1 / 53

KM3NeT Status Report

KM3NeT Status Report. Uli Katz ANTARES Meeting CERN, 11. December 2003. 1. What happened since last collaboration meeting 2. The FP6 Design Study proposal 3. A review of the KM3NeT talk in Munich. KM3NeT events after September 2003. Amsterdam, 4.-8. October 2003 VLVNT workshop

cwen
Download Presentation

KM3NeT Status Report

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. KM3NeT Status Report Uli Katz ANTARES Meeting CERN, 11. December 2003 1. What happened since last collaboration meeting 2. The FP6 Design Study proposal 3. A review of the KM3NeT talk in Munich

  2. KM3NeT events after September 2003 • Amsterdam, 4.-8. October 2003 • VLVNT workshop • 3. KM3NeT co-ordination meeting • Munich, 24.-26. November 2003 • ApPEC Design Study Workshop • 4. KM3NeT co-ordination meeting • Athens, 15.-17. January 2004 • KM3NeT writing group meeting • Rome, February 2004 • KM3NeT meeting(s) before Design Study deadline • Brussels, 4. March 2004, 17:00 METDS deadline! U. Katz, ANTARES meeting, CERN

  3. VLVnT Workshop, Amsterdam • 3 very intense days of presentations and discussion,strong participation from almost (?) all active institutes. • Topics particularly selected for KM3NeT objectives(i.e. leave out “far-future topics”, such as acoustics). • Numerous new & interesting ideas —need careful investigation. • Strong interest from industry. • Information under http://www.vlvnt.nl ,proceedings under preparation. U. Katz, ANTARES meeting, CERN

  4. KM3Net Meeting, Amsterdam, 09.10.03 Participants: John Carr, Greg Hallewell, Uli Katz, Leo Resvanis, Ion Siotis, Tonino Capone, Emilio Migneco, Maarten de Jong, Els de Wolf • Agree on characteristics of Design Study proposal choose project name: KM3NeT choose project coordinator: Uli Katz  submit pre-notification data to EU (see next page) • Agree on rough time schedule for Design Study: • End of 2003: Data collection, consolidation, first draft • End of Jan. 2004: Quasi-final draft, including administrative and budget details (meeting in Athens). • End of Feb. 2004: Final touches (meeting in Rome) • Install proposal writing group: G.Hallewell, L.Moscoso, U.Katz (coordinator), I.Siotis,T.Capone, M.de Jong, E.de Wolf U. Katz, ANTARES meeting, CERN

  5. KM3NeT DS pre-notification to EU • Title: Design Study for a Deep Sea Facility in the Mediterranean for Neutrino Astronomy and Environmental Sciences • Short abstract:A Design Study is proposed to accelerate and focus existing national and international efforts for the construction of a deep-sea research infrastructure in the Mediterranean sea, accommodating a cubic-kilometre cosmic neutrino telescope (KM3NeT) and providing long-term access for biological, environmental and other investigations. The proponents, representing the current Mediterranean neutrino telescope projects, have agreed to combine their efforts to aim at a unique European facility. • Instrument type: DS-SSA • Call identifier: FP6-2003-Infrastructures-4 • FP6 keyword codes: 04.01.01.00.00.00.00 Astrophysics 04.06.02.02.00.00.00 Experimental physics 06.03.20.02.00.00.00 Deep-sea technology • Participants: wait a moment ... U. Katz, ANTARES meeting, CERN

  6. The ApPEC Workshop in Munich, 25.11.03 • Presentation of intended Design Study proposals to the ApPEC Steering Committee: • 5@5: A Cherenkov telescope array at large height • KM3NeT • European gravitational wave observatory • 2 dark matter / 0nbb projects. • Our presentation was well received by the audienceand, reportedly, also by the ApPEC SC • Comments / criticism: • strengthen “credibility” of physics case • make sure the Design Study is one coherent and coordinated effort. • ApPEC role in Design Studies is unclear! U. Katz, ANTARES meeting, CERN

  7. KM3NeT meetings, Munich, 24.-26.11.03 Participants: John Carr, Greg Hallewell, Luciano Moscoso, Uli Katz, Alexander Kappes, Ion Siotis, Tonino Capone, Elisa Falchini, Paolo Piattelli, Mauro Taiuti, Maarten de Jong, Els de Wolf, Juanjo Hernandez, Joachim Rose • Long & detailed discussions on ApPEC presentation • many controversial topics touched and clarified to some extent • agreement on a set of objectives and on work packages • progress on the definition of the relation between current projects and KM3NeT • Steps towards self-organisation: • established a group of contact persons to collect information from participants (= institutes) and coordinate administrative and management issues of DS • requested information on desired contributions and budgets • suggested consortium contract (DS management structure) • Writing group meetings U. Katz, ANTARES meeting, CERN

  8. Some financial issues related to DS’s • EU only covers up to 50% of the overall DS budget • participants either need additional funding orpossibility to contribute with their own salaries etc.(depends on EU cost model) • needs to be sorted our and agreed internally asap! • Overall amount of funding requested from EU should be 1-10% of project cost 6-8 million € appears to be right volume • KM3NeT Design Study must not appear to be a continuation of existing projects keep KM3NeT requests separate from ongoing activities (explicitly decided so by INFN groups) U. Katz, ANTARES meeting, CERN

  9. The KM3NeT ProjectDesign Study for a Deep Sea Facility in the Mediterranean forNeutrino Astronomy and Environmental Sciences Uli Katz, University of Erlangen for the KM3NeT Project Group ApPEC Workshop Munich, 25.11.2003 Physics Perspectives of KM3NeT Status of Current Deep-Sea Projects Objectives and Time Schedule for KM3NeT Associated Sciences Management and Status of Proposal

  10. Introduction (i) • Institutes participating in the Design Study:Cyprus: Univ. CyprusFrance: CEA/Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3 Marseille, CNRS/IN2P3 Strasbourg, Univ. Haute Alsace Germany: Univ. Erlangen Greece: Hellenic Open Univ., NCSR “Demokritos”, NOA/Nestor Inst., Univ. Athens, Univ. Crete, Univ. PatrasItaly: INFN (Bari, Bologna, Catania, LNS Catania, LNF Frascati, Genova, Messina, Pisa, Roma-1) Netherlands: NIKHEF (Univ. Amsterdam, Free Univ., Univ. Utrecht, Univ. Nijmegen) Spain: IFIC (CSIC, Univ. Valencia), U.P. ValenciaUnited Kingdom: Univ. Leeds, Univ. Sheffield, Univ. Liverpool? Coordinator: Uli Katz, Erlangen U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  11. Introduction (ii) • What is our aim:a deep-sea km3-scale observatory for high energy neutrino astronomy and associated platform for deep-sea science • Why we need an FP6 Design Study:to enable the European neutrino astronomy community to prepare for the timely and cost-effective construction of the next-generation neutrino telescope • Why we need it now:“... both in view of the size of the enterprise and of a timely competition with IceCube, the Committee finds it urgent that a single coherent collaboration be formed, ...”Recommendation from ApPEC peer review meeting, Amsterdam, 3-4 July 2003 U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  12. Present and Future of Neutrino Telescopes The Mediterranean Seaoffers optimal conditions • Lake Baikaldemonstrated the concept of water Cherenkov neutrino telescopes • water quality, depth, temperature, ... • existing infrastructure • current expertise for sea water n telescopes concentrated inEuropean countries • a perfect stage for a largeEurope-led science project Fresh water • ANTARES, NESTORfirst data from prototype installations • NEMOR&D towards km3 neutrino telescope Salt water Common effort needed torealise a future km3n telescopein the Mediterranean Sea operated and constructed by an international collaboration • AMANDAdata taking • IceCubekm3 project; under construction Ice U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  13. Physics Perspectives of KM3NeT HENAP Report to PaNAGIC, July 2002: “The observation of cosmic neutrinos above 100 GeV is of great scientific importance. ...“ “... a km3-scale detector in the Northern hemisphere should be built to complement the IceCube detectorbeing constructed at the South Pole.” “The detectors should be of km3-scale, the construction of which is considered technically feasible.”

  14. Scientific Goals of KM3NeT • Astronomy via high-energy neutrino observation • Production mechanisms of high-energy neutrinos in the universe (acceleration mechanisms, top-down scenarios, . . . ) • Investigation of the nature of astrophysical objects • Origin of cosmic rays • Indirect search for dark matter • Associated science U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  15. Point Sources • Allows for association of neutrino flux to specific astrophysical objects • Energy spectrum, time structure and combination with multi-messenger observations provides insight into physical processes inside source • Profits from very good angular resolution of water Cherenkov telescopes • GRBs, if simultaneously observed by space-based experiments, allow for lower thresholds and larger efficiency U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  16. Sky Observable by Neutrino Telescopes (Region of sky seen in galactic coordinates assuming 100% efficiency for 2 down) South Pole Mediterranean Mkn 421 Mkn 501 Mkn 501 Not seen CRAB CRAB VELA SS433 SS433 Not seen GX339-4 Galactic Centre Need Neutrino Telescopes in both hemispheres to see whole sky U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  17. Point Sources - Sensitivities MACRO + SK + AMANDA-B10 AMANDA AMANDA + IceCube + ANTARES + NESTOR IceCube + KM3NeT Ch. Spiering, astro-ph/0303068 U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  18. Diffuse n Flux • Energy spectrum will provide important constraints on models of particle acceleration and energy budget at cosmological scales • Present theoretical upper limits are at the edge of current experiments’ sensitivities => Precise flux measurement needs km3-scale detector • Accessible energy range limited by atmospheric neutrino flux (~105 GeV) and detector size (~108 GeV) • Measurements at these energies require sensitivity for neutrinos from above due to opacity of Earth • Cosmic neutrinos arrive in democratic flavour mixSensitivity to ne, nt and NCreactions important U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  19. Dark Matter • Neutrinos produced in co-annihilation of WIMPs gravitationally trapped in Earth, Sun or Galactic Centre provide sensitivity of n telescopes to Dark Matter • May solve long-standing questions of both particle- and astrophysics • KM3NeT will observe Galactic Centre=> exciting prospects U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  20. Dark Matter - Sensitivity J. Edsjö, HENA workshop 2003 Paris • WIMP mass = upper limit of Neutrino energy spectrum • Detection requires sensitivity at low energies • KM3NeT scenario:maximise efficiency in direction of potential signal sources • Results complementary to direct searches Future direct detection experiments (10-9 pb at best mass). U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  21. Additional Topics • Particle physics (flavour oscillations, cross sections) • Top-down scenarios • Magnetic monopoles • The Unexpected U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  22. 3 ongoing projects • 2 detectors (ANTARES, NESTOR) and 1 prototype (NEMO) under construction • different technologies • will provide feasibility proof • 3 possible sites identified and being further explored • Existing installations can provide test bed for future R&D activities Status of Current Deep-Sea Projects

  23. ANTARES - Layout • String based detector • Underwater connectionsby deep-sea submarine • Downward lookingPM axis at 45O to vertical • 2400 m deep U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  24. ANTARES - Status U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  25. ANTARES - Results • Junction box successfully deployed and continuously operating for over 11 months in stable condition • Detector line and instrumentation line successfully deployed, connected and recovered • Data taking over 5 months(rate monitoring and environmental data) • Important conclusions for future detector operation;analysis is ongoing • Problems (timing signal, water leak) prohibited data taking at ns precision => no muons reconstructed(modest design modifications will avoid these failures) U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  26. ANTARES - Rates Strong variability of bioluminescence rates U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  27. NESTOR - Layout • Tower based detector(titanium structures) • Dry connections(recover - connect - re-deploy) • Up- and downward looking PMs • 4000 m deep U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  28. NESTOR - Status • January 2002: deployment of LAERTIS at 4200 m depth; successfully taking of environmental data • March 2003: deployment of first prototype floor (reduced size) • Acquisition of > 5 million event triggers;data taking suspended due to cable problems • Muon tracks identified and reconstructed U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  29. NESTOR - Results Muons identified and reconstructed Preview CERN Courier Nov. 2003 U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  30. The NEMO Project • Extensive site exploration(Capo Passero near Catania, depth 3340 m) • R&D towards km3: architecture, mechanical structures, readout, electronics, cables ... • 16 arms per tower, 20 m arm length,arms 40 m apart • 64 PMs per tower • Underwater connections • Up- and down-looking PMs U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  31. The NEMO Project NEMO test site approved and funded (depth 2000 m) U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  32. NEMO - Composite Junction Box U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  33. Towards a Collaboration • Cooperation ANTARES-NEMO: • majority of NEMO institutes participating in ANTARES • common site-exploration campaigns • KM3NeT project group (ANTARES, NEMO, NESTOR): • 4 meetings of KM3NeT coordination group(first meeting in January 2003, Munich) • agreement to proceed with the KM3NeT in a common coordinated effort • VLVnT Workshop Amsterdam, Oct. 2003 • Next steps: • formalise collaboration • writing of the Design Study proposal U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  34. Objectives and Scope of the KM3NeT Design Study Establish path from current projects to KM3NeT • critical review of current technical solutions • thorough tests of new developments • assessment of quality control and assurance • explore and establish possible cooperation with industry envisaged time scale of design, construction and operation poses stringent conditions

  35. Design Study Target Values (i) • Detection principle: water Cherenkov • Location in Europe:in the Mediterranean Sea • Detection view:maximal angular acceptance for all possible detectable neutrino signals including down-going neutrinos at VHE • Angular resolution:close to the intrinsic resolution (<~0.1 degrees for muons with En>~ 10 TeV) • Detection volume:1 km3, expandable U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  36. Design Study Target Values (ii) • Lower energy threshold:a few 100 GeV for upward going neutrinos with possibility to go lower for n from known point sources • Energy reconstruction:within factor of 2 for muon events • Reaction types:all neutrino flavours • Duty cycle: close to 100% • Operational lifetime: >= 10 years But these parameters need optimisation ! U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  37. Technical Design of the n Telescope • Cost-effectiveness: <~ 200 MEuro per km3 • Architecture: strings vs. rigid towers vs. flexible towers vs. new solutions • Photo detectors • Mechanical solutions • Readout: electronics, data acquisition, data transport • Calibration and slow control • Cables and connectors: dry vs. wet • Simulations: design optimisation and assessment; impact of environmental conditions U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  38. Production and Assembly Construction of the telescope within 5 years after end of the Design Study • Detailed assembly proceduresDistributed production lines • Evaluation of logistics needs • Quality control and assurance model U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  39. Installation and Maintenance • Deployment: fast procedures; parallelisation of operations • Shore infrastructure: supply units; on-shore computing; internet connection • Maintenance: flexible, low-cost access to sea-operation equipment; rapid recovery procedures; cost-effective repair options U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  40. Exploitation Model Goal: facility exploited in multi-user and interdisciplinary environment • Reconstructed data will be made available to the whole community • Observation of specific objects with increased sensitivity will be offered (dedicated adjustment of filter algorithms) • Close relation to space-based observatories will be established (alerts for GRBs, Supernovae etc.) • “Plug-and-play” solutions for detectors of associated sciences U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  41. Operation Model Goal: centralised services for tasks exceeding the capacity of single institutes • Maintenance centre for detector components(closely related to sea-operation base) • Computer facilities allowing for external operation and control • Data storage and distribution(relation to GRID?) • Software development and maintenance,in particular for on-line filter U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  42. Funding and Governance Goal: establish legal foundation for the project • Invite and coordinate world-wide participation • Explore national, European and regional funding sources • Assess and study models for contractual structures • Address legal questions related to the international structure and in particular to a possible detector deployment in international waters U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  43. Work Packages • WP1: coordination and project management • WP2: science(physics, simulation, architecture and calibration) • WP3: industry(materials, power, cables, connectors, photo detectors) • WP4: technology (signal detection and transmission, digitization, data processing and distribution) • WP5: quality assurance (new!) • WP6: infrastructure (deployment and recovery base, shore station, European data network, European science network) • WP7: associated sciences • WP8: governance, legal and funding aspects U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  44. Why us, why now, why an FP6 Design Study? • The KM3NeT group comprises the current expertise for design, construction and operation of sea-water Cherenkov neutrino telescopes • The KM3NeT project aims at achieving the timely construction of a km3-scale n telescope in the Northern hemisphere • Extensive preparatory studies required for KM3NeTwith substantial need for manpower and investments.An FP6 Design Study offers the chance to pursue a common European effort. U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  45. Requested Funding • Detailed evaluation of financial needs still ongoing • Estimated overall budget of Design Study of the order 15 MEuro. Amount requested from EU: 6 - 8 MEuro over 3 years U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  46. Time Schedule of KM3NeT Time scale given by "community lifetime" and competition with ice detector • Experience from current first generation water neutrino telescopes is a solid basis for the design of the KM3NeT detector • interest fades away if KM3NeT comes much later than IceCube (ready by 2010) Initiative for km3 water detector has to be consolidated now

  47. KM3NeT Milestones U. Katz, ApPEC Munich

  48. Great interest in long term deep-sea measurementsin many different scientific communities: • Biology • Oceanography • Environmental sciences • Geology and geophysics • . . . • Communication with ESONET established • Plan: include the associated science communities in the design phase to understand and react to their needs Associated Sciences

  49. Management, Political Issuesand Status of Proposal Preparation • Writing group for Design Study proposal established • Assembly of institution representatives as major decision body • Administrational and legal support by Erlangen University • Target for complete application draft: Jan. 2004

  50. Exciting physics perspectives of neutrino telescopes • A km3-scale telescope in the Northern hemisphere is needed to complement IceCube in sky-coverage and to exploit the full potential of neutrino astronomy • The Mediterranean offers optimal conditions. The current expertise in water Cherenkov neutrino telescopesis united in Europe • The European groups have agreed on a common coordinated effort towards KM3NeT • This effort has to be consolidated now in order to achieve a timely construction of the detector.An FP6 Design Study offers optimal conditions to proceed Summarising Remarks Let’s Go For It !

More Related