1 / 38

Review of Calorimeter R&D

This review highlights the requirements and progress in LC calorimeter development, including energy resolution for single particles, linearity, hermeticity, and operation in magnetic fields. It discusses traditional approaches like compensation and new approaches like particle flow, digital HCAL, and SiW ECAL. The review also covers the CALICE collaboration's R&D studies and results.

jefferyphillips
Download Presentation

Review of Calorimeter R&D

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. Review of Calorimeter R&D The 7th ACFA LC Workshop November 9-12, Taipei, Taiwan K. Kawagoe / Kobe University

  2. Introduction • Requirements for LC calorimeter • Good energy resolution for single particles (both for electrons/photons and hadrons) • Good linearity (from 1 GeV to a few 100 GeV) • Good hermeticity (no cracks) • Operational in strong magnetic field (~3Tesla) • Good energy resolution for jets • Essential to find W/Z/top in multi-jet final states

  3. Two-jet mass resolution • A benchmark is two-jet mass resolution to separate W and Z. • Right figures: nnWW and nnZZ events with different resolutions. • Jet energy resolution of ~30%/sqrt(E) is required. • Note: In many physics analyses, not only the jet energy resolution but also jet-finding algorithm will be equally important. 60%/sqrt(E) 30%/sqrt(E)

  4. Traditional approach: compensation • Main contribution of hadron energy resolution : fluctuation of EM component in hadronic showers. • Good energy resolution for single hadrons is achieved if signals from EM component and hadron component are equivalent (compensation). • Compensating sampling calorimeter is realized by optimizing the ratio of absorber and sensitive material. • So far achieved • ZEUS (U+Scinti.): ~35%/sqrt(E) for single hadrons, ~50%/sqrt(E) for jets • JLC test module (Pb+Scinti.): ~47%/sqrt(E) for single hadrons • Note: Jet energy resolution can be much improved if track information is combined.

  5. Compensating HCAL (Pb+Scinti.): test beam result • Test beams: 1-4 GeV at KEK (1998), 10-200GeV at FNAL (1999). • Energy resolution degraded by fiber-routing acryl plates. • Good linearity thanks to hardware compensation. • Still a good candidate for a LC calorimeter.

  6. New approach: Particle flow • Reconstruct each particle in a jet with Tracker+ECAL+HCAL • Charged particles by Tracker: ~64% of jet energy • Photons with ECAL: ~25% of jet energy • Neutral hadrons with HCAL: ~11% of jet energy

  7. Particle flow algorithm (PFA) • Ejet=S|P|ch+SEph+SEn.h • s2jet=s2ch.+s2ph.+s2n.h.+s2confusion • As the contribution of neutral hadrons is small, the HCAL energy resolution may be moderate for single hadrons. • Particle flow (Energy flow) algorithm was used already at LEP, but the LEP detectors were not optimized for PFA. • sconfusion is large and must be minimized. • Track-cluster matching • Separation of overlapping clusters

  8. Optimization for PFA • Magnetic field to bend charged particles • Large ECAL inner radius for particle separation • Small ECAL Moliere radius for small lateral spread of EM shower • Fine segmentation of ECAL/HCAL in 3-D MC by CALICE After reconstruction MC truth

  9. Another new idea: Digital HCAL • Digital HCAL is proposed and studied for PFA. • Super fine segmentation (~1cm x 1cm, ~40 layers)  Huge number of readout channels • Digital readoutwith cheap electronics (1bit/ch, no analog data). • Number of hits is proportional to hadron energy. • Asymmetry of energy response due to Landau fluctuation may be removed (better than analog HCAL?).

  10. Analog vs. Digital HCAL Linearity Response (S. Magill@Victoria) • Showers in a sampling calorimeters are characterized by their spatial development in terms of “track length” : • Track Length (T) = sum of tracks of all charged particles in a shower – Analog sampling calorimeters sum energy, Digital sampling calorimeters sum hits • T  E (particle energy) – what about spread in energy?

  11. Analog vs Digital Energy Resolution (S. Magill@Victoria) • GEANT 4 Simulation of SD Detector (5 GeV +) • -> sum of ECAL and HCAL analog signals - Analog • -> number of hits with 10 MeV threshold in HCAL - Digital Analog Digital Landau Tails + path length Gaussian /mean ~22% /mean ~19% E (GeV) Number of Hits

  12. Current direction • Traditional approaches (Compensation, AHCAL, …) • Well understood and established. • May work a backup. • New approaches (PFA, DHCAL, …) • All detector concepts take the new approaches. • More attractive and challenging… need much more effort • Optimization should be made by • Simulation studies • Hardware studies • Performance should be evaluated by • Test beam studies

  13. ECAL R&D studies

  14. CALICE (CAlorimeter for LInear Collider with Electrons) • A big international collaboration (3 regions, 8 countries, 28 institutes) • CALICE prepares beam test series • ECAL: SiW • HCAL: Analog and Digital

  15. CALICE SiW ECAL • ECAL system tests: 2004 October~ • DESY electron beam test: 2004 November~ • Beam tests with higher energy electron beams and hadron beams in combination with HCAL: 2005~

  16. Calice SiW Cosmic signal response Results from Cosmics/Single Slab DAQ Wafer 10 ADC’s counts Wafer 12 B. Bouquet

  17. What’s New: Silicon/W, SLAC-Oregon-BNL ALCPG Calorimetry Status J. Yu

  18. Silicon/W, SLAC-Oregon-BNL • Dynamically switched Cf • Much reduced power • Much better S/N • Allows for good timing measurement

  19. LCcal Test beam results: Linearity and Energy Resolution Cern TB 2003 EE pm saturates Ecal (GeV) e- 11.1%E Const. term compatible with beam p Ebeam (GeV) Ebeam (GeV) Si L1+L2 =1.76 mm 30 GeV e- 30 GeV electrons 15 GeV e- 30 GeV P. Checchia Ecal (GeV) E Si pad Layer 1 y pad –y telescope (cm)

  20. What’s New: Scintillator/W ECal, Colorado (cont’d) U. Nauenberg ALCPG Calorimetry Status J. Yu

  21. Asian activities on ECAL • Beam test studies of fine-granularity lead-scintillator ECAL prototypes (strip-array and small-tile) • Readout: clear fibers and MAPMT (only for beam test) • Talks by Yamauchi, Nagano, Ono.

  22. New design for Large detector • Lead/scintillator  Tungsten/scintillator for smaller Moliere radius • Scintillator segmentation to be optimized for PFA • Readout by SiPMs, directly attached to WLS fibers.

  23. SiPM, MRS, AMPD, … • Micro-APD cells operated in Geiger mode, developed in Russia • Number of cells up to ~ 1000 • Effective area ~1mm x 1mm (very compact) • High gain (~106); No AMP needed. • Photon counting capability • Cheap (a few $/device in future ?) • Significant noise rate (~1MHz) • CALICE AHCAL will use 8000 SiPMs. • Some varieties (at least 3 groups in Russia) • SiPM (Silicon photomultiplier) • MRS (Metal-resistive silicon diode) • AMPD (Avalanche multi-pixel photodiode) • A talk on SiPM performance by R. Nakamura

  24. HPK’s new device under development Samples being tested by T. Takeshita

  25. HCAL R&D studies

  26. CALICE Tile (Analog) HCAL • MiniCAL • A small prototype (15cm x 15cm cross section • Readout: APD, SiPM, and PMT (reference) • Already tested with DESY electron beam • New prototype • A large prototype (1m x 1m cross section) • Readout: ~8,000 SiPMs • To be tested 2005 onwards with hadron beam MiniCAL

  27. Calice Tile HCAL (minical)

  28. Calice Tile HCAL (new prototype) • 38 layers • 30 * 220 tiles • SiPMs with coax cables 8 * 145 tiles • ~ 8000 analogue channels in total SiPM 1 m2 with 220 tiles • Aim at common design for HCAL and tail catcher (~350 channels) F. Sefkov

  29. Calice Tile HCAL (new prototype)

  30. Digital HCAL • R&D of active layers • GEM-based (talks by A. White) • RPC-based • Scintillator-based • R&D of readout electronics

  31. Progress on understanding prototype signals and associated crosstalk.Progress on large-scale GEM active layers. Working with ANL/Fermilab on readout electronics (GEM mods to RPC design). Working with 3M Corp. on GEM foil production. Issue now is the funding/timescale for test beam stack. Design for DHCAL* using Triple GEM Embeded onboard readout Ground to avoid cross-talk *J. YuOn behalf of the HEP group at UTA.

  32. What’s New: DHCal with RPCs, ANL L. Xia @Victoria (On-board amplifiers) Pad array Mylar sheet Resistive paint • AIR4 is a 1-gap RPC built with 1.1mm glass sheet • 1.2mm gap size • Resistive paint layer is about 1MΩ/□ • Running at 6.8 KV • Avalanche signal ~5pc • Efficiency >97% • Total RPC rate from 64 channels <10 Hz • Very low noise! 1.1mm Glass sheet 1.2mm gas gap GND 1.1mm Glass sheet Resistive paint -HV Mylar sheet Aluminum foil ALCPG Calorimetry Status J. Yu

  33. ANL RPC R&D Plan FY 2004 • R&D with chambers • Essentially completed • Electronic readout system • Design and prototype ASIC • Specify entire readout system • Prototype subcomponents • Construction of m3 Prototype Section • Build chambers • Fabricate electronics • Tests in particle beam • Without and with ECAL in front CY2004 and early 2005 CY2005 CY2006 - 8 ALCPG Calorimetry Status J. Yu

  34. Digital HCal with Scintillator (NIU)Stack & Tile Fabrication ~15pe/mip ALCPG Calorimetry Status J. Yu

  35. Scintillator-based DHCAL • Study of small scintillator blocks started in Niigata. • Shape and size • White-paint or Al-evaporation

  36. Plan of combined beam test studies • Worldwide-effort (Asia, Europe, North America) • CALICE is the biggest group • ECAL (SiW) test with electron beam at DESY (2004/2005). • Start ECAL+AHCAL test with high energy hadron beams at FNAL/Protovino (2005/2006). • Then ECAL+DHCAL (funding problem ?) • Other R&D groups will join with their detectors. • A document (MoU?) for test beam needs to be sent to FNAL (meeting at ANL in September).

  37. Test Beam MoU Writing Meeting Argonne National Laboratory, September 23 – 24, 2004 I Welcome and introduction II Review of calorimeter projects ECAL HCAL Tail catcher Silicon – Tungsten (CALICE) Scintillator – Steel (CALICE) Scintillator – Steel (NIU) Silicon – Tungsten (US) RPC – Steel (Russia)RPC- Steel (Frascati) Scintillator – Tungsten (Japan) RPC – Steel (US) Scintillator – Silicon – Tungsten (Kansas) GEM – Steel (Texas) Scintillator – Silicon – Lead (Italy) Scintillator – (Colorado) III Discussion of requests to MTBF Presentation by E RambergV Writing of MoU Rate and length of spills Rate and energy range of electrons Energy range of pions VI Visit to Fermilab IV Discussion of the MoU Seminar by Holmes and Mishra (16:00) Visit of MTBF Outline Rôle of CALICE Assign writing tasks

  38. Summary • R&D studies on new appraoches/technologies • Particle flow algorithm • Digital hadron calorimeter • SiPM for scintillator-based calorimeter • They are very attractive and should be verified by simulation studies and test beam studies. • Many different activities are on-going all over the world • Combined test beam 2005 onwards: a world-wide effort • I wish to thank speakers at Victoria and Durham workshops for their slides I used

More Related