed.
ccd dc [µm]

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
0 100 200 300 400 500
time [min]

Figure 7.1: The pumping eect during exposure of a diamond sample to a 90 Sr source.
In future experiments such as the LHC, diamond detectors will reach the pumped
state within several hours, depending on the luminosity and the distance from the vertex.
As this will be the working condition, all charge collection distance values are given in
the pumped state unless noted otherwise.
CHAPTER 7. RADIATION HARDNESS 39
7.3 Irradiation
Several diamond detectors were exposed to high intensity photon, electron, pion, proton,
neutron and  particle beams. During all irradiation runs, the detectors were biased,
resulting in an electric eld strength of 0:2 to 1 V m,1, to obtain similar conditions as
in future applications.
As a representative example, the pion irradiation will be discussed in more detail.

7.3.1 Pion Irradiation

Four pion irradiation experiments have been carried out at the Paul Scherrer Institute
(PSI), Villigen, CH, in the past years [34].
All experiments were performed with 300 MeV c,1 +. This choice was based on the

resonance peak for the +p interaction, as shown in the top half of g. 7.2 [13]. The
bottom plot shows that there is no such signicant peak for ,. Due to the high cross
section, the chosen particles are expected to induce more radiation damage than those
with other momenta.
Fig. 7.3 shows the beam setup. The diamond samples had an average thickness of
650 m and were biased with 300 V (E  0:5 V m,1) throughout the irradiation. A
carbon shield with a thickness of 3 cm reduced the proton contamination of the beam to
the order below 1%. The diamonds were placed in the beam focus, which had a FWHM
(full width at half maximum) of a few centimeters. Thus the irradiation on the samples
was approximately homogeneous with a pion ux about 2  109 cm,2 s,1 .
On the back of each diamond sample an aluminum foil of extreme purity (99.999)
was attached for dosimetry. 27 Al atoms are converted by pions to 24Na with a half-life
of 15 hours. This determined the length of each irradiation period, usually around 12
hours. After each period, the aluminum foils were put into a spectrometer to measure the
amount of 24Na produced. With irradiation and cooling times and the foil mass given, the
received uence can be calculated. The beam current was included in these calculations to
take periods with no beam into account. The ionization chamber at the end of the beam
pipe was used to cross-check the dosimetry results. The overall error of the dosimetry is
estimated to be 15%.
During the irradiation, the beam induced current of each diamond sample was mea-
sured individually with a Keithley 237 source measure unit. The irradiation was performed
without a cooling device, thus the sample temperature was about 25 C throughout the
irradiation.
Individual samples were taken out of the beam in each irradiation period, rested for
several hours and then were measured in the characterization station before re-insertion
into the beam. The resting was necessary to reduce the radioactivity of the sample and the
ceramic support. As mentioned in section 6.3, the pedestal contribution in the measured
pulseheight spectrum increases with detector activity due to false triggers.
CHAPTER 7. RADIATION HARDNESS 40

2
10

Cross section (mb)

+
⇓ π ptotal

10

+
π pelastic

-1 2 3
10 1 10 10 10
πp 1.2 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 20 30 40

πd 2.1 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 20 30 40 50 60
Center of mass energy (GeV)
2
10

⇓ π±d total

π–p total
Cross section (mb)

10

π–pelastic

-1 2 3
10 1 10 10 10
Laboratory beam momentum (GeV/c)

Figure 7.2: Nuclear interaction cross section plots for pions and protons.

7.3.1.1 Collection Distance

In g. 7.4, the charge collection distance values in the pumped state are shown vs. pion
uence for various samples. The letter in the sample name indicates the wafer, from which
the samples were cut. Apart from E1, always two corresponding samples from a wafer
were irradiated, which behave similar.
It turned out that the higher the collection distance in the virgin state is, the faster
it drops with irradiation. This behavior could be explained by the linear model. The
vertical trap density in the detector before irradiation is higher at the substrate side
than on the growth side, as discussed in section 5.1.1. Thus the local charge collection
distance is low on the substrate side and high at the growth side. Intense irradiation is
expected to introduce additional traps, equally distributed along the beam track. The
sum trap density now increases signicantly on the growth side, shrinking the local charge
CHAPTER 7. RADIATION HARDNESS 41
Carbon Shield
Beam Pipe Diamond Sample Holder
Sample Al Foil Slide Tray Light-tight Box

π Beam

Ionization Chamber xyz Table

Figure 7.3: The irradiation setup.

collection distance, while there is only a negligible relative trap density increase at the
substrate side. In other words, regions with a high charge collection distance are more
susceptible to radiation damage than those with low dc, which are relatively indierent.
Similar behaviour applies to the global (mean) charge collection distance, as observed in
the experiment.
The measurements show that the signal decrease of the initially highest charge collec-
tion distance samples is about 40% after 1015  cm,2. This corresponds to the estimated
uence at the LHC at a radius of 7 cm from the vertex within 10 years of operation.
However, the irradiation damage is less severe than expected from the collection dis-
tance decrease, as the collection distance is calculated from the mean signal. When
comparing the signal pulse height spectra in the pumped state before and after irradia-
tion (g. 7.5), it is visible that the radiation does not simply scale the whole distribution,
but has more eect on initially higher signals, while there is almost no eect on very low
signals. The Landau tail suers from irradiation, the most probable value of the distribu-
tion is less aected and the rising edge almost stays the same. This agrees with the linear
model damage discussed above, when we consider the inhomogeneity of CVD diamond.
Regions with higher local collection distance are more aected by radiation than others,
causing the strong eect on the Landau tail.
7.3.1.2 Beam Induced Charge
The ionisation process of 300 MeV c,1 pions crossing the diamond is very similar to that
of the electrons from the 90 Sr source, because pions with this momentum deposit approxi-
mately 110% of the MIP energy in diamond of 650 m thickness [17]. The basic dierence
between the two types of irradiation is the ux, or intensity. While each single electron is
observed during the characterization, there is a high pion ux during irradiation, which
allows to measure a DC current, or average Q=t, respectively.
During beam-o periods, the current in the samples is essentially zero. When be-
ginning the irradiation with a virgin sample, the beam induced current increases in the
rst couple of seconds due to the pumping eect. However, as the ux was not constant
throughout the irradiation, it is more convenient for further analysis to look at the beam
induced charge instead of the current.
CHAPTER 7. RADIATION HARDNESS 42

dc Summary @ 1V/µm

Mean Charge per β [e ]

Collection Distance [µm]

-
A1

-
180
A2
6000 B1
B2 160
C1
C2
5000 140
D1
D2
E1 120
4000
100

3000
80

60
2000

40

1000
20

0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
+ 2
Total Fluence [E13 π /cm ]

Figure 7.4: The charge collection distance of various samples vs. pion uence.

By simple calculation, we can obtain the charge observed at the electrodes for a single
traversing pion if we know the beam induced current (Iind ), the pion ux ( ) and the
active area of the sample, which is bigger than the contact pad due to the fringe eld
(this will be discussed in detail in section 8.1). For the beam induced charge calculation,
we will refer to this equivalent area (Ae), obtaining the equation
Qc = Iind : (7.1)
 Ae
Using eq. 7.1, we can correlate the measured current of each sample with the number
of electrons generated by a single traversing pion. It is very interesting to compare the
beam induced charge with the collection distance measured with the 90Sr source at the
same bias voltage of 300 V. These two values should be identical for all uences, but
in fact they aren't. It turns out that the pion induced charge (pic) always exceeds the
electron induced charge (eic).
We dene the excess factor as the ratio pic=eic. Considering all samples, we observed
excess factor curves within the shaded area of g. 7.6. There are two components in
the development of the excess factor vs. uence. Easily seen at low uences, there is
CHAPTER 7. RADIATION HARDNESS 43

events [ ]
45
DB74-P1, D = 611 µm
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 5000 10000
collected charge signal [e]

Figure 7.5: The pumped state signal distribution of a CVD diamond sample before and after
receiving a pion uence of 1:1  1015 particles cm,2 .

an exponential decay, and additionally, there is a constant factor of approximately 2,

independent on the uence. The reasons for the excess factor are currently unknown.
One irradiation experiment was performed each autumn from 1994 to 1997. It was
found that the state of all samples was conserved over one year without irradiation, letting
the pic continue at the end value of the previous year in all cases. During the intervals,
the samples were characterized as well as pumped and depumped. Thus, for the excess
factor, we can exclude short-term eects such as activation.

7.3.2 Electron Irradiation

In 1995, an irradiation was performed with 2:2 MeV electrons from a Van de Graaf ac-
celerator at the Societe AERIAL in Strasbourg, France [35]. The CVD diamond samples
absorbed a uence of up to 1 MGy (= 100 MRad), while no decrease in the charge collec-
tion distance could be observed, as shown in g. 7.7.

7.3.3 Photon Irradiation

An irradiation experiment with 1:2 MeV photons emitted by a 60 Co source was carried
out at the Argonne National Laboratory in 1993 [36]. The bias voltage during irradiation
was resulting in an electric eld strength of 0:2 V m,1.
In g. 7.8, the collection distance is shown normalized to the unpumped value before
irradiation vs. the photon uence. The rst four points were obtained with  electrons
from a 90 Sr source and correspond to the pumping process, which saturates at a few 10 Gy.
CHAPTER 7. RADIATION HARDNESS 44

Excess Factor
6

Qπ/Qe
5

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
+ 2
Total Fluence [E13 π /cm ]

Figure 7.6: The range of the excess factor vs. uence.

Up to 100 kGy of photon uence, corresponding to 10 years of LHC operation at a radius

of 20 cm from the vertex (see section 2), no change in the collected charge was observed.

7.3.4 Proton Irradiation

In 1997, diamond samples were irradiated at the PS at CERN [37] with protons. The
momentum of the protons was 24 GeV c,1. Another irradiation was performed earlier
with 500 MeV c,1 protons, showing compatible results.
Fig. 7.9 shows the development of the collection distance with proton uence. After a
uence of 5  1015 p cm,2, exceeding by far the expected LHC uence within 10 years at
r = 7 cm from the vertex, the signal decrease is about 40%.

7.3.5 Neutron Irradiation

Diamond samples have been irradiated in 1995 at the ISIS facility at the Rutherford
Appleton Laboratory with both thermal neutrons and neutrons with energy peaks at
10 keV and 1 MeV [15].
The pumping process and the neutron induced damage to the charge collection distance
is shown in g. 7.10. The charge collection distance normalization corresponds to the
virgin unpumped state. The dc decrease is approximately 20% after 1015 n cm,2, which
CHAPTER 7. RADIATION HARDNESS 45
2

1.5

d/do
1

0.5

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Dose (MRad)

Figure 7.7: The dc development with electron irradiation, normalized to the initial unpumped
value. (100 MRad = 1 MGy)

corresponds to ten times the expected LHC uence over 10 years at a radius of 7 cm from
the vertex.

7.3.6 Alpha Irradiation

Some diamond samples were also exposed to an intense 5 MeV alpha beam at the Los
Alamos National Laboratory [36]. The range of these particles in diamond is less than
15 m, thus aecting the surface region only. In order to measure the charge collection
in this region, the two electrodes have been applied to the irradiated area on the same
side of the diamond lm. With this geometry, the electric drift eld is restricted to the
surface.
The charge collection distance normalized to the pumped value before irradiation is
shown vs. the  uence in g. 7.11. The dc decreases above a uence of the order of
1012  cm,2.
In contrast to the various types of particles mentioned in the previous sections, alpha
radiation will not be signicant at the LHC.

7.4 Comparison
Tab. 7.1 summarizes the collection distance damage introduced by hadronic particles.
The dc values are normalized to the pumped values before irradiation.
Among the hadronic particles, pions showed the worst eect on the charge collection
distance. Comparing the nuclear interaction cross sections of protons and pions with
protons (shown for pions in g. 7.2), it turns out that the 300 MeV c,1 + have an ap-
proximately ve times higher cross section than 500 MeV c,1 or 24 GeV c,1 protons [38].
CHAPTER 7. RADIATION HARDNESS 46
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0 -4 -3 -2 -1 2
10 10 10 10 1 10 10

Figure 7.8: The dc development with photon irradiation, normalized to the initial unpumped
value.
normalized charge collection distance [ ]

1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5
(24 GeV/c protons) fluence [1015 /cm2]

Figure 7.9: The charge collection distance vs. proton uence, normalized to the initial pumped
value.

This is in qualitative agreement with the observed dc decrease.

A coarse estimation suggests that diamond detectors are technically feasible as tracking
detectors up to a hadronic uence of at least 1015 particles cm,2, ten times more than
present silicon detectors allow.
As discussed with the pion irradiation (section 7.3.1), diamond samples with higher
initial collection distance are more aected by radiation than those of low quality. Fur-
thermore, this also applies to regions of higher and lower local collection distance within a
single sample. Thus, the irradiation has almost no eect on the rising edge of the Landau
distribution. For the potential application as a detector with a certain trigger threshold
at a few thousand electrons, the eciency is less aected than suggested by the collection
distance decrease.
Alpha particles are known to damage solid state detectors by a factor of 100 to 1000
more than minimum ionizing particles. The measured data agrees with this factor.
CHAPTER 7. RADIATION HARDNESS 47

normalized ccd [ ]
2.25

1.75

1.5

1.25

0.75

0.5

0.25

0
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
fluence [n/cm2]

Figure 7.10: The development of the charge collection distance, normalized to the initial un-
pumped value, during the pumping process under a 90 Sr source and with neutron irradiation.

Dose (MGy)
Normalized gain

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Fluence (α/cm2)

Figure 7.11: The dc development with  irradiation.

dc=dc0 after
Hadron 1015 cm,2 5  1015 cm,2
Proton 1 0.6
Pion 0.6
Neutron 0.8
Table 7.1: Normalized decrease of the charge collection distance after irradiation with dierent
hadrons.
Chapter 8
Detector Geometries
Usually solid state tracking detectors have metal electrodes on opposite sides, however
the geometric layout varies considerably. This has implications on the electric eld dis-
tribution, the readout electronics and the spatial resolution.

8.1 Dots
In the simplest case, both electrodes are pads of equal size and shape at matching po-
sitions on either side. Thus, all induced charge from traversing particles is collected on
the same electrode. In the diamond irradiation studies, the samples had circular pads
with a diameter ranging from 1:8 to 5 mm. Although CVD diamond shows lateral inho-
mogeneities on a sub-millimeter scale, a pad area of 2:5 mm2 and more is large enough to
average over the uctuations.
As long as the particle track is close to the pad center, the charge is generated in a
homogeneous electric eld, and the charge movement agrees with the model. Once the
track hits the pad fringe, the electric eld is no longer homogeneous.
For the diamond samples involved in the pion irradiation, the electric fringe eld has
been numerically calculated and the mean eld strength has been computed on small
ring elements. Together with the corresponding charge vs. electric eld plots (g. 5.4),
the charge induced by hits in the area of the fringe eld could be obtained. Finally, the
actual electric eld can be equivalently described by a sharp-edged homogeneous eld 40
to 70% bigger than the pad area, depending on the sample geometry. However, as the
charges follow the electric eld, they have to cross more grain boundaries in the fringe
region than in the homogeneous part. This could to some extent reduce the resulting
charge and thus the equivalent area, but has been neglected in these calculations.
To avoid these complications, the samples can be equipped with a grounded guard
ring electrode around the pad connected to the HV in order to restrict the fringe eld.
The simple dot and guard ring congurations are shown in g. 8.1. This photograph also
shows the dierent appearances of the smooth substrate side and the rough growth side.
Fig. 8.2 shows the electric eld in a radial cross-section of a diamond sample (D =
641 m) at 300 V bias without (a) and with (b) a guard ring. The borders of the shaded

48
CHAPTER 8. DETECTOR GEOMETRIES 49

Figure 8.1: CVD diamond samples with a simple dot (substrate side) and with a guard ring
(growth side). The scale ticks to the left represent millimeters.

areas are the equilines of potential (each shade corresponds to a 15 V interval), while the
arrows show the negative gradient of the potential, i.e., the electric eld. In total, the
fringe eld is signicantly reduced by the guard structure, being restricted basically to a
small range between the top and guard electrodes. Furthermore, the charges drained by
the guard ring do no longer contribute to the signal, which is measured at the bottom
electrode.
Guard rings are also used for silicon detectors, however, the reason there is primarily
to reduce surface leakage currents.

8.2 Strips
Strip detectors have a large number of narrow strip implants on one side, while the
opposite side is provided with a single, large electrode, called backplane. Normally, each
of these strips is wire-bonded to a separate amplier channel, allowing to detect the
track position in one dimension. In some detector designs, only every second (or even
third) strip is connected to an amplier, while the remaining \intermediate strips" are
terminated with high impedance. As there is a capacitive coupling, signals on these
intermediate strips are partially transfered to the readout strips. With proper geometric
design, the number of readout channels can be dramatically reduced while only little SNR
is sacriced. Strip and pixel detectors are often referred to as \trackers", as their intention
is the track reconstruction.

8.2.1 Spatial Resolution

The principal idea of not simply applying dots on both sides is to gain position informa-
tion. At the cost of more amplier channels and more complicated readout, the spatial
resolution gets better with smaller electrode areas, forming strips or pixels. With a strip
detector, the simplest case of data processing is to reduce the position information to
the readout channel with the highest observed signal. Thus, the position information is
digitized in steps of the strip pitch1 p. Similar to the intrinsic noise of an ADC, one gets
1 distance from one strip center to the neighbor strip center
CHAPTER 8. DETECTOR GEOMETRIES 50
300 V

641 µm
(a)

0V

1.0 1.5 1.75 2.0 r [mm]

300 V 0V
641 µm

(b)

0V

Figure 8.2: Cross-section of a diamond sample, showing potentials and the electric eld without
(a) and with (b) a grounded guard ring.

the digital (or, binary) resolution RMS of

RMSdr = pp : (8.1)
12
When the strip pitch is small enough, charge sharing between two or more electrodes
occurs, and together with proper analysis tools, the particle track can be reconstructed
with much higher resolution than digital, depending primarily on the SNR. Using a silicon
detector (300 m thick) with a strip pitch of p = 50 m and a high-quality amplier (e.g.,
the VA2), it is easy to obtain a spatial resolution of a few micrometers.

8.2.2 Measurements
When a diamond strip detector is measured in a test beam, the particle track is monitored
with a number of high-resolution silicon strip reference detectors. Half of the reference
detectors are rotated by 90 in order to obtain x and y position information. A system of
such detectors, shown in g. 8.3, is called \beam telescope". The RD42 telescope utilizes
8 planes of silicon strip detectors with a pitch of 50 m, which are read out by VA2 chips.
The intrinsic resolution of this telescope is approximately 1:5 m.
CHAPTER 8. DETECTOR GEOMETRIES 51
Silicon Strip
Reference Detectors
Diamond
Tracker
Silicon Strip
Reference Detectors

Particle Track

Figure 8.3: The RD42 beam telescope with a diamond tracker under test.

In the past years, several diamond samples have been equipped with strip electrodes
and measured in test beams [22, 39]. The rst diamond tracker, shown on the left side of
g. 8.4, was built and tested in 1994. It was made of a 1  1 cm2 piece of CVD diamond;
the strips had a 100 m pitch and a 50 m interstrip gap. Using a VIKING readout chip,
a mean SNR of 9 was achieved and the spatial resolution was 26 m, slightly better than
the digital resolution (29 m).
In the meantime, the quality of the CVD diamond material has been dramatically
improved. Furthermore, as the intention was to achieve better spatial resolution, the
strip pitch was reduced to 50 m. With the best diamond sample available, which has
an area of 1  1 cm2, a mean SNR of 71 (most probable SNR=46) has been achieved
with the VA2 readout chip. The measured spatial resolution of  = 15 m approximately
corresponds to the digital resolution for this strip pitch.
Recently, a 2  4 cm2 CVD diamond tracker with a pitch of 50 m has been tested
with VA2 amplier chips (right side of g. 8.4). With this conguration, a mean SNR of
30 and a spatial resolution of 14 m has been obtained.
Apart from the slow, but low-noise VA2 chips, diamond strip detectors have also been
tested with fast LHC front-end electronics. At the LHC, a bunch crossing occurs every
25 ns. In order to correlate the detector signal with a certain bunch crossing, the shaping
time of the front-end electronics must be of the same order. Furthermore, the LHC
amplier chips need an analog pipeline storage, since the trigger decision, i.e., the request
for event data, comes a few microseconds later. The SCT128AHC readout chip [40] has
been designed for the ATLAS experiment, having a shaping time of 21 to 25 ns and a 128
cell analog pipeline. Due to the short integration time, the noise gure of this chip is
ENC  650 e + 70 e pF,1, much higher than the noise of the VA2 chip.
The best available diamond detector, which was tested with the VA2 before, was later
connected to the SCT128AHC readout chip without changing the strip pattern. This
chip version is optimized for high capacitive load, i.e., silicon strip detectors, and thus not
ideal for diamond detectors. Nevertheless, a mean SNR of 10 was demonstrated (most
probable SNR=7.2) and a spatial resolution of  = 16:5 m was observed.
Although the SNR gures of the same diamond strip detector measured with VA2 and
SCT chips dier considerably, the spatial resolution is close to the digital resolution in
CHAPTER 8. DETECTOR GEOMETRIES 52

Figure 8.4: Left: The rst CVD diamond tracker (1  1 cm2 ) with a 100 m pitch, wire-bonded
to a VIKING readout chip. The strips are surrounded by a guard ring. Right: A 2  4 cm2 CVD
diamond tracker, connected with two VA2 chips. The resistor and capacitor to the right form a
low pass lter for the bias HV line; the scale's major ticks represent centimeters.

both cases. With silicon detectors, for comparison, the spatial resolution strongly depends
on the SNR. It seems that certain limitations to the spatial resolution of CVD diamond
are implied by the polycrystalline, inhomogeneous structure.
In order to obtain two-dimensional particle track information, two strip detectors
can be used, one of which is rotated, as it is done in a beam telescope. However, this
method is entirely secure only with low particle rates, i.e., one single particle per amplier
time constant, resulting in one hit strip in each plane. Otherwise, the hits may become
ambiguous, and track reconstruction is no longer possible. One possible workaround to
diminish the probability of such \ghosts" is to use a third strip layer under a certain
angle. Theoretically, even more layers under dierent angles could be used, but the eort
of track recognition would be far too complicated. The safe solution, at the cost of a large
number of readout channels, is to use pixel detectors.

8.3 Pixels
A large number of small, equally shaped dots makes up a pixel detector. The dimensions
of the pixels are primarily limited by the readout electronics. In contrast to strip detectors,
here it is impossible to wire-bond the detector to a readout chip located nearby. Pixel
detectors require a readout chip with amplier cells of the same dimensions but mirrored,
which is then bump-bonded onto the detector, forming a \sandwich". This conguration
CHAPTER 8. DETECTOR GEOMETRIES 53
is shown in g. 8.5.

Figure 8.5: A pixel detector, bump-bonded onto the readout chip. x and y are the unit cell
dimensions.
One method of bump-bonding will be described in brief. Each detector pixel met-
allization is passivated except for a small hole onto which indium is deposited from the
vapor phase. After each pixel is prepared, the detector is heated until the indium forms
a pearl on each pixel. Then the sample is pressed onto the readout chip, which is heated
to 170 C. The intention is that each indium pearl forms a contact between a pixel and
the corresponding readout cell.
Another type of pixel detector is the CCD (charge coupled device), which is primarily
used for video and photographic purposes.
With the design of the CMS pixel detector for the LHC at CERN, a few CVD dia-
mond samples have been prepared with 125  125 m2 pixels, as shown in g. 8.6. The
photograph to the right shows a close-up of individual pixel cells, where the indium pearls
are visible.
Another pixel cell size is developed for the ATLAS pixel detector of the LHC. Here
the cells are not square, but quite long and narrow. Fig. 8.7 shows the pixels cells, which
measure 50  536 m2. The intention of the staggered layout is to improve the spatial
resolution in the long dimension through charge sharing between adjacent pixels.
This pixel detector has been bump-bonded to the specically designed readout chip,
which complies with the LHC requirements. The system proved fully functional in a rst
test beam. Approximately digital resolution has been obtained in both dimensions in a
preliminary analysis.
CHAPTER 8. DETECTOR GEOMETRIES 54

Figure 8.6: The CMS diamond pixel detector with 125  125 m2 unit cell size (100  100 m2
electrodes). The indium pearls, which form the contact in the bump-bonding process, are visible
in the close-up to the right.

Figure 8.7: The ATLAS diamond pixel detector with 50  536 m2 cell size.
Chapter 9
Summary
The possible application of radiation detectors based on CVD diamond has been demon-
strated. Similar to semiconductor detectors such as silicon, the Bethe-Bloch and Landau
theories are ecient tools to describe the behavior of diamond detectors.
The polycrystalline structure of CVD diamond implies its inhomogeneity. A linear
model over the detector thickness describes the relationship between local and average
collection distances. This model satises experimental data. High quality CVD diamond
is obtained by removing material with poor charge collection properties from the substrate
side. The growth process has been successfully applied to grow large area detectors.
Excellent progress has been achieved over the past years by the RD42 collaboration.
The charge collection distance of diamond has been increased, now reaching 230 m (cor-
responding to 8300 e) with a sample 432 m thick and slightly more with thicker samples.
A compact characterization station was built in Vienna, which has been successfully used
for pulse height measurements. Due to my contribution and optimization, it has a very
low noise gure (ENC = 270 e).
Moreover, I was involved in the pion irradiation of CVD diamond samples, which was
carried out by the HEPHY in the autumns of 1995, 1996 and 1997. I made essential
contributions in preparation, realization and data analysis including further studies such
as the calculation of electric eld distributions in diamond samples. In agreement with the
linear model we could show that diamond samples with higher initial collection distance
are more aected by irradiation than those with lower dc. Similar, we have demonstrated
that the upper (Landau) tail of the signal distribution suers more from radiation than
the low signal region, which remains almost unaected. This implies that the eciency
of applications with a moderate threshold (a few thousand electrons) will be less aected
by radiation than the mean value of the distribution.
Furthermore, the radiation hardness of diamond has been demonstrated for all major
particles. Simplifying the results of the irradiation experiments, diamond is expected to
survive a hadronic uence of at least 1015 particles cm,2, corresponding to the projected
charged hadron uence at a radius of 7 cm from the vertex in the LHC accelerator at
CERN over 10 years. This is ten times more than present silicon detectors allow.
Diamond micro-strip detectors were successfully tested with both slow (VA2) and
fast (SCT128AHC) electronics. With the best diamond sample available, most probable

55
CHAPTER 9. SUMMARY 56
signal-to-noise ratios were observed to be 46 and 7.2, respectively, achieving approximately
digital spatial resolution in both cases. However, the version of the SCT chip was not yet
optimized for the small capacitive load of diamond detectors. The spatial resolution seems
to be limited by the polycrystalline structure of CVD diamond. Furthermore, the rst
prototype of a diamond pixel detector (ATLAS design) demonstrated its functionality in
a testbeam, and digital spatial resolution was observed in both dimensions.
The future program of RD42 includes further improvement of the charge collection
distance as well as the growing of large area detectors. Emphasis will be laid upon
the preparation and test of pixel detectors. Furthermore, the homogeneity studies will
be continued to investigate the charge collection properties on a scale of a few tens of
micrometers in the lateral dimension.
Acknowledgements
First of all, I am greatly indebted to my parents, who nanced my university study and
pushed me when I was somewhat lazy. Furthermore, I want to say thank you to my
girlfriend Michaela. She was very patient when I was distressed with this work.
At the Institute of High Energy Physics, I primarily want to thank Prof. M. Regler,
who oered me a job there after a laboratory course. This gave me the opportunity to
learn a lot in the eld of high energy physics and participate in the RD42 collaboration.
Additionally, I am indebted to him for advising my diploma thesis. I am also indeed
grateful to my mentors DI M. Pernicka, Dr. J. Hrubec and Dr. H. Pernegger for spending
lots of their time with fruitful discussions. I owe special thanks to Doz. M. Krammer, not
only for advising me whenever I had a question, but also for the eort of proofreading this
thesis. I have always enjoyed the atmosphere of our group in the institute, and therefore
I also want to thank all persons not mentioned.
Last, but not least, I owe many thanks to Prof. W. Fallmann for his eort of advising
my diploma thesis.

57
Appendix A
Abbreviations and Symbols
The list below explains abbreviations used in this thesis.
Abbreviation Meaning (explanation)
AC Alternating current
ADC Analog-to-digital converter
ATLAS A toroidal LHC apparatus (LHC experiment)
CAMAC (Standardized instrumentation for high energy physics, consisting of a crate
and modules)
CCD Charge coupled device (video pixel chip)
CERN European Laboratory for Particle Physics, Geneva, CH
CMC Common mode correction (method for removing shifts of all amplier
channels)
CMS Compact Muon Solenoid (LHC experiment)
CVD Chemical vapor deposition (growth process for diamond)
DC Direct current
Fermilab Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, USA
GSI Gesellschaft fur Schwerionenforschung, Darmstadt, D
HEPHY Institute of High Energy Physics, Vienna, A [1]
HF High frequency
HV High voltage
LHC Large Hadron Collider (future accelerator at CERN)
MIP Minimum ionizing particle
OTA Operational transconductance amplier
ppm Parts per million
PS Proton Synchrotron (CERN accelerator)
PSI Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, CH
RD42 Research & Development Programme 42 (diamond collaboration at CERN)
continued on next page

58
APPENDIX A. ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS 59
continued from previous page
Abbreviation Meaning (explanation)
SEM Scanning electron microscopy
SNR Signal-to-noise ratio
SPS Super Proton Synchrotron (CERN accelerator)
UV Ultra-violet (light)

This list denes the symbols used for variables and constants.
Symbol Denition Units or Value
 Speed relative to c
( ) Correction term
 Relative dielectric constant
0 Dielectric constant 8:85  10,12 A s V,1 m,1
(1 ,  2 ),1=2
 Wavelength nm
e;h Electron, hole mobilities cm2 V,1 s,1
 Flux particles cm,2 s,1
 Mass density g cm,3
c Resistivity
cm
 Standard deviation any unit
T Thermal conductivity W cm,1 K,1
e;h Electron, hole lifetimes s
A Atomic mass g mol,1
Amplier gain
Ae Equivalent area cm2
aF Noise gure dB
C Capacitance F
c Speed of light in vacuum 3:00  1010 cm s,1
Ccal Calibration constant e ADC,1
cce Charge collection eciency
D Thickness of a diamond sample cm
dc Charge collection distance cm
dE=dx Energy loss per unit length eV cm,1
E Electric eld strength V cm,1
Energy eV
e Elementary charge 1:60  10,19 A s
Base of the natural logarithm 2.72
Eg Band gap eV
continued on next page
APPENDIX A. ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS 60
continued from previous page
Symbol Denition Units or Value
Eeh Energy to create e-h pair eV
eic Electron induced charge e
ENC Equivalent noise charge e
f Frequency Hz
ft Transit frequency Hz
flc Fluence particles cm,2
h Planck constant 6:63  10,34 J s
hfe Transistor DC gain
I Current A
Mean excitation energy eV
k Boltzmann constant 1:38  10,23 J K,1
me Electron mass 9:11  10,28 g
me;h Electron, hole eective masses g
N Number of Atoms cm,3
n Refraction index
NA Avogadro's number 6:02  1023 mol,1
ni Intrinsic carrier density cm,3
NC;V Conduction, valence band weights cm,3
p Particle momentum eV c,1
Strip pitch cm
pic Pion induced charge e
Q Charge e
Qc Collected charge e
Qp Generated charge e
qp Mean MIP ionization e cm,1
r Radius from the vertex cm
Voltage divider attenuation
R Resistance

re Classical electron radius 40em2 e c2 2:82 fm

RMS Root mean square any unit
s Laplace variable
T Absolute temperature K
t Time s
Tmax Maximum kinetic energy transfer eV
Tp Peaking time s
v Velocity cm s,1
V Voltage V
ve;h Electron, hole velocities cm s,1
continued on next page
APPENDIX A. ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS 61
continued from previous page
Symbol Denition Units or Value
X0 Radiation length cm
y Distance from the substrate side cm
Z Atomic Number
z Distance from the vertex along the beam axis cm
Particle charge relative to e
Appendix B
My Work with Diamonds
The following list states the diamond activities I was personally involved in.

Interval Activity
Feb 1 - 24, 1995 Work on the VA2 readout at CERN
Mar 24, 1995 - Dec 20, 1996 Several contracts of work primarily devoted to diamond at
HEPHY
Jul 9 - 29, 1995 Work on the characterization station at CERN
Aug 28 - Sep 6, 1995 Pion Irradiation at PSI
Sep 11 - Oct 10, 1996 Pion Irradiation at PSI
from Jan 7, 1997 on Contract of employment partially devoted to diamond at
HEPHY
Jan 21 - 22, 1997 RD42 collaboration meeting at CERN (talk)
May 12 - 13, 1997 RD42 collaboration meeting in Florence, I (talk)
Sep 22 - 23, 1997 
OPG-Fachtagung Kern- und Teilchenphysik (Austrian Physical
Society, section of Nuclear and Particle Physics) at Lindabrunn,
A (talk)
Oct 2 - 3, 1997 RD42 collaboration meeting in Toronto, CAN (talk)
Nov 18 - Dec 2, 1997 Pion Irradiation at PSI
Feb 5 - 6, 1998 RD42 collaboration meeting in Amsterdam, NL (talk)
May 27 - 28, 1998 RD42 collaboration meeting at CERN (talk)
Sep 28 - Oct 4, 1998 7th International Workshop on Vertex Detectors in Santorini,
GR (talk and paper submitted to Nuclear Instruments and
Methods in Physics Research A)

CERN: European Laboratory for Paricle Physics, Geneva, CH (http://www.cern.ch)

HEPHY: Institute of High Energy Physics of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna,
A (http://wwwhephy.oeaw.ac.at)
PSI: Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, CH (http://www.psi.ch)

62
Bibliography
[1] Austrian Academy of Sciences, Institute of High Energy Physics, Nikolsdorfergasse
18, A-1050 Vienna, Austria (http://wwwhephy.oeaw.ac.at)
[2] M. Krammer, private communication ([email protected])
[3] CMS Collaboration, CMS Tracker Technical Design Report, CERN/LHCC 98-
6, April 1998
[4] P. Moritz et al., Diamond Detectors for Beam Diagnostics in Heavy Ion
Accelerators, GSI-Preprint-97-64, October 1997
[5] J. Conway et al., The Status of Diamond Detectors and a Proposal for R&D
for CDF Beyond Run II, CDF/DOC/TRACKING/PUBLIC/4233, July 1997
[6] G. Davies (editor), Properties and Growth of Diamond, INSPEC, Institution
of Electrical Engineers, London, 1994
[7] L.S. Pan, D.R. Kania (editors), Diamond: Electronic Properties and Applica-
tions, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston/Dordrecht/London, 1995
[8] S. Zhao, Characterization of the Electrical Properties of Polycrystalline
Diamond Films, Ph.D. thesis, The Ohio State University, Columbus, 1994
[9] I. Baumann, Charakterisierung von Silizium-, Galliumarsenid- und Dia-
mantdetektoren, Dipoma Thesis, Max-Planck-Institut fur Kernphysik, Heidelberg,
1996
[10] E. Gatti, P.F. Manfredi, Processing the Signals from Solid-State Detectors
in Elementary-Particle Physics, La Rivista del Nuovo Cimento della Societa
Italiana di Fisica, Vol. 9, N. 1, Bologna, 1986
[11] St. Gobain/Norton Diamond Film, Goddard Road, Northboro, MA 01532, USA
[12] De Beers Industrial Diamond Division Ltd., Charters, Sunninghill, Ascot, Berkshire,
SL5 9PX England, UK
[13] R.M. Barnett et al., Physical Review D54, 1 (1996) and 1997 o-year partial up-
date for the 1998 edition available on the PDG WWW pages (http://pdg.lbl.gov)

63
BIBLIOGRAPHY 64
[14] M. Regler, R. Fruhwirth (editors), Data Analysis Techniques for High-Energy
Physics Experiments, Second Edition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
1999
[15] D. Husson et al. (RD42 Collaboration), Neutron Irradiation of CVD Diamond
Samples for Tracking Detectors, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics
Research A 388 (1997), 421-426
[16] C. Grupen, Teilchendetektoren, B.I.-Wissenschaftsverlag,
Mannheim/Leipzig/Wien/Zurich, 1993
[17] M. Winkler, private communication ([email protected])
[18] L.D. Landau, On the Energy Loss of Fast Particles by Ionisation, Collected
Papers of L.D. Landau, Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1965
[19] J.E. Moyal, Theory of Ionization Fluctuations, Philosophical Magazine 46
(1955), 263-280
[20] K.S. Kolbig, B. Schorr, A Program Package for the Landau Distribution,
Computer Physics Communications 31 (1984), 97-111
[21] K.S. Kolbig, Landau Distribution, CERN Computer Center Program Library
G110 (http://wwwinfo.cern.ch/asdoc/shortwrupsdir/g110/top.html)
[22] W. Adam et al. (RD42 Collaboration), Development of Diamond Tracking De-
tectors for High Luminosity Experiments at the LHC, CERN/LHCC 98-20,
Status Report/RD42, June 1998
[23] M. Mishina, Induced Charge in Diamond, RD42 Internal Note 13, March 1998
[24] M.A. Plano et al., Thickness Dependence of the Electrical Characteristics
of Chemical Vapor Deposited Diamond Films, Applied Physics Letters 64 (2),
January 1994, 193-195
[25] D. Rakoczy, Charakterisierung von Siliziumstreifendetektoren fur den DEL-
PHI Very Forward Tracker, Dipoma Thesis, Institut fur Hochenergiephysik der
O sterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien, 1997
[26] G.F. Knoll, Radiation Detection and Measurement, Wiley, New York, 1979
[27] Nuclear Science References (NSR) database
(http://isotopes.lbl.gov/isotopes/vuensdf.html)
[28] W.R. Leo, Techniques for Nuclear and Particle Physics Experiments,
Springer-Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York, 1987
BIBLIOGRAPHY 65
[29] A. Hrisoho, Front-End Electronics for H.E.P., Proceedings of the III ICFA School
on Instrumentation in Elementary Particle Physics, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, July 1990,
World Scientic, Singapore, 1992
[30] IDE AS, Integrated Detectors & Electronics, Veritasveien 9, 1322 Hvik, Norway
(http://www.ideas.no)
[31] O. Toker et al., VIKING, a CMOS Low Noise Monolithic 128 Channel
Frontend for Si-Strip Detector Readout, Nuclear Instruments and Methods
in Physics Research A 340 (1994), 572-579
[32] E. Nygard et al., CMOS Low Noise Amplier for Microstrip Readout Design
and Results, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 301 (1991),
506-516
[33] A. Rudge, Comparison of Charge Collection in Semiconductor Detectors
and Timing Resolution, Using a Sub-Nanosecond Transimpedance Ampli-
er, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 360 (1995), 169-176
[34] M. Friedl (RD42 Collaboration), Pion Irradiation Studies of CVD Dia-
et al.

mond Detectors, RD42 Internal Note 12a, May 1998, to be submitted to Nuclear
Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A
[35] C. Bauer et al. (RD42 Collaboration), Development of Diamond Tracking De-
tectors for High Luminosity Experiments at the LHC, CERN/LHCC 95-43,
LDRB Status Report, November 1995
[36] C. Bauer et al. (RD42 Collaboration), Radiation Hardness Studies of CVD
Diamond Detectors, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A
367 (1995), 207-211
[37] D. Meier et al. (RD42 Collaboration), Proton Irradiation Studies of CVD Di-
amond Detectors, June 1998, submitted to Nuclear Instruments and Methods in
Physics Research A
[38] D. Meier, CVD Diamond Irradiations with Protons and Pions, Minutes of
the RD42 Meeting 02/98, Amsterdam, February 1998
[39] F. Borchelt et al. (RD42 Collaboration), First Measurements with a Diamond
Microstrip Detector, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A
354 (1995), 318-327
[40] F. Anghinol et al., SCTA - A Radiation Hard BiCMOS Analogue Readout
ASIC for the ATLAS Semiconductor Tracker, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear
Science 44 (1997), 298-302