1 / 28

“HF UPGRADE PHASE II ISSUES” Yasar Onel

“HF UPGRADE PHASE II ISSUES” Yasar Onel. HF Upgrade Group: Iowa, Baylor, Fairfield, Fermilab , FIU, Maryland , Mississippi Extended US Group for HCAL Upgrades: Boston, Minnesota, Princeton, Virginia Trieste, Italy Bogazici U. Istanbul,Turkey Cukurova U, A dana, Turkey

bina
Download Presentation

“HF UPGRADE PHASE II ISSUES” Yasar Onel

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. “HF UPGRADE PHASE II ISSUES”Yasar Onel HF Upgrade Group: Iowa, Baylor, Fairfield, Fermilab, FIU, Maryland, Mississippi Extended US Group for HCAL Upgrades: Boston, Minnesota, Princeton, Virginia Trieste, Italy Bogazici U. Istanbul,Turkey Cukurova U, Adana, Turkey ITU, Istanbul, Turkey METU,Ankara, Turkey Rio-CBPF,Brazil Rio-UERJ,Brazil Sao Paulo-Unicamp,Brazil

  2. One good reason to go SLHC…. [HF - inspired] • - Missing Et • - Forward Jet Tagging 3000 fb-1 (SLHC)

  3. HF is essential for tagging jets

  4. Jets in HF range • HE and HF overlap ends at η=3. A. Moeller et.al.

  5. Fiber Radiation Damage

  6. HF MAPS of fluence/dose Fluence of hadrons (E>10 keV) in cm-2 s-1 (upper plot) Radiation dose in Gy (lower plot) in the HF and its surroundings. (Values for 5 105 pb-1) RBX References: “Conceptual design and performance of the CMS forward shielding”, CMS Internal Note 2000/051 “Shielding of the HF photomultipliers ”, CMS Internal Note 2002/007 “Optimization of the CMS forward shielding”, CMS NOTE 2000/068 RBX

  7. Expected HF Fiber Exposure and Scenario • These numbers are without recovery of fibers. We expect the fiber to recover at least 20% at each shutdown. • QP Fibers cannot survive beyond 1 Grad. They’ll need to be replaced with QQ fibers after 10 years of LHC run (or equivalent dose). • The PMTs have sensitivity range nicely fitting with Fiber “sweet range” of 380 nm-580 nm). • PMT HV adjustment can easily make up for lost light intensity due to radiation. • “Radiation Hardness Measurements of High OH Content Quartz Fibers Irradiated with 24 GeV Protons” , NIM A 585 (2008).

  8. HF Upgrade Phase II SLHCOPTION A • If manipulation of activated components, for fiber extraction and stuffing, turns out to be prohibitive, replacement of the absorber matrix could be considered, possibly including finer-grained configuration, for instance to provide smaller trigger tower size, if useful. The price tag in year 2000 of original steel wedges with grooved plates and diffusion welding assembly was ≤ 1 MCHF. • A replacement of (at least fraction of) QPF with QQF and PMTs may be feasible, provided safe procedures for manipulation of the HF activated parts are implemented.

  9. HF Upgrade Phase II SLHCOPTION B • Rebuild the absorber as 11-12 lambda • Include a tail catcher • Increase the fiber amount by a factor two • Use the same QP fibers everywhere except QQ fibers tower 10-13

  10. HF Upgrade Phase II SLHCOPTION C • Rad-Hard detectors • GeAs [A. Penzo] • CVD Diamond [A. Penzo] • Gas Ionization (PPAC) [Y.Onel, E. Norbeck] • Secondary emission [Y.Onel, D.Winn] • Disposable active media: • Liquid Č Radiator / Scintillator [E. Norbeck]

  11. HF Upgrade Phase II SLHCOPTION D … Now, something totally different: Digital Calorimetry and Particle Flow with RPCs and GEMs • CALICE Analysis Notes: CAN-030, CAN-031, CAN-032. • Q. Zhang et.al., “Environmental dependence of the performance of resistive plate chambers”, JINST 5 P02007, 2010. • B. Bilki et.al., “Hadron showers in a digital hadron calorimeter”, JINST 4 P10008, 2009. • B. Bilki et.al., “Measurement of the rate capability of Resistive Plate Chambers”, JINST 4 P06003, 2009. • B. Bilki et.al., “Measurement of positron showers with a digital hadron calorimeter”, JINST 4 P04006, 2009. • B. Bilki et.al., “Calibration of a digital hadron calorimeter with muons”, JINST 3 P05001, 2008.

  12. HF Upgrade Phase II SLHCOPTION D Needs development of a low resistance glass with the optimum resistivity to allow larger counting rates but still have the desirable RPC performance.

  13. Conclusion • QP fibers will be fine for LHC (up to 1 Grad) • For SLHC (1035) all QP fibers should be replaced with QQ in towers 10 - 13. • With recovery during shutdowns QQ fiber will work for SLHC. • HF PMTs will not have any radiation problem during LHC due to neutrons. • Starting from lower HV values will help to compensate fiber and PMT signal degradation with HV increase. • However, there are other options with different active medium and readout implementations (e.g. Digital Calorimetry with RPCs/GEMs)

  14. Forward Lepton-Photon SystemCMS Example Polyethylene Shield in front of Forward Calorimeter (HF) Collar, Rotating Shield behind HF are COMPLETELY PASSIVE! IP Replace: Passive Poly Shield w/ PreRadiator/e-m Calorimeter Passive Collar/Rot. Shield w/Muon Toroids and Chambers

  15. Forward Lepton-Photon System Muon Chambers 3m Muon SuperFe Toroids replace Rot. Shield/Collar Stub Tracker, Pre-radiator, e-m Cal -replaces inert poly shield

  16. Forward 3<h<5 Lepton-Photon Physics • Triggering & Acceptance: µ & e; g’s vs leading po in jets • Refinement of Forward Jets – tighter DE/Dq/Df; + Calibration • Hermeticity of detector-MET: ~1 TeV muon, h=3: ET~100 GeV! • “Standard” model processes – Z/W production: Forward/Backward Asymmetries - SuSY: F/B lepton asymmetries; e, µ acceptance; MET – PDF’s at low x – consistency; calibrations – Resonance production: low pT acceptance of J/Ψ, Υ, ….. – F2(x1, x2,..xn): multiple Drell-Yan, Z/W – Correlation Fn’s – Higgs: Acceptance + VBF of high mass objects • Exotica – Heavy resonance/Z’/W’; heavy stable charged: precision timing See contributions by A.de Roeck, J.Mans, many others

  17. Forward Upgrade: e-m front, µ back REPLACE 30cm passive Poly Shield w/ Stub Tracker/Preradiator/EM Cal - 1 Lint – Protects HF and reduces punch thru to HF PMT/Fiber Bundles - Improves Jet ID/Def, angular resolution & energy resolution - Isolated e gamma and muon ID if high segmention - - Adds separation of real & induced backgrounds.

  18. E-M Calorimeter/Preshower/Stub Tracker Options • Liquid Scintillator Sampling: Organic or LXe • Quartz Plates coated with 1-5 µm ZnO:Ga, pTP • Quartz fibers • Lscint WLS Liquid Core Fibers • ZnO:Ga or YAP-coated WLS/SciFi Fibers • Gaseous-Based pixels • ……… • Secondary Emission Modules

  19. Secondary EmissionIonization Calorimetry Ugur Akgun2, Burak Bilki2, Warren Clarida2, Lucien Cremaldi3, Grekim Jennings1, Rob Kroeger3, Alexi Mestvirishvilli2, John Neuhaus2, Yasar Onel2, Victor Podrasky1, Rahmat Rahmat3, Chris Sanzeni1, Ianos Schmidt2, David R Winn,PI1, Taylan Yetkin2 Fairfield1/Iowa2/Mississippi3

  20. SE Calorimeter R&D Secondary Emission Sensors for Calorimeters • Basic Idea: Dynode Stack:High Gain Radiation Sensor • e ~0.1-0.15 SEe/mip/SE Surface; Signal g >104/SEe • sEem/Eem ~few %/√E(GeV) for practical devices • Rad-Hard (PMT dynodes>100 GRads) • Uber-Fast: signal cotemporal w/shower ~ PMT impulse • Compact (dynodes <1mm thick/stage) • Rugged/Structural Element/Non-Crit./NoActivation Assy • Arbitrary Shapes/Integrate into large calorimeters • Minimal Dead Areas or Services needed. • Up to 1.2 T operation • 25 Lrad Forward e-m Calorimeter: • 25 layers x (1 Lrad W + SEe g=106 Sensor module) about 30 cm to beam • Muon MIPs: ~25 SEe/Muon • E-M Showers: sE / E ~ 2.5%/√E • Tracking: ~5 mm ok - Energy-Flow Calorimeter (e+e-, µC, SLHC,….) - Forward HiRad HiRate Calorimeters - Quasi-Compensation

  21. SEe Detector Options Metal Screen Dynodes: 15D+: g~105, Bz~2 T MESH DYNODE VARIANTS Dn-Dn+1: 0.9 mm C-C mesh: 13 µm Wire diameter: 5 µm

  22. Quasi-Homogeneous-EM Calorimeter M.C. Fine Grained 50 micron Cu mesh, 50 micron gap • 9k shower e±/GeV (~signal! X5 if 10µm ) • Assume conservative yields: 1,200 SEe (d ~1.15) sE/E ~ 2.9%/√E • 10 µm gaps: <1%/√E! Shower particle in Gaps Yield: Highly Linear

  23. Test Calorimeter: Use Mesh Dynode from PMT Summer 2011 Beam Tests of SE Mesh PMT Used as SE Sensor are highly suggestive: Response similar to MC. Mip Muon Efficiency in single 19D stack: 75-80% Therefore we are now assembling in Test Beam: Test Calorimeter - 3x3 Array of Mesh PMT’s mounted on PC board. - Kathode operated at +5-10 V so p.e. can’t escape. - D1 = Ground - Anode = +HV - 12 PC Boards – alternate spaced by ½ cell - 1 Lrad Pb Sheets between boards

  24. SEe Calorimeter Sensor Assemblies - Mesh Dynode PMT 3x3 Arrays in Boxes - Dynode Stack only - PhotoCathode Blackened; +10V. - Boxes interspersed with Absorber plates - Boxes offset ½ cell layer-to-layer

  25. Back-up

  26. Radiation damage in irradiated quartz fibre [1][2] 1] I.Dumanoglu et al., NIM A 490 (2002) 444-455 [2] K. Cankocak et al., NIM A 585 (2008) 20-27

  27. Damage Recovery parameters

  28. Damage and recovery of irradiated quartz fibres [1][2] • Radiation damage (Decrease of signal) I(,D)/I(,0) = exp[– A(,D).L/4.343] A(,D) =  [D/Ds]  A in dB/m, D en Mrad, L en m . Recovery (Increase of transm. signal)

More Related