1 / 26

Understanding Radiation-Hard Quartz Calorimeters for Future High-Energy Physics Experiments

Learn about the development and challenges of radiation-hard quartz calorimeters for high-energy physics experiments like the SLHC. Explore their robustness in extreme radiation conditions and recovery mechanisms for sustained detector performance.

jerometaylor
Download Presentation

Understanding Radiation-Hard Quartz Calorimeters for Future High-Energy Physics Experiments

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. LHC Yasar Onel (Univ. of Iowa, USA) Aldo Penzo (INFN – Trieste, Italy) (On behalf of CMS HCAL) CALOR 2008 – Pavia, Italy (26- 30 May 2008) INFN Presented by Aldo Penzo, Calorimetric Techniques Session, 26 May 2008 The CMS - HF Calorimeters: Radiation hard Quartz Calorimetry Outline LHC ( → SLHC): Huge radiation challenge Quartz: Radiation – hard material Cherenkov light: Filter – out junk HF calorimeters in CMS: Forward physics at LHC Rad – hard Quartz R&D for SLHC

  2. LHC (SLHC) Experimental Challenges For LHC: • Luminosity L = 1034 cm-2 s-1, • Bunch Crossing (BX) interval D = 25 ns, • High Interaction Rate • pp interaction rate~109 interactions/s • Large Particle Multiplicity ~ 20 superposed events in each BX ~ 1000 tracks into the detector every 25 ns • High Radiation Levels • radiation hard detectors and electronics In forward CMS region (h~ 3-5) ~ 100 Mrad/year (~ 107 s) [Activation of HF ~10 mSv/h (60 days LHC run/1 day cool-down) ]

  3. LHC to SLHC • Assume SLHC luminosity L= 1035 cm-2s-1 (10 x LHC) • Possible bunch crossing intervals: 25 ns, 50 ns • Some parameters for comparison are (1 LHC year = 107 s) : LHC SLHC L (cm-2s-1) 1034 1035 1035 BX interval (ns) 25 25 50 Nint / BX-ing ~20 ~ 200 ~ 400 dN/d / BX-ing ~100 ~1000 ~1000 ∫L dt (fb-1) 100 1000 1000 • In forward CMS region (h~ 3-5) ~ 10 MGy/year

  4. Rad – hard Quartz Fibers • Quartz Fibers (QF) with fluorine-doped silica cladding (QQF) can stand ~20 Grads, with ≤ 10% light loss; • Plastic-clad fibers (QPF) may have ~75% losses after 5 years at LHC luminosity in high hregion • Quartz Fibers respond to fast charged particles by producing Cherenkov light • PMT Photodetectors (low B) are sensitive to radiation mainly through PK windowswith ≥ 30% transmission loss at 420 nm (glass) • Recovery mechanisms, for fibers and PMT, may reduce the effects of radiation damage, either in a natural way (self-repair in quiet periods after exposure), or artificially, for instance like thermo-(or photo-)bleaching. • Need to be understood to describe accurately the behaviour of the detector, and its history • Robust enough for a survival strategy of detectors in extreme SLHC radiation conditions…???

  5. Typical spectral response of QF shows reduced damage effects in the region around maximum (420 nm) of PMT sensitivity (Quantum Efficiency); this is an important asset of quartz-fiber calorimetry.

  6. qT ~ 20o b > 0.7 qC ~ 45o Characteristics of Cherenkov light from Quartz Fibers • In quartz (n=1.45) charged particles with b >1/n (0.7) emit Cherenkov light (Threshold 0.2 MeV for e, 400 MeV for p) • Cherenkov angle qc such that cos qc = (bn)-1 (~45o for b=1) • Optical fibers only trap light emitted within the numerical aperture of the fiber qT (~20o with axis of fiber) DRDCP54 (1994) - Development of quartz fiber calorimetry (A. Contin, P. Gorodetzky, R. DeSalvo et al.)

  7. Sharper shower profiles L. R. Sulak – Frascati Calorimetry Conf., 1996 R. Wigmans – Lisbon Calorimetry Conf., 1999 N. Akchurin and R. Wigmans – Rev. Sci. Instr. 74 (2003)

  8. CMS HF Calorimeter 2003 Test Beam 25 ns Intrinsically very fast Fast time response Y. Onel, Chicago Calorimetry Conf. , June 2006

  9. CMS – HF Calorimeters • 2 Quartz Fiber Calorimeters for the forward region (3< h <5) of CMS ~ 250 tons iron absorber (8.8 lI) ~ 1000 km quartz fibers (0.8mm diam) ~ 2000 PMT read-out • 36 wedges azimuthally; 18 rings radially (Segmentation DhxDf = 0.175x0.175) Test beam results of CMS quartz fibre calorimeter prototype and simulation of response to high-energy hadron jets - N. Akchurin et al. - Nucl.Instrum.Meth.A409:593,1998 Design, Performance and Calibration of CMS Forward Calorimeter Wedges– G. Bayatian et al. – Eur. Phys. J. C53, 139, 2008

  10. Assembling the wedges • Manual insertion of the fibers • Wedges completed with fibers

  11. HF at SX5 ready for lowering to the cavern • Completely assembledHF module

  12. HF in UX5 – at beam level • Since lowering to UX5, HFs were in garages, while the rest of CMS was lowered to UX5 & assembled; • in the garages HFs were commissioned • one module seen here was extracted and was brought to beam level temporarily

  13. HF structure and properties

  14. c - Noise, etc b - Constant term (calibration, nonlinearity) a – Statistical fluctuations Energy resolution of HF • Electromagnetic energy resolution is dominated by photoelectron statistics and can be expressed in the customary form. The stochastic term a= 198% and the constant term b= 9%. • Hadronic energy resolution is largely determined by the fluctuations in the neutral pion production in showers, and when it is expressed as in the EM case, a = 280% and b = 11%. • Highly non-compensating: e/h ~ 5 • Light yield ~ 0.3 phe/GeV • Uniformity (transverse) ± 10% • Precision in h ~ 0.03and in f~ 0.03 rad

  15. 2007 CMS Global Runs As 2007 progressed an increasing number of the following subsystems participated in the global runs (in order of entrance) : • HF: forward hadron calorimeter • DT: drift tubes • EB: barrel electromagentic calorimeter • RPC: resistive plate chambers • CSC: cathode strip chamber • Trk FEDs/RIB: tracker front-end drivers/rod-in-a-box • Lumi: luminosity monitor • HB: barrel hadron calorimeter • HO: outer hadronic calorimeter • HE: endcap hadron calorimeter • HLT: high level trigger HFin all global runs, since beginning 2007

  16. HF calibrations solo and in GR Events’ display of the HF+ calibration data (by Ianna Osborne).

  17. HF monitoring and calibration tools • Pedestals – long/short term stability; light-leaks • LED – stability, photoelectron response • Laser – timing • HV scans – gain • Co60 Source scan – calibration ~ ± 5% • Rad-dam monitoring – fiber attenuation damage by radiation

  18. Total weight : 12500 t Overall diameter : 15 m Overall length . 21.6 m Magnetic field : 4 T HF in CMS

  19. HF: 3. < h < 5. T1:3.1 < h < 4.7 T2: 5.3 <h< 6.5 HF ZDC HF- ZDC HF+ 2p C A S T O R C A S T O R 10.5m CMS 14m 0 f -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 h HF in the forward region of CMS Almost complete rapidity coverage at LHC

  20. HF Physics Benchmark Processes High Luminosity: • Higgs production via WW fusion : • pp → j j (WW) → H j j (tagging jets in HF) • Higgs decays to vector bosons : • H → ZZ (WW) → l l j j • - SUSY → jets + ETmiss (hermeticity) • Rapidity coverage needed: |h| up to 5 for ETmiss , 3 < |h| < 5 for ‘tagging’ forward jets

  21. “Tagging” jets

  22. Forward di-jets probe low-x QCD Moderate Luminosity Salim Cerci, David d’Enterria: “Mueller-Navelet” Jets separated by several Δη

  23. Luminosity Monitor • Real time lumi monitoring with HF • Count minimum bias events at low luminosity • Count “zeroes” at design luminosity • Use linear ET sum, which scales directly with luminosity. • Bunch by bunch • Update time: 0.1 s to 1.0 s or slower* • “Always on” operation, independent of main CMS DAQ • Offline • Robust logging • Easy access to luminosity records • Dynamic range (1028 ~ 1034cm–2s–1) • Absolute Calibration • Target 5% (or better) • Offline: TOTEM, W’s & Z’s • Simulations: Full GEANT with realistic representation of photostatistics, electronic noise and quantization, etc. Minimal hardware requirements•Mezzanine board to tap into HF data stream Autonomous (mini) DAQ system to provide “always on”operation

  24. SLHC R&D on Rad-hard Quartz University of Iowa • As a solution for SLHC conditions quartz plates are proposed as a substitute for the scintillators at the Hadronic Endcap (HE) calorimeter. • Castor uses Quartz Plates • A first quartz plate calorimeter prototype (QPCAL - I) was built with WLS fibers, and was tested at CERN and Fermilab test beams. • Geant4 simulations are completed • R&D studies to develop a highly efficient method for collecting Cerenkov light in quartz with wavelength shifting fibers. • • We are also constructing a prototype calorimeter, first 6 layers have been tested at Fermilab test beam. This summer whole prototype will be at Cern test beam.

  25. Extracting Cherenkov lightfrom Quartz plates • Studies and simulations • The real thing…

  26. Preliminary results Light Enhancement Tools: • PTP and Ga:ZnO (4% Gallium doped) enhance the light production almost 4 times. OTP, MTP, and PQP did not perform as well as these. • PTP is easier to apply on quartz, we have a functioning evaporation system in Iowa, works very well. We also had successful application with RTV. Uniform distribution is critical!! • We tested 0.005 gr/cm2, 0.01 gr/cm2, and 0.015 gr/cm2 PTP densities on quartz surfaces, looks like 0.01 gr.cm2 is slightly better than the others. • ZnO can be applied by RF sputtering, we did this at Fermilab- LAB7. We got 0.3 micron, and 1.5 micron deposition samples. 0.3 micron yields better light output. Readout Options: • Single APD or SiPMT is not enough to readout a plate. But 3-4 APD or SiPMT can do the job. Test Beams:We have opportunity to test our ZnO and PTP covered plates, at CERN (Aug07), and Fermilab MTest (Nov 07, and Feb 08). Blue : Clean Quartz Green : ZnO (0.3 micron) Red : PTP (2 micron)

More Related