Transcript Worldwide testbeam session summary Felix Sefkow DESY ECFA workshop Durham September 4, 2004 Session goals • Had half day session at LCWS in Paris on TB.

Worldwide testbeam
session summary
Felix Sefkow
DESY
ECFA workshop Durham
September 4, 2004
Session goals
• Had half day session at LCWS in Paris on TB needs and facilities
• Situation documented in “Worldwide LC testbeam” report
– http://www.linearcollider.ca:8080/lc/vic04/abstracts/detector/
testbeam/wwlctb_working_group.doc
• Here: get an updated overview of planned testbeam efforts
• Launch activity to submit internationally coordinated proposal
for testbeams for LC detector R&D
• Prepare statement for ICFA to alarm lab directors of our
concern that testbeam supply will not need our demands
ECFA LC workshop, Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam session summary
2
Outline
Summary of summaries:
• Demand
• Supply
• Initiatives
ECFA LC workshop, Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam session summary
3
Testbeams for calorimeter R&D
ECFA LC workshop, Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam session summary
4
Geant4 hadronic shower models.

GEANT4 has extensive set of hadronic shower
models, from which we would like to select.
Several experiments have compared testbeam
data with Geant4 predictions.
 However, used to characterize existing designs,
not to design new detectors.
 “Particle Flow”, or imaging calorimeter, places
much more stringent requirements on simulation.
 Cottage industry to run all available sets to
demonstrate dispersion.
 See talks in simulation session.
Norman Graf, SLAC

5
Hadronic shower model dependence
• Remember: need to optimize imaging capability of HCAL
Study by G.Mavromanolakis
ECFA LC workshop, Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam session summary
6
Calorimeter testbeam needs
•
108 – 109 events = (10 – 100) days / duty_factor (@ 100 Hz DAQ rate)
ECFA LC workshop, Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam session summary
7
CALICE testbeam plans
ECFA LC workshop, Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam session summary
8
LCcal beam needs
SUMMARY after 2003 runs
• Left over:
Paolo Checchia, Padova
more hadron data
scan different gains in pad electronics
combined test with Hcal
Calorimeter re-arrangment (including W absorber)
• Beam time: at least one week e/h beam
10-70 GeV
•Problem: time and manpower
•Possible solution: join efforts with other groups
ECFA LC workshop, Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam session summary
9
ECal R&D in N. America -Test Beam Readiness/Plans
Ray Frey, Oregon
• Silicon-tungsten
SLAC, Oregon, Brookhaven (SOB)
• Scintillator tiles – tungsten
U. Colorado, Fermilab
• Hybrid silicon/scintillator – tungsten
U. Kansas
ECFA LC workshop, Durham,
Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam session
summary
10
Si/W Status and Plans
•
•
Ray Frey
Note that current design is optimized for warm, but could be optimized for
cold
 Would require digital pipeline → this is current focus
 Would timing still be desirable?
This year
 Qualify prototype detectors already in hand
 Fabricate initial RO chip for technical prototype studies
• Readout limited fraction of a wafer ($) (64 of 1024 chns.)
• Chips probably not in hand before Jan 2005
•
2005
What people often neglect…
 Electronics evaluations
 Bump bonding
 “Technical” test beam, summer 2005 at earliest
• A few layers with 1st round detectors and chips
 Plan for a full ECal module (similar to eventual ECal)
• Finalize thermal plans, mechanics
• Provide correct front radiator for hadron shower validation in test beam.
• Earliest beam test: Summer 2006
 Continue to evaluate configuration options
• Layering, segmentation
ECFA LC workshop, Durham,
Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam session
summary
11
Tile ECal (contd.)
(from Uriel Nauenberg)
• Will be ready for test beam in 2006 if funding becomes available in
2005 to build a module.
Usual disclaimer
• The big issue is electronics; we have very little help with that.
• The module will consist of 60 layers or 45 layers
 For 11%/root(E) resolution we need 60 layers of 1/2 X0
Tungsten and 2 mm of scintillator, not 45.
 For 13%/root(E) then we can go with 45 layers of 3/4 Xo and 3
mm scintillator; (Investigating the spatial resol. deterioration.)
ECFA LC workshop, Durham,
Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam session
summary
12
ECAL R&D; Tungsten ECAL with both Si and
Scintillator sampling
Ray Frey
Graham W. Wilson for Kansas, Kansas State Universities
•
•
•
•
Concept: physics requires high
granularity, reasonable sampling
frequency, large BR2, compact RM. =>
ECAL probably should be W absorber,
some Si, some cheaper sampling
medium (Scint.).
All Si is probably best IF it can be
cost-effective, IF timing is not
important (less so now!), and IF really
large R is not dictated by the physics.
All Scintillator is probably prohibitively
expensive due to channel count at
sufficient granularity
Ongoing R&D: mostly simulation based
on different design possibilities
–
–
–
•
Test-beam Wishes & Goals:
–
•
–
•
–
•
Does coarse scintilllator granularity work
for a hybrid ?
Gap size (compactness)
Ideally gaps eg. alveoli in the CALICE ECAL
could be used to study alternative sampling
layers.
A hanging-file type approach would facilitate
understanding the intrinsic response (but not an
engineered hermetic solution …)
Have funds available which can contribute
significantly to a prototype ECAL
construction and testing on a 2-year timescale.
•
–
Eg. Anti-correlation predicted in Si and Scint.
response
In collaboration with existing groups
encourage that data taking opportunities with
large volume HCALs and expensive Si-W
ECALS can also be used to explore
alternative ECAL designs to Si-W
•
EM energy and angular response studied
Photon/hadron separation in progress
Critical items
•
could validate the EM response of hybrid
ECALs with mixed sampling media
•
Envisage wanting electron, pion beams in
summer 2006
Concurrent running with HCAL activities
Exactly how to proceed depends on
developing collaborations and results of
simulation studies (want to use test-beam
time and construction funds wisely)
13
Asian plans
• Updates since Paris:
– Still expect KEK PS runs in 2005
– J-PARC from 2008 onwards
– KEK linac 2006 onwards
• Pb Sci TB finished, now new Huge detector design
• New W Sci ECAL with SiPMs
• Testbeam 2006 onwards
• Participate with Tsukuba drift chambers in
CALICE TB at DESY
ECFA LC workshop, Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam session summary
14
Muon and Tail Catcher
(V.Zutshi, NIU)
 Vigorous R&D for a muon detector which could also
serve as a tail-catcher underway in gas and
scintillator technologies.
 All proponents are working towards exposing their
prototypes to a test beam in the 2005-2006 period.
 Expecting increased coordination between groups as
the test beam becomes a reality.
ECFA LC workshop, Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam session summary
15
Tracking / Vertexing
(B.Schumm, Santa Cruz)
International tracking group anticipates testbeam needs
beginning in late 2004
Very rough guesstimate is 75-100 weeks of facilities time
between now and beginning of 2006
Most-requested beam is few GeV hadrons or muons
Need for high-field magnet on test-beam line is an open
question. UCSC has addressed this for Si; what about
others techonolgies?
A: TPCs need B > 0, but 1 - 2 Tesla sufficient for most studies
ECFA LC workshop, Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam session summary
16
Outlook on IPBI
IP Beam Instrumentation is a critical aspect of the Machine-Detector
Interface. IPBI should be considered as one of the Detector subsystems –
measurements of luminosity, energy, polarization (and electron ID at small
polar angles for 2-photon veto) are critical for the ILC physics program.
IPBI R&D Efforts are well underway in all 3 regions. There is an identified
and growing need to develop prototypes, which need access to test beam
facilities.
At SLAC, a Letter-of-Intent for LC Beam Instrumentation Tests in ESA
was submitted to SLAC in Fall 2003 and presented to the SLAC EPAC.
Response from the EPAC and the SLAC Director was very positive.
First 3 Test Beam Requests have been submitted to SLAC and cost
estimates have been made. Requesting a run in June 2005. Currently
waiting for SLAC response as we go thru evaluation of SLAC’s efforts for
ILC (I expect a positive response).
M. Woods, SLAC
ECFA ILC Study, Sept. 2004
17
First IPBI Beam Tests Proposed to SLAC
1.
Energy BPMs (T-474 submitted)
U. of Notre Dame, UC Berkeley, UC London, U. of Cambridge, SLAC
- Mechanical and electrical stability at 100-nm level
- BPM triplet at z = 0, 2.5 and 5.0 meter spacing. BPMs 1 and 3 define
straight line. Monitor BPM2 offset over time scales of minutes, hours
- 2 adjacent BPMs to test electrical stability, separate from mechanical
2.
Synchrotron stripe diagnostics (T-475 submitted)
U. of Oregon, SLAC
- test chicane scheme with wiggler magnet
- characterize detector (quartz fiber / other) performance and capabilities
3.
Pair detectors (T-476 submitted)
Molecular Biology Consortium, U. of Hawaii, Tohoku U., Brunel U., CERN
- use “spray” beam of ~ 4-GeV electrons to mimic pair background
- test speed (at nano-second level) of both 3-d and planar Si
- characterize detector response to “pair background”;
can vary spray beam energy and absorber thickness in front of detector plane
- use MonteCarlo to superimpose 250 GeV electron to determine electron id
efficiency
M. Woods, SLAC
ECFA ILC Study, Sept. 2004
18
Other IPBI Beam Tests Possible in ESA
1. IP BPMs (necessary for fast inter-train and intra-train feedbacks)
- Sensitivity to backgrounds, rf pickup
- Mimic LC geometry, including fast signal processing (but no feedback)
- Sample drive signal to kickers
2. Tests with short bunches (~100-300 mm possible)
- EMI for beam instrumentation or Detector electronics
- collimator wakefield tests
3. Single Particles (electrons, photons, pions)
Prospects less clear
for these five
- 2-25 GeV particles with 1 or less particles/bunch at 10Hz
for LC Detector test beams
4. Fixed target to mimic beamsstrahlung and disrupted beam
- for synchrotron stripe energy spectrometer
- for IP BPM tests
5.
IR Mockup
- Mimick beamline geometry at IP within +-5 meters in z and
M. Woods, SLAC
ECFA ILC Study, Sept. 2004
19
A summary of world-wide
test beam facilities
Erik J. Ramberg
FNAL
4 Sept. 2004
A list of available facilities
with multi-GeV beam
FNAL - m, p, p: 8-120 GeV: available 2004-on
SLAC - e, g, p: 1-30 GeV: available 2004-on
DESY – e: 1-7 GeV: available 2004-6
CERN – e, p, p: (PS) 1-15 GeV: (SPS) 10-200 GeV:
likely available 2006-on
• IHEP (Protvino, Russia) – e, m, p, p: 1-45 GeV: available
•
•
•
•
See “Report on WorldWide Linear Collider Test Beam Effort”:
http://www-hep.uta.edu/hep_notes/lc/lc_0005.pdf
ECFA LC workshop,
Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide
testbeam session summary
21
General Impressions of Test Beam Facilities
• DESY: Probably the best place for low energy (< 6 GeV) electrons
• IHEP: Can get to higher energies for electrons. Good general
purpose beam. Limited availability during year.
2x 1 month
• CERN: excellent all around beams. Limited availability during year.
Unknown future.
• SLAC: Excellent for accelerator component testing. Secondary
beams for detector testing are good but have low rate.
• FNAL: Good availability with general purpose beam. Probably have
to share with other users. Electrons are problematic.
Could be improved, would need investments
ECFA LC workshop,
Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide
testbeam session summary
22
Jae Yu:
• Competition on facilities from other then LC
community is significant
• Funding situation in the regions are not all ideal
– European and Asian communities seems to have better
support for detector R&D and TB than North American
• Need to coordinate within the LC community to meet
all the TB needs in a most optimal manner
• We are in this together so we need to work together
as one entity
ECFA LC workshop,
Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam
session summaryTB Strategy
23
Strategy and Time scale
• For calorimeter there are two facilities that could
meet most the needs
– FNAL – MTBF
– IHEP, Protvino
• FNAL directorate willing to work with our community
• Have our primary contact person at Fermilab (E.
Ramberg)
“first” means: will soon be happy to
make use of all suitable resources
• Let’s shoot for FNAL first
– FNAL Fall PAC meeting: Nov. 12 – 14, 2004
ECFA LC workshop,
Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam
session summaryTB Strategy
24
Strategy and Time scale, cnt’d
• Write a world-wide TB proposal ( or MOU if you like) to
Fermilab directorate
– Starting with Calorimeters in all regions
– Including other detectors that would be ready
– We could build this upon existing efforts and expand to
integrate activities world-wide
• A workshop for this proposal planned: Sept. 23 and 24 at
ANL
– A focused group of people from all regions to write the proposal
• Submit the proposal to Fermiab directorate by Oct. 10 for a
possibility of PAC review and endorsement
– Request help to our leadership for this
• Turn this into a U.S. NSF MRI proposal for North American
TB equipment support
ECFA LC workshop,
Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam
session summaryTB Strategy
25
TB One Page Executive Summary
• Introduction for TB needs
–
–
–
–
LC Physics as detector challenge
Novel technologies and approach to meet this
Technology decision giving momentum and setting time-scale
Detector concept studies and eventual TDR require serious
TB efforts NOW
– Many detector R&D are mature for test beam
• Primary goals for TB experiments
– Testing of novel technologies and algorithms
– Bases for conceptual detector design choices
– Simulation verifications and enhancements
ECFA LC workshop,
Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam
session summaryTB Strategy
26
TB One Page Executive Summary, cnt’d
• Current and anticipated TB programs
– Requirement for facilities  Particle species and momentum
ranges
– CALICE and other calorimeter efforts
– Other detector needs
– Total coordinated beam time requests
• Current situation in facilities
– Limitations in number of facilities that can meet the needs
• Existing facilities can meet the need in principle
– Availability and scheduling
• Recommendations and requests
– Request the lab directors to recognize the LC TB effort and
adjust the priority to meet our needs
– Request strong resource support from laboratories
– Request endorsement for necessary funding
ECFA LC workshop,
Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam
session summaryTB Strategy
27
Summary
• Test beam demands are overwhelming, and exceeding availability
of facilities
• Program now entering new phase
• Level of coordination, too
• Call for participation in generic LC detector R&D proposal, built
on momentum from large calorimeter R&D groups
•
executive summary to ICFA and lab directors today
ECFA LC workshop, Durham, Sept 2004
Felix Sefkow, Worldwide testbeam session summary
28