1 / 25

LHCb Phase II: Precision measurements of CP Violation

LHCb Phase II: Precision measurements of CP Violation. Chris Parkes. LHCb Status Physics Motivation Future scenarios VELO replacement Trigger Strategies. LHCb UK Bristol, Cambridge, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Imperial College, Liverpool Oxford, RAL. PPAP, March 8 th 2005.

holland
Download Presentation

LHCb Phase II: Precision measurements of CP Violation

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. LHCb Phase II:Precision measurements of CP Violation Chris Parkes • LHCb Status • Physics Motivation • Future scenarios • VELO replacement • Trigger Strategies LHCb UK Bristol, Cambridge, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Imperial College, Liverpool Oxford, RAL PPAP, March 8th 2005

  2. LHCb pit • Magnet installed • operated full current 9th November • Calorimeter installation now • RICH2 to be installed July 2005 Construction Status • RICH • VELO • Pre-production module tested in beam Nov. ‘04 • Sensor production underway • RICH2 • mirrors • being mounted • 1st batch HPDs • June 2005 • Detector • Software • GRID • Trigger • Framework • Analysis

  3. UK Responsibilities in LHCb The UK plays a major role in the LHCb experiment • 15% of the LHCb Collaboration • 8Institutes(Bristol, Cambridge, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Imperial College, Liverpool,Oxford, RAL) • 50Current Physicists+Engineers + 20 PhD students • UK leading roles in Collaboration • RICH Project Leader • Computing Project Leader • UK Detector Responsibilities • RICH 1 • RICH 2 • VELO The UK also contribute significantly to the physics activities, are responsible for the RICH and VELO software projects and are actively involved in the LHCb Computing strategy and Grid project.

  4. Bs mix CP Violation in 2010 LHCb: st = 43 fs • 3 Years of LHCb data taking • 1 day at LHCb = 100d at B Factory ! • Bs Oscillations measured • SM <25 ps-1, CDF • LHCb ms reach 68 ps-1 •  measured • Theory error ~1% will be matched by LHCb ~ 5yrs •  measured J/ K0 • Current B factories sin(2) = 0.7260.037 (La Thuile, 2005) • theory error < 1%, 1 yr statistical error sin(2) 0.02 • New physics, need 5% measurements • Tree Penguin • Also Rare Decays • SM 3.5x10-9 , 3.7  after 3 yrs BELLE

  5.  LHCb etc. •  measured to ~3 in 3 yrs • But theoretical error only ~ 0.1% ! • Potential New • Physics • Contributions • Improved vertex • Resolution equiv. • to more stats • Tree only, no NP contribution • LHCb Not limited by LHC • LHCb lumi 2x1032 cm-2 s-1, ATLAS/CMS 1034 • Limiting factors on LHCb • Not Theoretical for  • Vertex Capabilities • VELO • Statistics • Luminosity • Trigger

  6. Why Upgrade ? (1) Improve Trigger • Increasing Event yield by 3-5 times could reduce statistical uncertainties by factor of 2. LHCb L0 trigger relies on high-pt e//hadrons 1MHz Output rate, 1.5 s for algorithm Could this cope ?

  7. Increase Luminosity • LHCb would have to cope with multiple interactions High pt muon trigger could cope 4 of 10 benchmark channels have +- in final state

  8. Trigger Strategies BUT would need improved hadron trigger • Improved L0 trigger • Massive use of modern optical links and FPGA’s can allow us to make a Vertex trigger in ~2010 • BTeV assumed they could do this in 2009 • Need pt information ? • Mag. Field in VELO or include TT in L0 Displaced Track Trigger at L0

  9. J. Christiansen LHCb electronics coordinator System configuration outlineR projection only Task 8 Clustering & Triplet finding & merging Track Identification & filtering In counting house 4 sectors per half Track merging Two halfs • 35 processing modules • 2 crates • 2200 optical links • 36 multi ribbon cables (8x8) Vertex identification Impact parameter calculation Final vertex trigger decision

  10. Why Upgrade (2) Replace VELO • Radiation Tolerance • Replacement required at ~4 years • Improved Performance • Use in L0 trigger • Pattern recognition at higher lumi • Improve vertexing capabilities • Material Budget • RF foil • Two Options under active consideration: • New rad. hard Strip technology • Pixel technologies

  11. Extreme Radiation Environment Middle station Far station • LHCb VELO will be HOT! • Maximum Fluence • 1.3x 1014 NIEL 1MeV neq/cm2/year at 8mm at 2x1032 • 3.3x 1014 NIEL 1MeV neq/cm2/year at 5mm at 2x1032 • 6.6x 1014 NIEL 1MeV neq/cm2/year at 8mm at 1033 • Strongly non-uniform • dependence on 1/r2 and station (z) • Maintain a reasonable S/N performance • 3-4 years at 300V

  12. Radiation Hard Technologies Czochralski n-on-p Glasgow, CERN Liverpool • Cz, n-on-p, 3D, or pixel technologies – Active UK R&D 3D Glasgow Extreme rad. hard For 4.5 x 1014 24 GeV p/cm2 Depletion voltage = 19V !!!

  13. Move Closer 5mm limit from Accelerator • Current safe guard ring design 1mm • Edgeless technology exits • Dope edges • 3D, etch, laser cut Alternative Guard Rings Baseline first strip 8mm 7.1mm 10% improvement

  14. LHCb UK Resources • Total Cost of LHCb 74.48 MCHF Committed by FA’s 69.56 MCHF Overall Shortfall 4.92 MCHF • Cost of Capital Phase to UK (Apr 2001-Mar 2007) SCP4 baseline Equipment £ 3.1 M (£2.5M RICH, £0.6M VELO) Staff £ 8.3 M (£5.9M University, £2.4M CCLRC) Common Fund £ 1.3 M Travel £ 0.9 M Total £ 13.6 M • SCP4 cuts £ 0.7M • Bid to PPARC £ 0.9 M (mostly RICH-1 redesign, under discussion)

  15. LHCb UK Resources • Steady State Running Staff PPARC funded 31 RAL PPD 6 University/Fellows 18 Students 20 • Continuation of 9 eScience posts are required in addition to staff requirements during period 2007-2009. (see Tony Doyle PPAP 26/10/04) • Steady State Running Non-Staff Costs Travel £400k p.a. M&O UK £260k p.a. M&O CERN £300k p.a. • In order to preserve and reinforce the leading role held by the UK in LHCb, we expect to maintain a comparable level of commitment to the future LHCb programme including potential upgrades. Upgrade estimates • R&D phase Velo,trigger : £500k • Rad hard Velo in L0 trigger: O £10M depending on technology

  16. Conclusions • LHCb can maximise physics opportunities after 2010 • Reach ultimate sensitivity • Increase luminosity Trigger Upgrade with Velo in L0 • New Radiation tolerant technologies for VELO • Velo replacement required • 1015 NIEL1 MeV neq/cm2 • 3D, Cz, n-on-p strips or pixel technologies • Exploit UK R&D Investment • LHCb UK Workshop on future scenarios • 1st April at IC • SoI November 2005 • UK expects to play a leading role in LHCb upgrade

  17. SPARE SLIDES

  18. LHCb UK e-science forward look (Nick Brook) • Current RICH & VELO e-science: • RICH: UK provide bulk of the RICH s/w team including s/w coordinator ~7 FTEs about 50:50 e-science funding+rolling grant/HEFCE • VELO: UK provide bulk of the VELO s/w team including s/w coordinator ~4 FTEs about 50:50 e-science funding+rolling grant/HEFCE ALL essential alignment activities for both detectors through e-science funding Will move from development to maintenance and operational alignment ~3FTEs for alignment in 2007-9 • Current core activities: • GANGA development • Provision of DIRAC & production tools • Development of conditions DB • The production bookkeeping DB • Data management & metadata • Tracking • Data Challenge Production Manager • ~10 FTEs mainly GridPP, e-science, studentships with some HEFCE support Will move from development to maintenance phase - UK pro rata share of LHCb core computing activities ~5 FTEs Need ~9 FTE (core+alignment+UK support) in 2007/9 - continued e-science support

  19. Material Budget: RF-foil VELO RF-foil 250m BTeV • BTev - 150m thick wires/foil, 6mm from beam • In primary vacuum • Cryo panels for absorb outgassing • TOTEM • 1mm from beam (v. diff optics) • 150m foil

  20. Material Budget 220m (nominal) 250m In brackets - % before first sensitive hit

  21. CKM triangle status, ICHEP 2004 Compatibility obtained between all constraints 2002: first non-trivial compatibility test for CKM triangle

  22. Bdgp+p- No identification Purity = 9.5% With pion identification Purity = 85%, Eff. =90%

  23. LHCb UK Resources • Cost of Capital Phase (Apr 2001-Mar 2007) SCP4 baseline Equipment £ 3.1 M (£2.5M RICH, £0.6M VELO) Staff £ 8.3 M (£5.9M University, £2.4M CCLRC) Common Fund £ 1.3 M Travel £ 0.9 M Total £ 13.6 M • LHCb UK expect to maintain a comparable level of commitment to the future LHCb programme • Future Cost Estimate (Apr 2007-Mar 2013) Equipment £ ??? M (Spend in 08/09/10) Staff £ 9 M eScience Staff £ 3 M (9 FTE’s see Tony Doyle PPAP 26/10/04) Common Fund, Travel, M&O £ 6 M Total £ 18 M + Equipment

  24. O(Upgrade Costs) • Velo • Total ~3.5M Capital • UK ~0.6M Capital • BTeV pixel detector (Joel Butler, Sept ’04) • $20.8M inc. FTEs • (Total Det 108M capital/180M with FTEs) • Potential LHCb involvement of some BTeV collaborators

  25. Systematics • Acceptance • ~Cancels in TDCPA • Detection efficiency • Magnetic field polarity • Decay-time resolution for Bs • Survey accuracy ~10m, alignment • Lifetime measurements • Production Asymmetry,Tagging Performance • Control channels • Trigger Efficiency • Multiple channel triggers

More Related