1 / 18

AFP STATUS REPORT – WHERE ARE WE ???? Steve Watts We have spent the last year being reviewed.

AFP STATUS REPORT – WHERE ARE WE ???? Steve Watts We have spent the last year being reviewed. Decision and letter from ATLAS EB November 2009. Proceed to Technical Proposal by end of 2010. Earliest for TP-> TDR decision is end 2010. Then LHCC….. HIGHLIGHTS OF YEAR

jon
Download Presentation

AFP STATUS REPORT – WHERE ARE WE ???? Steve Watts We have spent the last year being reviewed.

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. AFP STATUS REPORT – WHERE ARE WE ???? • Steve Watts • We have spent the last year being reviewed. • Decision and letter from ATLAS EB November 2009. • Proceed to Technical Proposal by end of 2010. Earliest for • TP-> TDR decision is end 2010. Then LHCC….. • HIGHLIGHTS OF YEAR • Physics case. A lot of work by all and this is now much improved. • BSM Higgs QN + Anomalous Couplings + QCD Studies • Importance of trigger at 220 for Higgs to bb. BSM possible. • Importance of L1 ECAL Upgrade for topological selection. • Federico saved the day. Collimators at 220. This will be on-going as • the LHC collimator system design is finished and implemented. • Change to tracker design. Use FE-I4 as in IBL. Means a lot of • development work. But many advantages ( e.g. rad. hardness) • AND…..common 220/420 design • Detailed plan to solve MCP/PMT lifetime issue. • Lot of progress on transferring 3D sensor technology to industry. CMS design too!

  2. 2000 Durham IPPP Khoze, Martin, Ryskin (KMR): Exclusive Higgs prediction Eur.Phys.J.C14:525-534,2000, hep-ph/0002072 2003-2004 Manchester Christmas meetings – supported by IPPP To develop interest in joint CMS/ATLAS work. FP420 R&D collaboration forms. Meeting continues – next is 12-14 December 2009. 2005 FP420 LOI presented to LHCC CERN-LHCC-2005-0254 “LHCC acknowledges the scientific merit of the FP420 physics programme and the interest in exploring its feasibility” 2006-2007 Significant STFC R&D funding in UK for FP420. Funding in U.S. and other countries, major technical progress. RP220 formed 2008 RP220 and AFP420 merge to form AFP, R&D continues, Cryostat design finalized with CERN, LOI to ATLAS submitted 2009 “AFP year in review”, FP420 R&D document published “The FP420 R&D Project: Higgs and New Physics with Forward Protons at the LHC,” FP420 Collaboration, arXiv:0806.0302v2, published in J. Inst.: 2009_JINST_4_T10001.

  3. Overview of AFP Physics - Plenty of diffractive events (SD and DPE) Physics programme in QCD and photoproduction. Two exciting new physics production processes Central Exclusive Production (CEP) Khoze, Martin and Ryskin. and using the LHC as a photon-photon collider – photon-photon physics CDF arXiv 0902.1271 Quantum number selection rule. High precision mass measurement independent of decay channel See few events => JPC = 0++ cf. High energy photon collisions at the LHC – CERN April 2008 Production very large. Well known cross sections for SM and BSM processes: SUSY production and anomalous couplings

  4. AFP and ATLAS 420 m 28 7x8 mm2 sensors per tracking station 4 stations required. or 14 FE-I4 sensors 220m 14 FE-I4 sensors or 60 FE-I3 sensors Two stations at 220 and 420m to detect leading protons, integrated into the LHC High precision mass spectrometer using the LHC 70 – 1400 GeV/c2

  5. THE KEY PLOT FOR AFP NEED STATIONS AT 220 and 420 for the physics programme.

  6. WHAT DETECTOR SYSTEM DO YOU NEED TO DO THIS PHYSICS ??? • Array of rad-hard active edge 3D silicon detectors with resolution • ~10 m/plane and 1rad angular resolution. • 3D technology development which is also ATLAS R&D Project • Timing detectors with ~10 ps resolution for overlap background • rejection. Developed by FP420 and R&D on-going. • New Connection Cryostat at 420m – conceptual design developed by FP420 R&D with CERN. • “Hamburg Beam Pipe” - Similar idea to Roman Pots but better suited to this experiment. beam Edge response with tracks < 4mm

  7. FE-I3 - lifetime issue – can get three years if move system in y Use FE-I4. Factor 5 more radiation tolerant than FE-I3. For IBL project Plus - better matched to track hit distribution at 220. - Common module design for 220 and 420 - 2 x Fe-I4 each plane 20.2mm ~200μm 7.6mm ~19 mm active IBM reticule 16.8mm 8mm active 2.8mm ~2mm Chartered reticule (24 x 32) FE-I3 74% FE-I4 ~89% NO MCC !!!!!!!!!!! • New FE-I4 • Pixel size = 250 x 50 µm2 • Pixels = 80 x 336 • Technology = 0.13µm • Power = 0.5 W/cm2 • FE-I4 Design Status • Contribution from 5 laboratories. • Main blocks MPW submitted in Spring 2008. • Full FE-I4 Review: 2/3/3009 • Submission in Summer 2009 • Expect IBL modules late 2010

  8. Radiation dose close to beam at L = 1034 cm-2s-1 is 1015 protons cm-2 per year ( 30 MRad) 3D sensor is good to 1016 protons cm-2, but FE-I3 tolerance is much less (50-100 MRad) FE-I4 – At 220 m need two FE-I4 sensors per layer rather then six FE-I3. (two FE-I4 sensors at 420m also) FE-I4 – more radiation hard than FE-I3. By moving in Y can get ten years operation at 1034. Conclusion: Go for FE-I4 sensors as baseline with FE-I3 as fallback. Allows same design of 220 and 420 trackers.

  9. Andrew Brandt, Jim Pinfold, Scott Kolya……… A =216 m B =224 m or both at 216 m or 224 m top view 1.5 mm fibers proton ~50 pe’s photons proton side view 0.1 mm fibers Quartz fibers either 1.5 mm or 0.1 mm depending on desired bins. Cerenkov light goes to microchannel plate PMT indicating proton pased through detector (distance from beam correlated to mass) 9

  10. Readout Electronics 6/22/2009 AFP Physics Meeting Andrew Brandt 10

  11. L1 Proton Trigger Time to CTP Baseline Design with a few mass bins is within the time budget 6/22/2009 AFP Physics Meeting Andrew Brandt 11

  12. WE ARE BUILDING A SYSTEM THAT HAS SAME PROBLEMSAS A SPACE PROBE. • MUST BE RELIABLE. • MUST BE SAFE. • MUST WORK FOR LONG PERIODS WITHOUT MAINTENANCE. • Space projects have several stages. • DESIGN • ENGINEERING MODEL • FLIGHT MODEL If we want to get the reliablity we will need a similar scheme.

  13. What do we have to do ?? • Finish R&D. FE-I4 based tracker. • (benefits from Pixel R&D). • Build a pre-production Hamburg Pipe • and tracker. • Start production – delay as need • TP/TDR approval

  14. GANNT CHART……….

  15. FE-I4 Schedule 3D sensor schedule IBL and AFP AFP Tracker schedule 220/420 AFP Detector assembly + test Overview of FE-I4, sensor and AFP tracker and detector schedule 2010 to Early 2013. We also assume staged installation.

  16. ATLAS 420 L (2) 220 R (2) 420 R (2) 220 L (2) Sequence of build would be as described. Key Point – phased installation of 220 and 420 detectors to deliver physics as soon as possible and commission key systems. 8 stations to build, test, install and commission Each station ( HP + Tracker + Timing + BPM + Wire Alignment) would be tested and internally aligned on a test beam at CERN. This could easily be 1 week to 4 weeks each !

  17. In UK have applied for funding for…. • Hamburg Pipe . Help complete the design and build it. • How can we help CERN. Need system engineering so • we integrate our detector with the Hamburg Pipe • R&D for FE-I4 sensor and FE-I4 Tracker. • Build a pre-production system , commission and test. • System Engineering support from RAL. Must have system drawings. • ( GT will join us – if we get the funding). • FUNDING IN UK IS VERY TIGHT. • WILL NOT KNOW UNTIL April 2010. • MUCH CAN BE DONE ON PAPER. BUT NEED PRE-PRODUCTION OR WE LOSE ANOTHER 1-2 YEARS. • e.g. Safety Review. ( Independent Chair) • Radiation Review. Combine with Safety Review. • This can be a joint CMS/ATLAS Exercise.

  18. OTHER TECHNICAL ISSUES……………………. • Cooling system that works in the tunnel • Reference Timing System • Lifetime of the phototubes • General radiation tolerance of systems. • The tracker is radiation hard but needs external services. • The timing detector electronics. • LV/HV systems. Follow on work of Henning in FP420 report

More Related