Systematic approach to measure the performance of microchannel-plate photomultipliers

The form factor of an MCP-PMT is determined by the ratio between the active photocathode area and the total surface area of the PMT exposed to the incident photon flux. Obviously, the FF depends on the type and geometry of the PMT. It ranges from $\ll$50% for small MCP-PMTs to 81% for the 2-inch Planacon tubes used in the PANDA DIRCs. The value of the FF is determined exclusively by the layout and overall dimensions of the respective tube.

The QE describes the probability that a photon hitting the photocathode (PC) of the PMT is converted into a photoelectron (PE) that escapes into the vacuum. A typical peak QE of MCP-PMTs ranges from $\sim$20% to $>$30%, depending on the PC material. To qualify the detection efficiency of the PMT, we measure the QE as a function of the photon wavelength, but also its homogeneity across the photocathode at a fixed wavelength (in our case 372 nm or 633 nm, depending on the pulsed picosecond laser (PiLas from Advanced Laser Diode Systems [19]) used).

In order to check the CE values advertised by the various manufacturers, we have developed our own measurement method. Although the calculation of the CE appears simple at first glance, tiny PC currents in the picoampere range make the actual measurement considerably more difficult. The CE is given by

The CE setup is sketched in Fig. 6. For the measurement of $I_{PC}$ the voltage $U_{PC-MCP}$ between PC and MCP-In is the same as in normal operation and ranges from $\sim$150 V in an $R_{PC}$:$R_{MCP}$:$R_{A}$ = 1:10:1 voltage divider configuration to $\sim$750 V in a 4:10:1 configuration. In this case, the electrode MCP-Out and the anode are usually shorted. It is important to note that the CE depends slightly on the configuration used. For the latest PHOTONIS MCP-PMTs with the 4:10:1 voltage divider configuration, a large CE close to 100% was measured. The large CE is probably achieved by the deposition of a secondary emissive layer on top of the input electrode MCP-In [23]. However, the latter increases the tail of the time distribution (see Fig. 17) and requires the use of a higher $U_{PC-MCP}$.

Before the actual measurements, the MCP-PMT is placed in the dark for several hours to reduce the dark currents. The light from a PiLas laser is passed through a beam splitter, with one part falling on the PC of the MCP-PMT and the other part on the reference diode. The current of the reference diode is measured with a Keithley 6485 picoammeter at both low ($I_{diode@LR}$) and high ($I_{diode@HR}$) illumination rates. This is necessary because the light intensity of the laser is not proportional to its pulse frequencies $LR$ and $HR$. The number of photoelectrons ($N_{pe@PC}$) emerging from the PC is determined by measuring its current ($I_{PC@HR}$) at high laser rates using a second Keithley picoammeter (6487). As an example, the time evolution of the raw PC current $I_{PC}$ and the diode current $I_{diode}$ is shown in Fig. 7 for several applied laser rates (peaks) from 10 MHz to 50 MHz. The tiny photon-induced PC current of $\lesssim$12 pA with laser switched on indicates the difficulty of the measurement.

To measure $N_{pe@anode}$, the full voltage settings are applied to the MCP-PMT. The number of photoelectrons ($N_{pe@anode}$) that are amplified and reach the anode is derived from the pulse height distribution (see section 3) measured with a 3 GHz LeCroy WavePro 7300A oscilloscope with 20 GSa/s for a 2-channel (or 10 GSa/s for a 4-channel) operation at low light intensity (controlled by ND filters) and at low rates ($LR$). All these measurements are performed for different rate and thus intensity configurations, and the final CE is determined as the average of the obtained results.

One of the first qualification steps is to measure the gain of each MCP-PMT as function of HV by illuminating the PC with laser light at a very low photon rate and intensity. The latter is controlled by neutral density filters. A primary goal of this step is to determine the voltage setting at which a gain of 10⁶ is reached. This gain ensures efficient single photon detection and is the goal for operation at the PANDA DIRCs.

The anode signal of a central pixel (e.g. 44 or 45 in Fig. 3 (left)) is fed into the LeCroy WavePro 7300A oscilloscope [24] or a CAEN DT5742B desktop waveform digitizer [25]. The signal charge is integrated (usually directly in the oscilloscope) and the accumulated pulse height distributions are stored for further analysis. A schematic representation of our typical setup is shown in Fig. 8. The gain and the number of photoelectrons can be derived by fitting the pulse height distribution (Fig. 9 (left)). If required, this plot can also be used to determine the peak-to-valley (P/V) ratio between the noise band (pedestal) and the single photon signal (first Gaussian of the fit). The measured pulse height distribution is deconvoluted using an approach described in [26]:

with

The response function $S(x)$ has seven free parameters (5): $Q_{0}$ and $\sigma_{0}$ define the pedestal, $Q_{1}$ and $\sigma_{1}$ characterize the pulse height distribution of the first photoelectron. $\mu$ is the mean number of photoelectrons and $n$ the photoelectron index, which is usually limited to $n\leq 24$ in our fits. $w$ and $\alpha$ describe a potential exponential background below the pedestal that extends into the photon peak. The most important parameters for the analyses are: (a) the mean number of photoelectrons $\mu$ that emerge from the PC and are amplified in the MCPs, and (b) the mean signal charge for a photoelectron $Q_{1}$. The PMT gain $G$ can be calculated directly from $Q_{1}$.

In our analyses, we generally use the simplified fit function $S_{MCP}(x)$ (9). The background is neglected ($w=0$ and $\alpha=0$), as the accumulation of the pulse height distribution is only triggered if a photon pulse was emitted by the laser. This simplifies the response function to

Typical gain curves are shown in Fig. 9 (right) for different voltage divider configurations. The voltage between the PC and the MCP is varied in the same way as the voltage between the two MCPs. The curves show that the voltage between the PC and MCP also has a significant influence on the gain.

Knowing the gain homogeneity across the active sensor area is important, as it affects the overall photon detection efficiency when the same signal threshold is applied to all pixels during PMT operation. The gain homogeneity measurement setup is based on the same principle as the QE position scan. A schematic representation of the measurement setup is shown in Fig. 10.

The MCP-PMT is operated with a voltage configuration that provides a gain of approximately $10^{6}$ and the sensor surface is automatically scanned in xy steps of typically 0.5 mm with an attenuated laser beam. At an intensity of $\sim$1 photoelectron, 50-100 kHz laser rate and $\sim$10⁶ gain, an anode current of $I_{A}(xy)\sim 5-10$ nA is measured for about 0.2 s at each scan position. In this case, the laser spot is tightly focused, but before the scan, the anode current is checked at different laser rates to avoid charge saturation. In this measurement, all anode pixels are shorted, and we measure the anode current at each xy position. Similarly to the QE scans, after typically four scanned x-rows, the laser spot is placed far outside the active PC area and the dark current $I_{dark}$ of the MCP-PMT is measured. Each raw anode current $I_{A}(xy)$ is corrected for the dark current $I_{dark}$ and scaled with the current $I_{A,refpix}$ and the gain $G_{refpix}$ at the reference pixel (e.g. 44 or 45) measured in the HV scan (see Section 3.1). After the correction for $QE(xy)$ at each measured position (see Section 2.2.2), this results in a QE-corrected gain distribution $G(xy)$ over the entire active PC surface.

Fig. 11 (left) shows the gain of the PHOTONIS SN 9002228 as a function of the PC position. It is clear that the gain is less homogeneous than the QE. It is generally significantly lower towards the rims of the tube. Here too, the black grid in the plot illustrates the position of the anode pixels of the PMT. Similar to Section 2.2.2, an average gain is calculated for each anode pixel from the various measurement positions and a max/min ratio of the gain is determined from these values. The results are shown in Fig. 11 (right) for five example PMTs. This approach can be used to quantify the gain variation over the active area of the MCP-PMT. Typically, $>$80% of the area has a gain max/min ratio of $<$2. This is also observed in many multianode dynode PMTs, and thus is not uncommon.

The very compact PANDA detector leads to the requirement that the MCP-PMTs of the DIRCs must be placed inside a magnetic field of $\sim$1 Tesla, with the field lines crossing the PMT axis at an inclination angle $\theta$ of up to $\sim$20 degrees. Even under these conditions, the gain must be at least 10⁶ to enable efficient single photon detection. This requires a measurement of the gain as a function of the magnitude and angle of the magnetic field.

The measurements were carried out on a dipole magnet with a field of up to 2 Tesla at the Julich Research Center in Germany. The B-field was monitored with a Hall probe. Unfortunately, the pole shoe gap of this dipole magnet is only 6 cm wide. To place the PMTs in this gap, we designed a special aluminum dark box with blackened side walls (Fig. 12). The total size of the box is 32$\times$19$\times$6 cm³, and it consists of four main parts: (1) a top cover with a small mirror mounted on the bottom at a 45^∘ angle, (2) a light-tight box with a holder for inserting a lens and several cable feed-throughs for the high voltage and the anode signals, (3) four special screws for adjusting the tilt angle $\theta$ and (4) an interior slide which holds the MCP-PMT in place. The slide can be moved in x and y directions using micrometer screws. The screws can also be moved with stepper motors to enable automatic position scans (Section 9).

Fig. 13 shows a schematic representation of the setup for the measurements within the B-field. The MCP-PMT is illuminated with a laser beam that is attenuated to single photon level with ND filters. The light is transported into the box through an optical fiber, which is connected to a microfocus lens at its downstream end. In a special tube, the lens is pushed into the dark box and the photons are deflected at the top cover mirror by 90^∘. By varying the lens position, the light is focused to a point on the PC of the MCP-PMT that corresponds to the center of one of the anode pixels, except for scans. The high voltages for the tube are fed into the box via SHV feed-throughs, while the voltage divider is placed outside the box. The measurements are performed at low laser rates ($\leq$5 kHz) to avoid gain saturation due to high local intensities. The anode signals from one or more pixels are read out via Samtec LSHM 140 (or 150) 50 $\Omega$ high-speed microcoaxial cables and amplified with a $\times$20 amplifier (Phillips Scientific PS775) before being passed to a LeCroy WavePro oscilloscope which accumulates pulse height distributions with typically 50k - 100k events for each selected setting [HV, tilt angle, B-field]. The data sets are stored and analyzed in the same way as described in an earlier subchapter.

For an MCP-PMT with 6 µm pores from Photek and one with 10 µm pores from PHOTONIS, the resulting gains for different B-fields and tilt angles are shown in the plots of Fig. 14. It can be clearly seen that the decrease in gain by a factor $\sim$3 between 0 and 1 T is similar in both PMTs. Beyond 1 T, the Photek PMT performs significantly better than the PHOTONIS tube, which is to be expected due to the smaller MCP pore diameter.

Measuring the shorted anode current $I_{anode}$ as a function of photon rate simulates the expectation in a real experiment where the entire PC surface is illuminated with photons. To measure this, we broaden the laser light with a square diffuser ED1-S20-MD from Thorlabs to cover the entire active sensor area. With an ND filter, the light intensity is reduced to 5 - 20 photons per laser pulse and entire PC area. In this type of measurement, all anode pixels are shorted and $I_{anode@f}$ is measured with a picoammeter at different laser frequencies $f$. In parallel, the current of a reference diode $I_{diode@f}$ is measured with a second picoammeter. This is necessary because the laser intensity does not increase proportionally to the laser frequency and must be corrected. The MCP-PMT is operated with a voltage that provides $\sim$10⁶ amplification. The setup is shown schematically in Fig. 19.

A correction for the dark current is made for each measured frequency $f$. For example, after measuring of the anode current at a certain laser frequency, the dark currents of the PMT $I_{anode,dark}$ and the reference diode $I_{diode,dark}$ are measured. In relation to a reference point at a low laser frequency $f_{ref}$, at which the MCP-PMT does not yet saturate, the relative gain $G_{rel}$ can be calculated for each laser frequency $f$ according to (12).

Analyzing the pulse height distribution is another method for measuring the rate capability of an MCP-PMT. The photocathode is illuminated with a laser light spot that is attenuated to single photon level. An aperture of $\sim$5 mm diameter limits the spot size to one anode pixel, usually at position 44 (see Fig. 3 [left]) or elsewhere. All anode pixels except the illuminated one are shorted, and the charge spectrum is recorded for different laser frequencies $f$ and intensities $N_{pe}$. The pulse height distributions are analyzed in the same way as described in Section 3.1. The fit provides the gain $G$ and the number of photoelectrons $N_{pe}$, which can be used to determine the anode current per area $A$ by

It is generally agreed that the rate capability depends on the charge recovery time $\tau$ of the MCP pores. Illuminating the photocathode with LED double pulses with different time delays is a simple way to measure this time. The electrical double signals from a Philips PM-5770 pulse generator are used to drive a blue LED and trigger an oscilloscope. The LED is placed near the input window of the MCP-PMT, attenuated by an ND filter to a moderate light intensity of a few hundred or thousand photons per pulse and ”focused” by an aperture directly in front of the photocathode. The photons in each pulse are distributed over a time interval of typically 1.5 µs. Since the PMT response to each photon is very fast ($\sim$1 ns width), at low intensity many of the individual photons can even be visualized with a fast oscilloscope. In Fig. 20 (top) the averaged waveform is shown with two consecutive anode signals for a delay of $\sim$1 µs. Normally $\sim$1000 of these waveforms are stored, averaged, and further analyzed.

A first and surprising observation is the decay of the pulse heights with a time constant of $\tau_{d}<1$ µs. Since the pulser signal has a rectangular shape with a width of 1.5 µs, this effect must be due to saturation of either the LED or the MCP-PMT. LED saturation was ruled out by performing the same measurement with a Philips XP2262B dynode PMT, which shows neither signal decay nor gain reduction at high rates. On the other hand, the signal decay time $\tau_{d}$ must have a different origin than the MCP-PMT charging time $\tau$ as it is too short. We assume that this decay is caused by space charges in the MCP pores when many photons hit the same pores almost simultaneously. The transit time in the MCPs and from the MCP-Out to the anode is $\mathcal{O}$(few ns) for an electron avalanche. Considering that for each LED pulse several thousand Npe/cm² ($\approx$ $\mathcal{O}$(100 Npe/pore)) are evenly distributed over a width of $\sim$1.5 µs (see Fig.  20), this multiplies to a time of $\mathcal{O}$(few hundred ns), in which the MCP pores and the region after the MCP-Out are filled with many electrons from the multiplication process and could lead to a lower gain due to a reduced electric field. This would mean that the measured decay constant $\tau_{d}$ is roughly comparable to the transit time of the secondary electrons multiplied by the number of photo electrons (Npe). However, more studies are needed to fully understand this signal decay. On the other hand, the rather small increase in charge between the end of the first and the beginning of the second pulse is due to the MCP charging time.

The waveforms are used to integrate the anode charge contained in each of the two pulses. Their charge ratio for a $\sim$10⁶ single photon MCP gain is plotted against the time delay of the double pulse. The results for different photon intensities ($N_{pe}/cm^{2}$) are shown in Fig. 20 (bottom). The fitted function $[1-a\cdot exp(\Delta t/\tau)]$ provides the pore recharge time $\tau$, which does not seem to depend on the intensities within the given uncertainties. The weighted mean value for the PHOTONIS MCP-PMT SN 9002085 with 25 µm pores is $\tau=(1.63\pm 0.06)$ ms, which is smaller than the expected value $\tau_{exp}=R\cdot C$ = 7.5 ms from the MCP resistance $R$ and the capacitance $C$. This roughly agrees with measurements of the recharge time in other tubes where $\tau=k\cdot\tau_{exp}$ with $k$ = 0.4 - 2 [32] was observed, where $k$ should represent the properties of the unknown recharge circuit.

The data demonstrate that the relative gain at 1 µs delay drops more sharply for larger photon densities. In addition, measurements at similar photon densities show that the relative gain decreases with increasing illumination area. It confirms the observation that the rate capability and thus the charging behavior depend on both the photon density and the overall photon intensity (= illuminated area). The more the capacitor charge is emptied when a new photon arrives, the longer it takes for the pores to fully recover, which can lead to lower amplification. The same measurements were repeated with the PHOTONIS MCP-PMT SN 9002228 with 10 µm pores. The measured recovery time in this tube was $\tau=(2.67\pm 0.16)$ ms with an expected value of $\tau_{exp}$ = 8.7 ms. This tube also shows a pulse decay time of $\tau_{d}\sim$ 1 µs. The data indicate that one of the dominating factors for the rate capability is the initial charge of the ”MCP-PMT capacitor” when a new photon is detected.

In 2011, the Erlangen group launched an extensive illumination campaign with lifetime-enhanced MCP-PMTs. The aim was to measure the aging behavior of tubes of various designs and from different manufacturers in the same environment. In order to enable the fairest possible comparison of the different PMT types, we decided to set up a test station where the aging behavior of all available lifetime-enhanced MCP-PMTs could be long-term illuminated and measured in parallel [28, 29] and under similar conditions. This setup has already been briefly described several times in other papers [28, 40, 41], but will be presented in more detail here.

All included MCP-PMTs are permanently illuminated with a common LED light source at 460 nm. The special LED driver consists of a combination of an old Anritsu bit-generator and a self-built pulse generator, which generates square-wave pulses of $\sim$10 ns width and $\sim$70 V height. These electrical pulse signals are sufficient to trigger a very short LED flash. Unfortunately, the rather large and fast pulser signals also cause a considerable amount of stray electromagnetic radiation, which can interfere with all other ongoing measurements. For this reason, double-shielded Aircell7 cables had to be used to conduct the control signals from the pulser to the LED.

Under normal illumination conditions, the blue LED is driven at a frequency of 1 MHz and its intensity is attenuated to single photon level by neutral density filters. This is comparable to the expected boundary conditions at the PANDA DIRCs. At these illumination parameters and 10⁶ MCP-PMT gain, each MCP-PMT accumulates $\sim$15 mC/cm² IAC per day. The stability of the LED light intensity is monitored with a photodiode near the MCP-PMTs during the entire illumination period. In addition, a VME data acquisition system permanently reads out the pulse heights of some selected anode pixels of each PMT and records them to hard disk at a highly prescaled rate ($2^{-16}$). This allows a straightforward determination of the integrated anode charge. A block diagram of the lifetime setup is shown in Fig. 22. For some MCP-PMTs, one half of the PC is masked to allow a direct side-by-side comparison of the aging progress on the same tube. A homogeneously illuminated area of about 30 $\times$ 30 cm² at a distance of $\sim$50 cm from the blue LED is achieved with a square diffuser ED1-S50-MD from Thorlabs, followed by a spherical lens to further broaden the LED light. This currently allows us to illuminate up to sixteen 2-inch MCP-PMTs in parallel within the same setup (see Fig. 23).

After the MCP-PMTs have been illuminated for several weeks (or months), measurements of the gain, DCR and QE are performed for each tube. First, the photon rate is reduced to a few kHz, the prescaling in the readout electronics is removed and the distribution of the height of the single photon pulses for some selected anode pixels of all MCP-PMTs in the illumination setup is recorded. This results in the gain estimate of the MCP-PMTs. The DCR is also determined for each tube after the LED has been switched off. In the next step, all MCP-PMTs are transferred to the in-house monochromator [43], which is described in Section 2.2.1 and where a QE wavelength scan is performed in steps of $\lambda$ = 2 nm from 200 to 850 nm. If no further QE surface scans are planned, the MCP-PMTs are reinstalled in the illumination setup and the pulse height spectra are checked for consistency. After increasing the LED rate to 1 MHz and resetting the prescaling factor, the aging process is restarted by permanently illuminating the MCP-PMTs for several more weeks.

The charge and time distributions of the signals recorded continuously during the illumination are analyzed to determine the integrated anode charge for each MCP-PMT. The additional non-prescaled pulse height spectra are used to determine the gain and the DCR before and after each illumination period. Finally, QE, gain and DCR are plotted against the IAC, which provides the final results. In addition, measuring the entire QE spectrum between 200 and 850 nm allows an investigation of the evolution of the QE relative to a reference wavelength. As an example, the QE aging results are shown in Fig. 24 for the PHOTONIS MCP-PMT SN 9001332. The relative QE clearly shows that PC aging, once it has started, is more severe for red light than for blue light. Although it is not obvious for this MCP-PMT, we have also observed decreasing gain and DCR with progressive aging for some other tubes [29].

Every few months, a QE surface scan is performed for each MCP-PMT in small steps of 0.5 mm over the entire PC area to identify potential regions on the PC where the QE may decrease faster. The used setup is the same as that described for the spatial QE scans in Section 2.2.2. The measurements are conducted at a wavelength of 372 nm or (in rare cases) 633 nm.

These QE scans provide quite interesting insights. We often observe (see Fig. 25) that the degradation of the QE starts at a certain PC position and grows from that point. The plots show the results of a QE scan and some x-projections at different IACs for the ALD-coated PHOTONIS SN 9001332. The right half of the PC was always covered during illumination. The QE degradation with increasing IAC is much more pronounced in the illuminated half, indicating that ion feedback is the main cause of PC aging.

In rare cases, significant ”QE holes” were observed immediately after delivery of the tube, usually on the PC rims and/or corners, which deteriorated within weeks or months, even when the tube was not illuminated. This indicates vacuum micro-leaks in the housing, probably caused by a faulty sealing, and these tubes had to be rejected. An example is shown in Fig. 26 with the Photek MAPMT253 MCP-PMT (SN A1200116), where the first QE scan was made immediately upon arrival of the tube, followed by others several months later. It can be clearly seen that the QE degradation develops from these ”QE holes”. This shows that the rather simple QE scans are quite a powerful tool to detect tiny vacuum leaks in the MCP-PMT housing.

The MCP-PMTs are surveyed in large light-tight wooden boxes whose outer walls are covered with thin copper sheets to shield the interior from electromagnetic radiation. This is essential for clean anode signals from the PMTs, but also because the investigation of some performance parameters requires the measurement of currents in the sub-nanoampere range. A self-built 3-axis stepper (Fig. 27, top left) is installed in one of the dark boxes, which can be moved $\sim$40 cm in the x and y directions and $\sim$15 cm in the z direction. The large xy range allows us to measure four (and more) 2-inch MCP-PMTs in succession without having to change the setup. The stepper consists of 4 ”C-Beam^®” linear actuators made of extruded aluminum, each equipped with a motor controlled by a ”TMC2130 Trinamic” stepper motor driver. The advantage of this driver is that it is equipped with sensorless motor load detection, which recognizes when the stepper motor hits a limit or other obstacle. The driver is controlled by a ”Teensy 3.5” microcontroller, which is programmed in an ”Arduino” development environment [30]. A stepper motor has 200 steps/revolution, while the lead screw used has a feed rate of 8 mm/revolution. By additionally activating a 16-fold microstep option, a theoretical distance of 2.5 µm/step can be achieved. When approaching a position always from the same side, a real positioning accuracy of $\leq$10 µm was measured with a CMOS camera. This accuracy is sufficient to deliver high-quality scans in our applications.

A microfocus lens system is attached to the 3-axis stepper, which is connected to a PiLas laser head outside of the dark box by a single-mode optical fiber. The photocathode of an MCP-PMT is illuminated with ultrafast ($\sigma_{t}\lesssim$ 15 ps) blue or red laser pulses, and the light intensity is reduced to single photon level by neutral density filters. By adjusting the lens position along the z-axis of the stepper, the light spot can be focused to $\lesssim$10 µm FWHM peak width at the PC. In practice, a slightly worse focus is used to avoid gain saturation of the MCP-PMTs at the typically applied photon rates of 5 - 50 kHz.

The signal of each anode pad of a multianode MCP-PMT is read out directly and fed into FPGA-based PADIWA [44, 45] or DiRICH [46] frontend boards with 16 or 32 channels, respectively, which are located inside the dark box. The signals from the frontend boards are forwarded to a TRB3 (Trigger and Readout Board version 3) [45, 47] board, as shown in Fig. 27 (top right), outside the dark box, which takes over the further data management. In our applications, a PADIWA/TRB3 setup is used for reading out MCP-PMTs with a high anode segmentation (e.g., 100$\times$3 pixels) or in spatially limited environments such as measurements inside the Julich dipole magnet, while the standard quality test scans for the 8$\times$8 anode pixel PMTs are performed with a DiRICH/TRB3 setup.

Depending on the setup, the PADIWA boards can either be connected directly to the backplane of the MCP-PMTs or via Samtec HLCD high-speed coaxial cables. Each PMT signal is 7$\times$ amplified and processed by an FPGA-based threshold discriminator, which switches an LVDS output as long as the signal is above the threshold. The LVDS signal of each channel is routed to a TRB3 board via simple ribbon cables. In addition to a central FPGA chip, each TRB3 board is equipped with four peripheral FPGAs which, in combination with the PADIWAs, can act as TDC to provide time and time-over-threshold (ToT) signals. In a single central FPGA, the trigger signal is generated with a Central Trigger System (CTS) and then distributed to the central FPGAs of any additional TRB3 boards. The clock signal is either provided by an external source or each TRB3 board generates its own clock, with the latter usually being applied. A TRB3 board has 256 usable data channels if no ToT information is required, and 4$\times$48 channels otherwise. It can process a maximum data readout trigger rate of up to 700 kHz. In principle, by combining many PADIWAs with enough TRB3 boards, it would be possible to read out an ”infinite” number of PMT channels.

In order to significantly reduce the cable clutter caused by the use of PADIWAs, DiRICH frontend boards were developed that can be connected directly to the PMTs via intermediate adapter backplanes (Fig. 27, bottom). One backplane can accommodate up to 4 MCP-PMTs with 64 channels each. A DiRICH channel is equipped with a $\sim$18 - 28$\times$ (dependent on the pulse height) amplifier, a discriminator and a multihit TDC and provides coarse pulse height information through a ToT technique, all of which is implemented in an FPGA. The intermediate backplane is additionally equipped with a data concentrator and a power supply board. The data concentrator is connected to a TRB3 board outside the dark box via a fiber optic cable for the data and one or two Ethernet cables for the distribution of the trigger (and possibly the clock) signal to the DiRICH boards. The latter signals are generated in the CTS of the TRB3. The power module is connected to a 32 V power supply outside the dark box.

A block diagram of the basic components of the scanning setup is shown in Fig. 28. The DiRICH/TRB3 DAQ system has a flexible design and offers a timing accuracy of up to $\sim$10 ps per single TDC channel. An internal ring buffer for each channel can (theoretically) store the timing information of up to 32 hits per trigger and handle burst hit rates of $\sim$30 MHz. During xy-scans the DiRICH/TRB3 system permanently analyzes the data stream provided by all anode pixels of the MCP-PMT. The lead time (= timing of the pulse leading edge) and the ToT information of each hit and TDC channel (corresponding to an anode pad) are continuously queued in the ring buffer and can be read out and stored within an adjustable time window (e.g. -10 to +10 µs) around a certain trigger time. In our applications, this is usually the trigger pulse of a PiLas laser, which for practical reasons is artificially shifted to t₀ = 100 ns for each channel in the analysis.

Before any accurate and rigorous measurement is possible with the DiRICH/TRB3 data acquisition system, the fine time delays of the individual TDC channels must be calibrated. Unfortunately, this calibration is temperature sensitive and needs to be repeated occasionally, especially if the ambient temperature has changed. Otherwise, the time resolution and linearity of the DAQ system can deteriorate considerably. Calibration is performed by triggering each channel with internal random time pulses generated by the CTS. This creates a statistical sample from which the fine time delay is calculated from longer delays and used to calibrate the sampling distances of the time axis. The next step is to set the thresholds for the incoming analog signals on each DiRICH channel. With the PMTs turned off, the offset (or threshold) voltages of the DiRICH channels are varied close to the edge of the noise band until a moderate count rate is measured for each channel. An interesting option in this context is the possibility to measure the pulse height distribution for each anode pixel by simply varying the signal threshold. Counting the hits per pixel for different thresholds gives the distribution shown in Fig. 29 (left). The derivative of this curve provides the analog pulse height distribution measured at each anode pixel (Fig. 29, right). This allows us to examine the average pulse heights arriving at each DiRICH channel. In most of our scans, we apply a common threshold for all channels. In standard measurements, this is typically set to 10 to 25% of the pulse height peak of the single photons in a central anode pixel.

The entire stepper/DAQ setup allows xy-scanning over the active surface of the MCP-PMT in steps down to $\sim$20 µm. The laser beam is always directed exactly perpendicular to the PC of the PMT in order to suppress internal reflections in the optical entrance window. Any effects of this kind are not taken into account in the analyses. At each xy position, all data collected for a certain number (usually between 10k and 100k) of laser triggers are read out. The data of each measured position is first stored in files with a special format (.hld) and in a further step converted into root files [49] for the final analysis. In combination with the DiRICH/TRB3 or the PADIWA/TRB3 DAQ system [46, 45, 44], we can read up to 256 anode pixels simultaneously with the DiRICH and more than 300 channels (192 per TRB3) with the PADIWA boards. In practice, the laser positioning along x and y with the stepper, data acquisition for a given number of triggers, file conversion and data analysis at each measured xy point is automated and can be controlled with appropriate Python scripts. The data obtained allows a view “inside the PMT” [50] in 3D (x,y,t) and many performance parameters can be measured as a function of the incident photon position. By performing an xy-scan (for the 8$\times$8 anode MCP-PMTs in steps of 0.5 or 1.0 mm) over the active surface of the MCP-PMT, the information x- and y-position of the laser spot and the lead time, ToT and channel number of each hit within a given trigger time window for each anode pad (channel) and each laser pulse is stored to disk. The spatial dark count distributions, the afterpulse distributions as a function of the xy position and the time after the trigger pulse (quasi the TOF of the feedback ions) and the spatial and temporal recoil electron distributions can be derived from this raw data. By counting the hits in narrow and wide time windows, the charge-sharing and electronic crosstalk behavior can be analyzed. These TRB scans make it possible to separate crosstalk events from those of recoil electrons and afterpulse hits.

Figure 30 (top) shows the lead time distribution of the exemplary anode pad x4-y6 within a [-10,1] µs window for a HiQE PHOTONIS XP85012 (SN 9002085) MCP-PMT summed over all xy illumination points. A laser rate of 10 kHz was used, which corresponds to a delay of 100 µs between two laser pulses. Two distinct regions can be identified: the long flat distribution before the trigger peak at 100 ns contains pure dark count hits, while clearer discrete structures appear later. The DCR is determined by integrating the number of hits between -10 and 0 µs. Two enlarged time window regions are shown in the other plots. In these distributions, the number of hits measured in the anode pad x4-y6 is plotted for laser x-positions between 15 and 34 mm, which also cover the left and right adjacent anode pads. In the middle plots of Fig. 30, the time window of [98,108] ns is zoomed very close around the main trigger peak, which contains recoil electrons and charge-sharing events. At the bottom plots, the time window is zoomed to [80,580] ns, showing that the afterpulse hits arrive much later than the main trigger pulse at 100 ns.

The DAQ system also gives us access to the spatial distribution of different hit classes defined by specific time windows around the trigger peak. In Fig. 31 such distributions are shown for a high-resolution PHOTONIS MCP-PMT (ES440) with a 100$\times$3 anode grid. Shown is the spatial distribution of four classes of hits: (1) the dark count hits between [-10, 0] µs show a flat distribution in space; (2) around the main trigger time ([99.5, 100.6] ns) we obtain, as expected, a narrow peak at the pixel position of direct photoelectrons; (3) in the recoil electron time region ([100.6, 101.5] ns) a well-defined hump about 15 mm wide appears with a central hole due to dead time; (4) events in the afterpulse time region ([104, 500] ns) show a broad scatter with a maximum at the position of the read-out pixel. Please note that in this plot the anode pixel x57-y1 was read out and data for many x-positions from 14 to 44 mm were recorded in steps of 25 µm.

The detection efficiency over the entire active area of an MCP-PMT depends on the QE (and CE), the gain and the threshold applied to the anode signals. To estimate the efficiency that would be obtained in a real experimental setup, we compare the number of expected hits with the measured ones. For each xy illumination point, the number of measured signals within a narrow time window [99.5,100.5] ns around the main peak at 100 ns in the time distribution is divided by the number of expected laser triggers. The ratio obtained for each position is normalized to the highest value within the entire active area, which provides the spatial ”relative efficiency plots” as shown in Fig. 32. It can be seen that the relative efficiency is lower towards the PMT rims and between the anode pixels because (1) the gain is generally smaller at the rims of the tube, probably due to distorted electric fields, and (2) the signal between the anodes is lower due to the sharing of charges. Typically, the same absolute threshold is set to each channel of a tube, and the relative efficiency is highest somewhere in the center of the PMT. At higher threshold values, the efficiency between the pixels and at the rims decreases more. The net effect of different thresholds (10%, 25%, and 50% of the mean single photon pulse height at a central pixel) is shown for the PHOTONIS MCP-PMT SN 9002223 in the first three plots of Fig. 32. The relative efficiency map of a PMT (SN 9002225) with a low QE in some areas is also shown in Fig. 32 (bottom right). A low QE naturally leads to a significantly reduced detection efficiency (see top right and bottom left corners), as fewer photoelectrons per laser trigger exit the PC in this area.

In addition to dark count events (DCR) caused by thermally emitted electrons at the photocathode, we usually measure a typical DC leakage current of a few nA even when the MCP-PMT is not illuminated. The leakage current comes from a non-infinite resistance between the PC and the MCP-In electrode when a voltage is applied between them. Ideally, the leakage current is in the sub-nA range, because if it is $\gg$10 nA, this current can become problematic for measuring some parameters such as CE and spectral and spatial QE, where a very small photon-induced current at the MCP-In electrode needs to be accurately determined. Fortunately, the leakage current is not a problem under normal experimental conditions as it does not reach the anode and therefore does not affect the pulse detection of the MCP-PMT.

The thermally induced DCR decreases after the PMT has been placed in the dark. For the series production PHOTONIS MCP-PMTs, the stabilization time is typically 30 to 60 minutes. For this reason, we wait about 1 hour after closing the dark box before starting any measurement. After this period the DCR has usually stabilized at $\lesssim$1 kHz/cm². A by-product of the xy-scans described above is a dark count map for all anode pixels of each investigated MCP-PMT. The DCR for a pixel is derived from the integrated number of hits in the time window from -10 to 0 µs before the actual trigger peak, scaled by 10⁵ and finally divided by the laser rate at each laser position to obtain the DCR in Hz. At a typical laser trigger rate of $<$10 kHz, this time window is free of other background hits such as afterpulses and recoil electrons. As expected and shown in Fig. 30 (top) and Fig. 31, the DCR distribution is uniform in time and space. Fig. 33 shows the measured DCR/pixel for two recent MCP-PMTs from PHOTONIS with 8$\times$8 anodes. It varies between $<$100 Hz and $\sim$10 kHz, and we observe that pixels with high DCR are usually found at the rims or corners and not in the center of the anode region. This is the case for most of the scanned MCP-PMTs; a possible explanation could be a distorted electric field due to residues of the sealing material at the PMT rims. With a mean gain of $\sim$10⁶ and a signal threshold of $\sim$20% of the single photon pulse height at a central anode pixel, the typical DCR, averaged over the entire active area, is between 100 Hz/cm² and several kHz/cm² for recently measured PHOTONIS MCP-PMTs.

There is a certain probability that the photoelectron will not enter a pore directly, but will be scattered back at the MCP-In surface. The recoil electron can then reach the MCP at another location and trigger a delayed electron avalanche. The principle of this effect is sketched in the left part of figure 36.

The signals from recoil electrons become visible in the time region directly after the main trigger peak at 100 ns, where a clear structure can be seen in the center-right plot of Fig. 30. The number of entries is approximately constant from 101 to 102.5 ns. The latter time corresponds to photoelectrons elastically scattered normal to the surface. In addition, the number of hits decreases over several orders of magnitude up to $\sim$108 ns. In Fig. 37 (top left), the distribution x-position is plotted against time. It shows that the recoil electrons are scattered over an area around the read-out anode pixel. It is instructive to examine the spatial distribution of these hits by shifting the time window. In the other plots of Fig. 37 it can be observed that at a narrow time slice around the trigger peak only the area of the read-out anode pixel x3-y6 is populated, while at later times this pixel is also hit when the laser focus points to the closer vicinity of the pixel position. The spatial and temporal extent of $\sim$20 mm and $\sim$4.5 ns of these events fit well with expectations for recoil electrons that are backscattered from the MCP-In before being amplified. The events at even later times could be caused by electrons that are backscattered more than once. Fig. 37 (top left) also shows a significant population of the regions adjacent to the read-out pixel at 14 - 21 mm, but the timing is the same as for the main laser peak. These can be attributed to charge-sharing crosstalk hits where the charge cloud extends across the pixel boundaries.

The DiRICH/TRB3 data acquisition system makes it easy to identify and quantify afterpulse hits. Afterpulses are caused by residual gas ions traveling in the opposite direction to the electrons and hitting the PC of the PMT. They can knock further electrons out of the PC, which are then also amplified in the MCPs, but arrive much later than the photoelectrons from the main trigger. The effect is sketched in the right part of Fig. 36. As can be seen in Fig. 30 (bottom) the arrival times of afterpulse hits range from $\sim$10 ns after the trigger peak at 100 ns to $\sim$1 µs. The afterpulse ions also reach the surroundings of the illuminated area and can be detected in adjacent pixels.

Crosstalk between the anode pixels is one of the most disturbing effects of multianode PMTs. In MCP-PMTs, we observe three different types of crosstalk: charge-sharing, electronic, and oscillations. The first two were investigated with the DiRICH/TRB3 DAQ, while the latter was studied with a digital oscilloscope.

The dark box shown in Fig. 12 has been modified to also allow for xy-scans in a magnetic field. For these measurements, the micrometer screws are extended by long threaded spindles stabilized by two metal rails that extend well beyond the range of the B-field, as shown in Fig. 45 (right). The extension rails are connected to the x- and y-axis of the sledge in the dark box on one side and to a stepper motor on the opposite side. This arrangement allows to perform xy-scans in a magnetic field similar to those in the laboratory in absence of magnetic field. The TRB3 data acquisition system is the same as that used in the lab, but the DiRICH boards are replaced by PADIWA frontend cards connected to the MCP-PMT by Samtec high-speed LSHM140 connectors and HLCD coaxial cables and placed outside the B-field. The automatic measurements at many xy positions and the subsequent analyses are controlled via a Python script, which can also be used to set different B-fields and high voltages. This enables very efficient measurements even overnight, for example. The scan range does not cover the full active area due to space limitations within the dark box. Nevertheless, a scan range of almost 25$\times$25 mm² in x and y direction is possible, which covers about 4$\times$4 pixels of an 8$\times$8 anode MCP-PMT and $\sim$50$\times$1 pixels (in x direction) with a 100$\times$3 anode MCP-PMT.

The laser focus is optimized as described in Section 2.2.2 for the QE setup, and the photocathode current is measured with a Keithley picoammeter for different positions. At optimal focus, the PC current is the lowest due to saturation effects in the PC. For scan measurements, we usually place the lens slightly out of focus to avoid saturation of the anode current.

Fig. 46 shows the crosstalk behavior at different B-fields for the PHOTONIS MCP-PMT SN 9002224 with 8×8 anodes. The high-resolution (50 µm steps) x-scan ran over four inner pixels, and all read-out pixels are summed in these plots. In both the 1-hit and 2-hit distributions, one can clearly identify the regions corresponding to the four anode pads. Only hits within a narrow time window of $\pm$0.5 ns around the main trigger peak at 100 ns are selected.

The regions between two adjacent pixels are filled with 2-hit events. This reflects the charge sharing crosstalk, and becomes less pronounced and narrower with increasing magnetic fields. The explanation for this is that the width of the charge cloud reaching the anode gets narrower within a magnetic field. The electrons between MCP-Out and anode are constrained onto helicoidal paths, so that at high B-fields there is almost no charge sharing effect. At 1000 mT the pixel boundaries are barely visible, the remaining 2-hit events are probably caused by electronic crosstalk.

Similar studies can be carried out with the recoil electrons. The effects are shown for the PHOTONIS 946P541 2-inch MCP-PMT with 100$\times$3 anode pixels, which corresponds to a pixel pitch of $\sim$0.5 mm. Fig. 47 (left) shows the spatial expansion of recoil electrons with increasing magnetic fields. Obviously, the distribution of recoil electrons becomes much narrower at higher B-fields. This is due to the effect that the electrons are confined within a relatively limited area when a magnetic field is applied. At high fields, the recoiling electron falls back to almost the same position at which it started. If this recoil electron arrives at the same pixel, it can sometimes not be detected due to the $\sim$30 ns dead time of the DAQ channel described above (see section  8.7.2). This results in the holes at the position of the read-out pixel that can be seen in the spatial distributions. In contrast, the temporal distribution of recoil electrons is hardly influenced by a B-field. This is reflected in the distributions of Fig. 47 (right), where the slope of the tail at later times on the right side of the main laser peak (from 100.5 to 102 ns) shows only minor changes. The lower intensities for higher fields are due to the fewer recoil electrons from adjacent pixels reaching the read-out pixel x47-y2 as these are spatially more localized.

The electrons moving in the MCP-PMT are subjected to the Lorentz forces generated by the electric field along the PMT axis (z) and the magnetic field inside the dipole magnet (e.g. y-z plane). This leads to significant electromagnetic focusing of both the photoelectrons (and any recoil electrons) between the PC and the MCP-In and the electron cloud exiting at the MCP-Out. When the PMT axis is tilted with respect to the direction of the B-field, local shifts of the center of gravity of the charge cloud in the anode plane in the x-direction (Lorentz shift) and in the y-direction (geometric shift) are also observed. The non-negligible magnitude of these effects was simulated for different magnetic fields and compared with our measurements [48]. This will be published in a forthcoming paper.