Transcript The Other Detectors and Associated R&D Jim Brau April 4, 2003 • In addition to the TESLA detector, some other detector configurations have been under.

The Other Detectors
and Associated R&D
Jim Brau
April 4, 2003
• In addition to the TESLA detector, some other
detector configurations have been under study:
– JLC Detector
– North American SD
– North American L (similar to TESLA/JLC)
• Different choices have been made, aimed at the
same physics
Thanks to Y. Fujii, and
my NAmer colleagues,
for help in preparing
this talk
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
1
2
Comparison of
Detector
Configurations
144
(Ray Frey)
3
6o
6o
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
2
LC Detector Requirements
• Any design must be guided by these goals:
– a) Two-jet mass resolution comparable to the natural widths of
W and Z for an unambiguous identification of the final states.
– b) Excellent flavor-tagging efficiency and purity (for both b- and
c-quarks, and hopefully also for s-quarks).
– c) Momentum resolution capable of reconstructing the recoilmass to di-muons in Higgs-strahlung with resolution better than
beam-energy spread .
– d) Hermeticity (both crack-less and coverage to very forward
angles) to precisely determine the missing momentum.
– e) Timing resolution capable of separating bunch-crossings to
suppress overlapping of events .
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
3
SD (Silicon Detector)
• Conceived as a high performance detector for NLC
• Reasonably uncompromised performance
But
• Constrained & Rational cost
– parametric cost analysis
• Accept the notion that
excellent energy flow
calorimetry is required, and
explore optimization of a
Tungsten-Silicon EMCal and
the implications for the
detector architecture…
Recently this configuration
has been getting serious
attention, as a result of studies
being organized by M. Breidenbach
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
4
Architecture arguments
• Silicon is expensive, so limit area by limiting radius
• Get back BR2 by pushing B (~5T)
– This argument may be weak, considering quantitative cost
trade-offs. (see plots)
• Maintain tracking resolution by using silicon strips
• Buy safety margin for VXD with the 5T B-field.
• Keep (?) track finding by using 5 VXD space points
to determine track
– tracker measures sagitta.
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
5
Silicon Tungsten EMCal
• Figure of merit something like BR2/s,
– where s = rpixel  rMoliere
• Maintain the great Moliere radius of tungsten
(9 mm) by minimizing the gaps between ~2.5 mm
tungsten plates. Dilution is (1+Rgap/Rw)
– Could a layer of silicon/support/readout etc. fit in a 2.5
mm gap? (Very Likely)
– Even less?? 1.5 mm goal?? (Dubious)
• Requires aggressive electronic-mechanical
integration!
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
7
Silicon Tungsten EMCal (cont.)
• Diode pixels ~ 5 mm square on largest hexagon
fitting in largest available wafer.
– 6” available now – 300 mm when??
– Consider m tracking as well as E flow in picking pixel dimension.
• Develop readout electronics of preamplification
through digitization, IO on bump bonded chip.
– Upgrade would be full integration of readout on detector wafer.
• Optimize shaping time for small diode capacitance.
– Probably can do significant bunch localization within train.!!!
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
8
Structure
Pixels on
6” Wafer
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
9
Thermal Management
• Cooling is a fundamental problem: GLAST system is
~2 mW/channel. Assume 1000 pixels/wafer and power
pulsing duty factor for NLC of 10-3 (10 µsec @120 Hz),
for 2 mW average power.
– Preliminary engineering indicates goal of under 100 mW ok.
• Assume fixed temperature heat sink (water cooling) at
outer edge of an octant, and conduction through a ~1 mm
thick Cu plane sandwiched with the W and G10: ΔT~140C.
• OK, but need power pulsing!!! ..and maintaining the
noise/resolution is a serious engineering challenge.
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
10
Silicon Tracker
• SLC/SLD Prejudice: Silicon is robust against machine
mishaps; wires & gas are not.
• Mechanical:
– Low mass C-Fiber support structure
– Chirped Interferometry Geodesy (Oxford System) Atlas
has developed a beautiful chirped interferometric alignment
system – a full geodetic grid tieing together the elements of
their tracker. Can such a system reduce requirements on the
space frame precision and stability – reducing its mass and
cost?
• Silicon Development
– Build on GLAST development,
• Add double ended bond pads, and
• Develop special ladder end detector w/ bump bond array
• Reduce mass, complexity at ends
• Employ track finding in 5-layer CCD vertex detector
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
13
Tracker Electronics
• Plan is to string 10 cm square detectors to barrel
half lengths and readout from ends.
• Design “end” detectors to route strips to
rectangular grid for bump bonding to read out chip
(ROC).
• ROC is ASIC with all preamplification, shaping,
discrimination, compression, and transmission
functionality. Includes power pulsing.
• Hasn’t been done!
• Electronics:
– Develop RO for half ladder (~1.5 m)
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
14
HCal
• Hcal assumed to be 4 l thick, with 46 layers 5 cm
thick alternating with 1.5 cm gaps.
• Could use “digital” detectors, eg high reliability
RPC’s (Have they been invented yet???)
• Hcal radiator non-magnetic metal – probably
copper or stainless
– Tungsten much too expensive
– Lead possible, but mechanically more painful.
• Hcal thickness important cost driver, even though
Hcal cost small.
– And where is it relative to coil?
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
15
HCal Location Comparison
2l
Hcal Delta Cost
Scale –
Relative
to 4 l
Inside!!
70.0
60 M$
60.0
Delta M$
50.0
40 M$
40.0
30.0
20 M$
20.0
10.0
0 M$
0 M$
-10 M$
-20 M$
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
-10.0
-15.0
-20.0
-25.0
-30 M$
-30.0
-35.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
2l
2.0
4l
3.0
4.0
5.0
HCal Lam da
6l
6.0
HCal Lam da
7.0
Quadrant View
8.000
8.000
7.000
7.000
5.000
4.000
3.000
Coil
2.000
1.000
0.000
0.000
Beam Pipe
Trkr
Ecal
Hcal
Coil
MT
Endcap
Endcap_Hcal
Endcap_Ecal
VXD
Endcap_Trkr
6.000
5.000
m
Beam Pipe
Trkr
Ecal
Hcal
Coil
MT
Endcap
Endcap_Hcal
Endcap_Ecal
VXD
Endcap_Trkr
6.000
m
6l
0.0
Quadrant View
Hcal
inside
coil
4l
Hcal Delta Cost
-5.0
Delta M$
80 M$
80.0
4.000
3.000
2.000
Coil
HCAL
outside
coil
1.000
2.000
4.000
m
6.000
8.000
0.000
0.000
2.000
4.000
6.000
8.000
m
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
16
More Cost trade-offs
Cost Partial R_Trkr
Cost Partial, Fixed BR^2
140.0
30
1.85
120.0
25
1.75
100.0
20
Delta M$
Delta M$
1.65
80.0
60.0
Linear
15
Power
1.55
Radius
10
1.45
40.0
5
20.0
0
1.35
0
1
2
3
-5
0.0
0.5
0.75
1
1.25
1.5
4
5
6
1.25
B
R_Trkr (m )
D $ vs R_Trkr
~1.7M$/cm
Delta $, Fixed BR2=5x1.252
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
19
Detector R&D in North America
• Diversity of R&D projects
• Not necessarily aimed at specific detector
configurations
• Several years of support for simulation is
now in transition into invigorated hardware
effort
– funding for this new era is nearly (but not
quite) established
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
21
A University Program of Accelerator and Detector Research
for the Linear Collider
2002 Proposal
Proposed
Budget
No.
projects
Accelerator Physics
$1,003,783
Luminosity, Energy, Polarization $171,541
Vertex Detector
$119,100
Tracking
$395,662
Calorimetry
$514,540
Muon system and Particle ID
$148,899
33
9
3
11
12
3
TOTAL
71
$2,353,525
http://www.hep.uiuc.edu/LCRD/html_files/proposal.html
In addition focussed R&D effort continues in Canada
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
22
North American Tracking
ALCPG Tracking Working Group:
B. Schumm/D. Karlen/K. Riles
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
23
Gaseous Tracking
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
24
North American Vertex Detector R&D
Oregon/Yale/SLAC
Radiation hardness studies
removed SLD VXD3 for analysis
Vertexstudies
Detector
spare ladder
Developing new CCD detector prototype
Studying mechanical issues
Design readout for X-Band operation
Oklahoma/Boston/Fermilab
Development and design of an LC ASIC for CCD readout and data
Purdue
Study of the Mechanical Behavior of Thin silicon and the
Development of hybrid silicon pixels for the LC
ALCPG Vertex Detector Working Group:
J. Brau, N. Roe
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
25
ALCPG Calorimeter Working Group:
R. Frey/A. Turcot/D. Chakraborty
Calorimeter Detector R&D in N. America
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
26
ALCPG Muon Working Group:
G. Fisk
Scintillator Based Muon
System R&D
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
29
Beamline Instrumentation
• Ongoing R&D Work:
– Luminosity
•
•
•
•
dL/dE analysis (SLAC, Wayne St.)
Beamstrahlung Monitor (Wayne St.)
Pair monitor (Hawaii, in collab. with Tohoku)
Forward calorimeter (Iowa St.)
– Energy
• WISRD spectrometer (UMass, Oregon)
• BPM spectrometer (Notre Dame)
– Polarization
• x-line simulations (SLAC, Tufts)
• Quartz fiber calorimter (Iowa, Tennessee)
 Many important topics uncovered...
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
32
Testbeams
• World-wide R&D web page on testbeams:
– http://www-lc.fnal.gov/lc_testbeams/tbpage.html
• Assessment underway on testbeam needs and resources
Recent study:
– Linear Collider Calorimeter Testbeam Study Group Report
• S. Magill, J. Repond, A. S. Turcot, J. Yu
• http://www-d0.fnal.gov/~yu/lc-tb-report.pdf
– This report should be broadened to include other subsystems
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
35
Test Beam Needs
Group
1
(collected by Gene Fisk to date)
3 LC- Cal – R. Frey et al
5
EM & H Cal
Prototypes
E_Cal
H_Cal Prototypes
e, m, , p
2 - 200 GeV
e to 10 GeV
e, m, , p =>120
When/Where
Mid 2004 – 2005
Setup; DESY/CERN
Fermilab/Protvino?
KEK/2004
US/Europe 2004 - 08
E_cal at SLAC ‘04;
E & H_Cal @ FNAL
H_Cal Prototypes
e, m, , p =>120
Fermilab – 2005-‘06
e/ to 100 GeV;
LINX for
beamstrahlung;
Polarized e’s
Various
e, , p =>120
< 20, < 300 GeV
Fermilab
CERN PS & SPS
TESLA/CALICE
E_Cal/H_Cal
J.-C. Brient/P. Dauncy et al E-flow Tests
2 JLC-Cal – Y. Fujii et al
4
Apparatus
Digital H_Cal – Argonne,
NIU, UTA, et al
IP Instrumentation
Woods/Torrence et al
6 IP Instr and Calorimetry
Onel/Winn et al
7 Tile/fiber Tests
R. Ruchti
Muon Prototype Detectors
8
TESLA/ALC
Gas Č counter/cal
Quartz fiber cal
Sec. Emission det.
W. angle, vis light
beamstrahlung
Synchrotron rad
BPM E spectro
Compton polar. w/
quartz fiber cal;
Sec. Emission det.
Č compensated cal
Detector
prototypes, timing,
RPCs and
Scintillator based
Beam Conditions
e, m, , p
1 - 100 GeV
e, m, 
Fermilab
10 – 100 GeV
e’s 50-750 MeV Frascati 2004
e, m,  =>120GeV Fermilab 2005
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
36
JLC Design
• The JLC strategy for choice of technologies in baseline R&D
– 1) No Proof-of-Principle R&D.
– 2) Constructible within affordable cost.
• JLC official view, as stated in the 'Roadmap Report'
(http://lcdev.kek.jp/RMdraft/ )
– "Extensive R&D studies have been carried out in Asia, Europe,
and North America toward the same goal, but with slightly
different technology choices in some sub-detectors.
International cooperation in common technologies and in crossexamination on different approaches is maintained. Design of
the total detector system will be done within a few years by
integrating the best technologies achieved."
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
37
JLC Detector R&D
– 3.1) Vertex Detector
• a) done or finishing soon
– excellent spatial resolution (plot)
– room-temperature operation (good S/N by Multi-Pinned Phase operation)
– radiation hardness measurement : 90Sr, 252Cf, electron-beam
irradiation=in analysis
• b) in progress or to do
– CTI improvement : two-phase clocking, thermal charge injection, notch
structure (plot)
– fast readout : test-board fabrication in progress
– thinned CCD (20micrometer) : flatness, stability, reproducibility
– precise estimation of background by a full simulation with detailed
beamline components
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
39
JLC Detector R&D
– 3.2) Intermediate Tracker
• in progress or to do
– Si-sensor fabrication and test-module construction
– Simulation study of VTX-IT-CT combined tracking (plot)
– 3.3) Central Tracker
• a) done or finishing soon
–
–
–
–
–
spatial resolution
effect of gas contamination
Lorentz angle measurement
dE/dx measurement
positive-ion space-charge effect (plot)
• b) in progress or to do
– Two-track separation performance with a test chamber using parallel
laser beam (plot)
– Z-measurement with charge-division
– Creeping of aluminum wire
– Full-simulation study on Pt resolution, bunch-tagging capability, and
physics sensitivity
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
40
JLC Detector R&D
– 3.4) Calorimeter
• a) done or finishing soon
– hardware compensation, energy response linearity, energy resolution
(stochastic term) (plot)
– machine-ability of tiny tiles, assemble-ability
– performance of WLS-readout SHmax
• b) in progress or to do
– granularity optimization with a full simulation
– photon yield and non-uniformity improvement for RectTile EMcal
– performance study of strip-array EMcal : beamtest, simulation, ghostrejection (plot)
– direct-APD-readout SHmax
– photon detectors (multi-channel HPD/HAPD, EBCCD etc.)
– 3.5) Muon System
• no effort
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
41
Conclusion
There is much to learn from the differing choices
of independent groups in the world that are
developing full LC detector concepts and studying
their advantages and disadvantages.
We much do an honest comparison and assessment
leading to improved detectors that we will eventually
build and use for the LC physics program.
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
46
Extras
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
47
EMCal Readout Board
Silicon
Diode
Array
Readout
Chip
Network
Interconnect
~1m
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
48
Luminosity, Energy, Polarization
• Beam Energy
DEbeam ~ 200 ppm from 350 - 1000 TeV
Upstream BPM + Downstream WISRD Spect.
mm in forward detector (~200 mRad)
• Polarization
DP/P ~ 0.25% (Pe- only) DP/P ~ 0.10% (Pe+ also)
Downstream Compton polarimeter
t-channel WW scattering
Strategy document
just completed
• Absolute Luminosity
DL/L ~ 0.2% (adequate, not perfect)
Forward calorimeter around 50 - 200 mRad
• Luminosity Spectrum
Core width to ~ 0.1%, tail level to 1%
e+e- acolinearity (necessary but not sufficient!)
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
49
Luminosity Spectrum
Acolinearity problems
•
•
•
•
•
•
Energy, dL/dE both correlated
with position along bunch.
Measures boost, not s’
Energy imbalance, width
imbalance must be input
Independent real-time width
measurements?
200 uRad kicks from disruption
alone (larger than target
accuraccy)
Many other offsets/degrees of
freedom which must be input.
Putting together complete analysis including
‘realistic’ mis-aligned machine decks from TRC report
Jim Brau, Amsterdam, April 4, 2003
50