1 / 16

Testbeam Requirements for LC Calorimetry

Testbeam Requirements for LC Calorimetry. S. R. Magill for the Calorimetry Working Group. Physics/Detector Goals for LC Calorimetry E-flow implications for CAL Design/Testing Optimization for E-flow Testbeam Goals Hardware/Readout mode tests

dgilman
Download Presentation

Testbeam Requirements for LC Calorimetry

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. Testbeam Requirements for LC Calorimetry S. R. Magill for the Calorimetry Working Group • Physics/Detector Goals for LC Calorimetry • E-flow implications for CAL Design/Testing • Optimization for E-flow • Testbeam Goals • Hardware/Readout mode tests • E-flow/Detector simulation validation/verification • Test Beam Programs and Venues • Summary

  2. Physics/Detector Goals for LC Calorimetry • For example, explore EWSB thru the interactions : • e+e- -> WW and e+e- -> ZZ • -> Requires Z,W ID • -> Can’t always use (traditional) constrained fits Physics Requirement : separately id W, Z using dijet mass in hadronic decay mode (~70% BR)-> higher statistics physics analyses Detector Goal : measure jets with energy resolution -> /E ~ 30%/E W,Z 75%/M • Calorimeter challenge :match tracks • to charged hadrons – requires separation • of charged/neutral hadron showers in Cal, • and isolation of photons –> E-flow approach • -> high granularity, both transverse and longitudinal, to reconstruct showers in 3-D 30%/M

  3. E-Flow Implications for Calorimetry Traditional Standards Hermeticity Uniformity Compensation Single Particle E measurement Outside “thin” magnet (~1 T) E-Flow Modification Hermeticity Optimize ECAL/HCAL separately Longitudinal Segmentation Particle shower reconstruction Inside “thick” coil (~4 T) Optimized for best single particle E resolution Optimized for best particle shower separation/reconstruction

  4. ECAL E-flow Optimization • Priorities : • Measure (isolated) photon energy • Separate charged/neutral hadron showers • For good isolation of photon showers : • -> small rM (Moliere radius) – dense calorimeter • -> If the transverse segmentation is of size rM, get optimal transverse separation of electromagnetic clusters • -> If X0/I is small, then the longitudinal separation between starting points of electromagnetic and hadronic showers is large • All of the above help to separate hadron showers as well A dense ECAL with high granularity (small transverse size cells), high segmentation (many thin absorber layers), and with X0/I small is optimal for E-Flow. -> 3-D shower reconstruction • Some examples : • Material Z A X0/I • Fe 26 56 0.0133 • Cu 29 64 0.0106 • W 74 1840.0019 • Pb 82 2070.0029 • U 92 2380.0016

  5. HCAL E-flow Optimization • Priorities : • Measure neutral hadron energy • Separate charged/neutral hadron showers • To optimize the HCAL for E-Flow requires : • full containment of (neutral) hadronic showers • good precision on energy measurement • high segmentation in transverse and longitudinal directions in • order to separate in 3-D close-by clusters in jets • Integrated approach including other detector sub- • components in the design phase, with E-Flow algorithms • Assume a tracking system optimized for, e.g., di-lepton • measurements • Assume a dense ECAL optimized for photon reconstruction • Vary HCAL parameters, e.g., absorber material, thickness, size of • readout cells in both transverse and longitudinal directions, to • determine optimal performance in an E-Flow Algorithm.

  6. Testbeam Goals for Calorimetry • Test detector hardware technologies and readout configurations • -> flexible configurations of absorber type and thickness, active media types • -> linearity, uniformity, signal response, energy resolution, analog/digital readout schemes • Study reconstruction algorithms • -> flexible configurations of transverse granularity, longitudinal segmentation • -> E-flow properties, particle shower shapes • -> beam particle tracking? • Validate/verify MC simulation • -> shower libraries

  7. Calorimeter Hardware/Readout Schemes ECAL Si pixel/W sandwichAnalog “SD Detector” Scin Tile/W sandwich Analog Si-Scin/W hybridAnalog Dense CrystalsAnalog Cerenkov compensated Analog HCAL Scin Tile/SS sandwichAnalog “CALICE” Scin “pixels”/SSDigital RPC/SSDigital GEM/SSDigital Same absorber – hanging file configuration at Testbeam?

  8. E-flow/Simulation validation Testbeam Requirements • Design of CAL relies on simulation for E-flow algorithm applications • Simulations need to be verified in testbeam at particle shower level • Ultimate goal is jet energy/particle mass resolution - not possible in test beam • So, since EFAs require separation/id of photons, charged hadrons, and neutrals - • Verify photon shower shape in ECAL prototype (Si/W with fine granularity - 1X1 cm**2 or better – see plot) • Verify pion shower probability in ECAL as function of longitudinal layer • Verify pion shower shapes in ECAL/HCAL prototype (must be able to contain the hadron shower both transverse and longitudinally – see plot) • Try to get beams with particle energies as in Z jets from e+e- -> ZZ at 500 GeV ->

  9. e+e- -> ZZ @ 500 GeV Energy (GeV) Energy (GeV) Energy (GeV)

  10. 3 GeV e- in SD Cal 70% of e- energy in layers 3-9 13,15.5 Shower Radius (black) Ampl. Fraction (red) 5.2,6.2 ECAL/HCAL Boundary 2.6,3.1 cm (front,back) ECAL Layer

  11. 10 GeV - in SD Cal 80 cm X 80 cm (min.) X 34 layer HCAL 15.5,26 Shower Radius (red) Ampl. Fraction (blue) 7.8,12.6 20 cm X 20 cm X 30 layer ECAL Need all 34 layers 3.1,5.2 cm (front,back) HCAL

  12. Summary of SD Calorimeter Properties • On average, 94% of pion energy is contained within an ECAL area of 20 X 20 cm2 • -> 20% of 10 GeV pions appear as MIPS throughout the entire ECAL volume, therefore are 100% contained • In the SD CAL, 95% of pion energy is contained for 35% of 10 GeV pions in a 20 X 20 cm2 ECAL coupled with an 80 X 80 cm2 HCAL (90% containment for 66% of these pions) • -> important to tag leakage from ECAL/HCAL in all directions • In a digital SD HCAL, 90% of pion hits are contained in a 90 X 90 cm2 area • -> again, important to tag leakage from ECAL/HCAL in all directions • Readout Channels for Testbeam CAL : • 30 X 30 cm2 SD ECAL (0.5 cm X 0.5 cm pixels in 30 layers) • -> 108K channels!!! • 1 X 1 m2 SD HCAL (1 cm X 1 cm cells in 40 layers) • -> 400K channels!!!

  13. LC CAL Testbeam Configuration Beam halo veto scintillator paddles Tagging scintillator paddles surround CAL modules Scintillator hodoscopes Beam ECAL Dead material HCAL Wire Chambers (3-views) HCAL : 1 X 1 X 1 m3

  14. Testbeam Programs Several scenarios suggested so far :

  15. Testbeam Venues • Testbeam requirements : • Electron and photon beam • Pion and other hadron beam • Energies of EM and Hadrons: 5 - 150 ~ 250 GeV (If possible as low energies as possible, down to 1~2 GeV) • Muon beam at energies 1-100 GeV or so --> This is for calorimeter tracking algorithm studies.

  16. Summary • The Calorimeter Working Group has begun to think about testbeam programs – first working document written which addresses : • -> Compatibility of various hardware configurations in the same testbeam area • -> Challenge of testbeam programs for E-flow calorimetry • -> Challenge of several readout configurations, large number of channels • -> First look at possible venues • -> Cooperation with European (CALICE) colleagues

More Related