1 / 32

Neutrino Factory Scoping Study: Progress & Challenges in Particle Physics

Explore the progress and challenges in particle physics with a focus on the Neutrino Factory concept and the MICE collaboration. Learn about the pursuit of understanding neutrino oscillations and leptonic CP violation, critical for unraveling the universe's baryon-antibaryon mystery. Track the ambitious neutrino program's path toward a proposal, with key events like NUFACT workshops shaping its direction. Delve into the technical aspects of accelerator physics, including cooling and acceleration technologies, essential for building a Neutrino Factory. Witness the collaboration's efforts to demonstrate the feasibility and performance of muon ionization cooling within the project's particle physics framework.

lisahenderson
Download Presentation

Neutrino Factory Scoping Study: Progress & Challenges in Particle Physics

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. MICE collaboration meeting 12 at Frascati -- Introduction -- MICE: progress and challenges

  2. Why MICE? Based on Muon collider ideas and development (Palmer et al, 92->), the Neutrino Factory concept (Geer, 1998) resonated in 1998 with the final demonstration of Atmospheric Neutrino Oscillations by the SuperK Collaboration. International workshops: NUFACT 99 (Lyon, France) NUFACT 00 (Montery, California) NUFACT 01 (Tsukuba, Japan) NUFACT 02 (London, UK) NUFACT 03 (Columbia,NY,USA) NUFACT 04 (Osaka, Japan) NUFACT 05 (Frascati,Italy)  Neutrino Factory is the ultimate tool for study of Neutrino Oscillations -- unique source of high energy ne --reach/sensitivity better by order(s) of magnitude wrt other techniques (e.g. super-beams) for _ m+ e+ne nm * q13* ** matter effects ** *** leptonic CP violation *** ****ne  nm andnt**** NB : leptonic CP violation is a key ingredient in the leading explanations for the mystery of the baryon-antibaryon asymmetry in our universe

  3. ~NOvA +PD

  4. encouraging signs from CERN… report from Scientific Policy Committee to council

  5. An ambitious neutrino programme is a distinct possibility, but it must be well prepared to have a good proposal in time for the big decision period in 2010 (Funding window: 2011-2020) Avenues identified as promising a) Superbeam alone + large detector(s) (e.g. T2HK, NOvA) a) SuperBeam + Beta-Beam + Megaton detector (SB+BB+MD) Fréjus b) Neutrino Factory (NuFact) + magnetic detector (40kton)+… The physics abilities of the neutrino factory are superior but….. « what is the realistic time scale? » (Hardware) cost estimate of a neutrino factory ~1B€ + detectors. This needs to be verifed and ascertained on a localized scenario (CERN, RAL…) and accounting. The cost of a (BB+SB+MD) is not very different Cost/physics performance/feasibility comparison needed  ‘scoping study’

  6. Physics compare performance of various options on equal footing of parameters and conventions and agreed standards of resolutions, simulation etc. identify tools needed to do so (e.g. Globes upgraded) propose « best values » of baselines, beam energies etc.. MICE and the SCOPING STUDY… Detectors (NEW!) Water Cherenkov (1000kton) Magnetized Iron Calorimeter (50kton) Low Z scintillator (100 kton) Liquid Argon TPC (100 kton) Hybrid Emulsion (4 kton) Near detectors (and instrumentation) AB Peter Dornan Accelerator: M.Zisman -- proton driver (energy, time structure and consequences) -- target and capture (chose target and capture system) -- phase rotation and cooling -- acceleration and storage evaluate economic interplays and risks include a measure of costing and safety assessment + Ken Long

  7. Time scales: NUFACT05 (Sunday 26 June 2005) launch of scoping study September 2005: ISS report0 NUFACT06 (summer 2006) discussion of results of scoping study September 2006 ISS report 2007 full design study proposal 2010 conclusions of Design Study & CDR NB: This matches well the time scales set up at CERN

  8. Particle physicist: • Q: Can a Neutrino Factory be built? • Accelerator physisicst: • A: YES! (US Study II, CERN) • but… it is expensive, • and many ingredients • have never been demonstrated! •  R&D is needed. (est. 5yrs) • to • ascertain performance • reduce costs • among critical items: • ***Target*** • *** COOLING *** *** Acceleration *** Cooling component development programme+ ‘blast test’: MUCOOL collabration (US-Japan-UK)

  9. IONIZATION COOLING principle: reality (simplified) this will surely work..! ….maybe… • A delicate technology and integration problem Need to build a realistic prototype and verify that it works (i.e. cools a beam) Difficulties lay in particular in • operating RF cavities in Mag. Field, • interface with SC magnets and LH2 absorbers What performance can one get? Difficulty:affordable prototype of cooling section only cools beam by 10%, while standard emittance measurements barely achieve this precision. Solution: measure the beam particle-by-particle RF Noise!! state-of-the-art particle physics instrumentation will test state-of-the-art accelerator technology.

  10. 10% cooling of 200 MeV/c muons requires ~ 20 MV of RF single particle measurements => measurement precision can be as good as D ( e out/e in ) = 10-3 never done before either… Coupling Coils 1&2 Spectrometer solenoid 1 Matching coils 1&2 Matching coils 1&2 Spectrometer solenoid 2 Focus coils 1 Focus coils 2 Focus coils 3 m Beam PID TOF 0 Cherenkov TOF 1 RF cavities 1 RF cavities 2 Downstream particle ID: TOF 2 Cherenkov Calorimeter VariableDiffuser Liquid Hydrogen absorbers 1,2,3 Incoming muon beam Trackers 1 & 2 measurement of emittance in and out

  11. Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment Aims: demonstrate feasibility and performance of a section of cooling channel Final PID: TOF Cherenkov Calorimeter Main challenges: RF in magnetic field! 10-3 meas. of emittance Safety issues 4T spectrometer II Status: Approved at RAL(UK) First beam: 04-2007 Funded in: UK,CH,JP,NL,US Requests: Be,CH,It,JP,US Cooling cell (~10%) b=5-45cm, liquid H2, RF 4T spectrometer I TOF Single-m beam ~200 MeV/c Some prototyping: 200MHz RF cavity with beryllium windows Liquid-hydrogen absorbers Scintillating-fiber tracker

  12. Some challenges of MICE: 1. Operate RF cavities of relatively low frequency (200 MHz) at high gradient (16 MV/m) in highly inhomogeneous magnetic fields (1-3 T) dark currents (can heat up LH2), breakdowns 2. Hydrogen safety (substantial amounts of LH2 in vicinity of RF cavities) 3. Emittance measurement to relative precision of 10-3 in environment of RF bkg requires low mass and precise tracker low multiple scattering redundancy to fight dark current induced background excellent immunity to RF noise require complete set of PID detectors (INFN) And… 4. Obtaining funding for R&D towards a facility that is not (yet) in the plans of a major lab

  13. MICE is an international effort from the start.

  14. at this point MICE (PhaseI) is an approved and funded project in 5 countries -- UK: 9.7M£ -- USA: 1.2 M$ approved for next three years (NSF+DOE) ( +RF source + MRI proposal -- some success) + propose to build solenoid magnet within MC budget (+ longer term plan for Coupling coil) (Zisman at CB) -- Japan: US-Japan ~$100k/yr, UK-Japan (travel funds) (+ 500k$ requested) -- Switzerland: PSI solenoid + Uni-Geneva-NSwissF (80KCHF/yr)+ 1 PDA+1PhDS -- Netherlands: Mag probes (in production!) + 1 PhDS + Proposal submitted in Italy (TOF, Calorimeter) and Belgium (Cherenkov) MICE is CERN recognized experiment RE11.

  15. PHASE I m implementation in steps physics-based: understanding of systematics all configurations successfully matched optically - STEP I: April 2007 STEP II: October 2007 STEP III: 2008 PHASE II STEP IV: 2008 STEP V 2008? STEP VI 2009?

  16. MICE is being designed simulated reviewed MOU’ed dug prototyped and built!

  17. SIMULATION -- beam line : Turtle (Kevin Tilley) + G4beamline (Tom Roberts) match input beam (quads and dipoles) to MICE (solenoid) 600 ‘good muons’ per ISIS spill should be achievable  10-3 emittance measurement in 1 hr (stat) (work to do for diffuser, variety of optics, etc…) -- optics (Bob Plamer, Ulisse Bravar) ICOOL all steps of MICE have been optically matched (but not to the beam) both in flip mode and solenoid mode (proposed by Migliorati et al) -- physics simulation (G4MICE, Y. Torun et al)

  18. ‘Simple things should be easy and complicated things should be possible’ SIMULATION and software. ‘Students are taking over the project’ Yagmur Torun Sci-fi simulation of the measurement includes noise dead channels etc.. (Malcolm Ellis et al) G4MICE-ICOOL comparison Chris Rogers Right ICOOL less than 10-3 difference between true and reconstructed Left G4MICE E good to 20 ps and a few 100 keV t EMCAL(Rome, Frascati) RF emission of X-rays (Rikard Sandstrom)

  19. requirements on spectrometer system: 1a reject incoming e, p, p (TOF 0, TOF1) 1.b reject outgoing e => TOF2, Cerenkov + Calorimeter 2. measure x,y,Px, Py E (tracker) and t (TOF counters) to build 6D emittance particle by particle 3. resolution better than 10% of width at equilibrium emittance s2meas = s2true+ s2res = s2true [ 1+ (sres/ strue)2 ] (correction less than 1%) 4. robust against noise from RF cavities  Sci-Fi tracker was validated with calculations based on G4MICE -- experimental input from prototype (dead channels, efficiency, resolution) -- calculated spectrum and time structure of RF field emission based on LabG 800MHz -- still will need to be scrupulous about multiple scattering in tracker  stepIII Sci-fi prototype II presently assembled test at KEK in magnetic field (october)

  20. Now same exercize needs to be done for TOF requires measured 50ps resolution  double layer scintillator construction of TOF0 prototype this year (Milano,Pavia, Padova, Geneva) funding available (GVA), proposal submitted (Italy) bias on longitudinal emittance ratio 50ps from tracker energy resolution 1% TOF0 (R4998 Hamamatsu with Bicron scintillator)

  21. DAQ, controls and monitoring working group aims understand what instrumentation is needed and what data are needed at which frequency (per spill, per muon, independently) in order to perform comparison of data with simulation at the level of 10-3 started to meet here at Frascati, will have dedicated workshop (so far: Bross+Yoshida+Graulich+Radicioni+Drumm  will need some accelerator physicists!)

  22. RF module MICE is foresen with 8 RF cavities Closed with curved Be windows (increase gradient / MW RF power) 201 MHz First cavity prototyped (MUCOOL) Completion in April 2005 RF power sources : Will be assembled from equipement refurbished from Berkeley, Los Alamos, CERN, RAL. Needed 8 MW peak power  23 MV acceleration Operation at LN2 foreseen to increase Volts / MW

  23. Initial inspections of 4616 circuits RF circuits arrived from LBNL to Daresbury Lab. LBL equipment arrived Jan 05 Initial inspections 4616 circuits look ok ! MICE test area at Daresbury Moss

  24. MICE Muon Beam Design integration: Beam line and shielding, cryogenics MICE: Support systems, RF, services, …

  25. MOU for PSI solenoid counter-signed Paul Drumm MICE Project Manager Prof. John Wood RAL CEO

  26. Hydrogen Safety Safety Review process under way Internal review organized in Berkeley in Dec. 2003 Reviewers: D. Allspach (FNAL), G. Benincasa (CERN), M. Seely (Jlab), L. Starritt (NASA), J. Weisend (SLAC), J. Wells (RAL) Evacuated buffer tank needed? NO Burst valves and relief valves? YES Separate vents for vacuum and hydrogen? YES Detailed answers issued. Proceeding now to full safety revue (toward fall 2005) to be set up at this meeting

  27. Review Document Review RAL Review FINALDocument Audit RAL Operate Design and safety working groupnominated to ensure that MICE is designed and built according to appropriate and safe engineering and according to RAL safety rules. This will happen with 3 successive milestones internal audit external review (production readiness) external review (OK to operate) production reviews pertinent to PHASE I will have to be passed ***before end 2005*** …!

  28. Time Line If all goes well and funding is adequate, Muon Ionization cooling will have been demonstrated and measured precisely by 2009 At that time: MINOS and CNGS will have started and measured Dm132 more precisely J-Parc-SK (and reactor expt?) will be about to start (13 measurement) LHC will be starting as well It will be timely (…and not too soon!) to have by then a full design for a cost-optimized neutrino factory, with no questions about practical feasibility of ionization cooling

  29. MICE is getting REAL! First beam 1st April 2007 **** 365*2 - 88 = 642 days to data taking !!!

  30. AIMS of the meeting: • review ongoing activities • design and safety reviews: where do we stand? • are we on track to be ready to take data in April 2007? • design of diffuser, impact on running strategy? • see formation of DAQ Controls and Monitoring group • continue to broaden simulation effort analysis forum • creation of editorial board foreseen in MICE constitution • NB: we had 6 contributions to PAC05 NB we strongly encourage everyone to document their work within the framework of MICE with MICE Notes!

  31. Editorial Board This body approves publications from the Collaboration. Two types of publications are foreseen. Collaboration Publications These publications are issued as ‘MICE Collaboration’ publications and it is expected that all active members of the collaboration will sign. All analysis results from the experimental data are expected to be in this category as are descriptions of the experiment as a whole and its performance. These must be approved by the Editorial Board. Limited Publications Publications by a limited number of members of the collaboration concerning e.g. the construction and performance of specific subcomponents of the experiment. They are not issued as ‘MICE Collaboration’ publications, however it is recommended that these papers are also submitted to the Editorial Board for approval so that the management are aware of them and can advise of any possible conflicts with other members which may occur.

More Related