1 / 24

Pileup Background Rejection

Fast Timing Detectors for FP420. WHO?. UTA ( Brandt ), Alberta (Pinfold), Louvain (K.P.), FNAL (Albrow) +LLNL (Gronberg). WHY?. Pileup Background Rejection. Ex: 3 interactions, one with hard scatter, and two with diffractive protons. How?. Compare z-vertex for SVX with TOF. z=c(TR-TL)/2.

gaston
Download Presentation

Pileup Background Rejection

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. Fast Timing Detectors for FP420 WHO? UTA (Brandt), Alberta (Pinfold), Louvain (K.P.), FNAL (Albrow) +LLNL (Gronberg) WHY? Pileup Background Rejection Ex: 3 interactions, one with hard scatter, and two with diffractive protons How? Compare z-vertex for SVX with TOF z=c(TR-TL)/2 How Fast? z (mm) =0.21 t (psec) (2.1 mm for t=10 psec) 10 psec -> ~x40 rejection

  2. The Detectors : 1) GASTOF (Louvain) http://www.fynu.ucl.ac.be/themes/he/ggamma/Cherenkov/ Presents little material to beam, extremely fast

  3. The Detectors : 2) QUARTIC proton V2 Segmented, provides multiple measurements

  4. Baseline Plan 2 QUARTICs Lots of silicon 1 GASTOF

  5. T958 • Fermilab Test beam experiment to study fast timing counters for FP420 (Brandt spokesman) • Used prototype/preprototype detector with NIM/CAMAC to test concept in Fall 2006, Mar 2007 • Next run planned July 11-18 2007 Time resolution for the full detector system: 1. Intrinsec detector time resolution 2. Jitter in PMT's 3. Electronics (AMP/CFD/TDC)

  6. First TB Initial Results G1-G2 For QUARTIC bar 110 psec Efficiency 50-60% For events with a few bars on see anticipated √N dependence <70 psec/Gastof (2500V) >90% efficiency

  7. Upgrade for T958 Phase II March 7-20 • New detector prototypes, electronics, • Improved DAQ, alignment, analysis, tracking • Scope Data 10:00->12:30Fast Timing (UTA Workshop) 10:00 Fast Timing Test Beam Overview (20') Andrew 10:20 Scope Analysis (20') Tomek Pierzchala 10:40  Test Beam Analysis Plans (20') Pedro Duarte 11:00 Quartic Geant Simulation (20') Yushu Yao 11:20 Ray Tracing MC (20') Joaquin Noyola 11:40  Reference Timing (30') Mike http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=14046

  8. T958 Electronics Phase I: Amplifier : Hamamatsu Ortec Phillips Burle 8x8 MCP-PMT 25 um pore Constant Fraction Discriminator Ortec 934 (9307) TDC (Phillips 7186) SMA SMA Lemo 10 um Burle or 6 um Hamamatsu HPTDC Phase II: Custom CFD (Louvain) Phase III: New 10 um Burle? LCFD V2, Amp+CFD board (Alberta)

  9. TB Phase II Analysis • Pedro Duarte data analysis of CAMAC data • (TDC tracking) leads to understanding of coherent noise, tracking, efficiency, cross talk. • II) Tomek Pierzchala scope data analysis gives • data base of pulses, allows separation of detector/tube response from electronics. • Focus on scope analysis for this talk.

  10. Scope (Tektronix DPO70404) Analysis Waveform2 sample 755 events: Trigger Ch3xCh1CH1 QBE > Ortec9306CH2 G01 > HamamatsuCH3 G02 > ZX60CH4 QBD > 18dB > Phillips2

  11. Using Scope Signals What time To use?

  12. Scope Analysis (G1-G2) (t)=45 ps (t)=35 ps CFD algo simulated Threshhold discriminaton

  13. Scope Analysis: Detector Resolution • time difference using LCFD • 23 GASTOFs 35±1ps • 14 QUARTICs 63±2ps • 12 74±3ps • 13 69±3ps • 24 64±3ps • 50±3ps • Overconstrained setup gives G1 = 42 ps G2=24 Q1=59 Q4=40

  14. Scope Analysis: LCFD Resolution Ch4=LCFD output of same bar as ch1 raw pulse Difference gives LCFD resolution (t)=40 ps Noise? Saturation

  15. Concerns Efficiency: From tracking+scope Q about 60%, G2 from tracking 10-30% (CFD threshhold?) Correlation/cross talk: Track not in row of bar but bar on Background—not tested Rad Hardness of electronics Readout

  16. Extrapolating Current QUARTIC/PMT resolution ~60ps Louvain CFD ~40 ps, software optimization implies might reduce this to 20 ps, combined with TDC resolution of 20 ps gives 66 ps/bar 60% efficiency implies 10 measurements instead of 16 with two QUARTICs gives 21 ps QUARTICs only resolution GASTOF/PMT is 24 ps, combined with a single photon counter with <10 ps resolution would give 25 ps, which implies an overall system resolution of 15-20 ps And rejection factor ~30

  17. Q3 Parallel tube to lower background, shorter light guide to increase light

  18. Short kink Long kink aka Dogleg <#p.e.>=5.5 <#p.e.>=3.5

  19. 6 4 2.5 L.K. S.K Q2-4

  20. TB III: July 11-18 • LCFD v2, better algo dual output for HPTDC tests • Alberta amp/CFD board • Scope analysis, more systematic • Q2 vs Q3 • GASTOF 2 efficiency • Q correlations • Compare Phillips 7186 TDC and HPTDC

  21. GOOD NEWS! • DOE ADR awarded A.B. $75k includes money for fast scope, CAEN HPTDC, electronics, travel to CERN testbeam, etc. • My sabbatical was approved by UTA, I plan to be at CERN Jan-Aug 2008

  22. EIG1000D with PIL063SM (fiber coupler and fiber) • PiLas Digital Control Unit (EIG1000D) • Optical Heads (PILxxx) for 375 nm – 1550 nm) • Laser stand & irradiations • We resume June 22nd irradiations and tests with picosecond laser (PiLas) using blue laser head PIL040 - 408 nm, 32 ps pulse FWHM and < 3 ps jitter! Before and after irradiation series of laser pulses measured by Hamamatsu MCP-PMTs will be taken with 3 GHz LeCroy. We will scan Hamamatsu responses as a function of HV, pulse rate and number of photons per pulse. In next step, front-end electronics will be irradiated.

  23. Optical box, with possibility of varying light attenuation in wide range Laser head Hamamtsu MCP-PMT

More Related