1 / 39

Neutrino Beams in Europe

Neutrino Beams in Europe. - - potential LHC injector upgrade -- CNGS and upgrade considerations -- Superbeams from proton driver SPL -- other -- beta-beams -- neutrino factory -- towards FP7 design studies. U pgrade of the proton accelerator complex at CERN

salali
Download Presentation

Neutrino Beams in Europe

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. Neutrino Beams in Europe -- potential LHC injector upgrade -- CNGS and upgrade considerations -- Superbeams from proton driver SPL -- other -- beta-beams -- neutrino factory -- towards FP7 design studies A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  2. Upgrade of the proton accelerator complex at CERN Protons Accelerators for the Future (PAF) WG Present chain: weak link in Linac 2 and in the PS (old!) A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  3. Priority is given to LHC and efforts should be made to incorporate the demands of the High intensity neutrino programme the cheapest way to LHC luminosity consolidation is to -- implement the LINAC 4 and replace the CERN PS Step I: replace linac 2 by Linac 4 increase injection rate no major improvement for neutrinos ~2011 A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  4. Priority is given to LHC and efforts should be made to incorporate the demands of the High intensity neutrino programme the cheapest way to LHC luminosity consolidation is to -- implement the LINAC 4 and replace the CERN PS Step II: new PS2 (5-50 GeV) PS remains in operation for injection at 5 GeV in PS2 possible increase of SPS intensity --> CNGS ~2015 A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  5. Step III: New SPL (or RCS) to ~5 GeV inject directly in PS2 Multi-MW oportunity @~5 GeV no date yet (i.e. a few more years) A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  6. Intensity increase to CNGS? can one launch an off axis programme similar to T2K and NUMI-off-axis? -- present neutrino beam optimized for High energy (tau appearance) ==> factor >~10 less flux at off axis energy than T2K -- no near detector! A.Rubbia et al, A. Ball et al, have proposed a low energy version of CNGS with different target and more compact optics, run off axis (E ~800 MeV for C2GT, 1.5-2 GeV GeV for Larg A. Ball et al(C2GT) CERN-PH-EP-2006-002 A. Rubbia, P. Sala JHEP 0209 (2002) 004[arXiv:hep-ph/0207084]. A. Meregagliaand A. Rubbiahep-ph/0609106 A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  7. target and horn C2GT off axis 2d maximum detector module 1.5 Mton of water in the Golf of Taranto for 25 1019 pot = 5yrs --> sensitivity (90%) to sin213= 0.0076 A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  8. A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  9. hep-ph/0609106 Imagine: 100 kton Larg detector at 0.750 off-axis 850 km (1st max) -->  search or 1.50 off-axis 1050 km 2d max CP violation and matter effect or sharing 1st and 2d maximum assume all of 50 GeV 200 kW PS2 accelerated to 400 GeV ==> CNGS+ = 30 1019 pot/year 5years 5 years (2026) <-- sensitivity sin 2213 ~ 10-3 A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  10. thanks to and running, sensitivity to and matter effects example (90%)for ‘known hierarchy’ (assume that hierarchy is given by comparison with another expt) A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  11.  ephysics at CNGS+? Basic issues to solve: 1. no near detector --> no knowledge of absolute cross sections (at osc. max there are no  to normalize…) difficult to measure absolute rates of  e and to compare  vs or different energies for CP or matter effect 2. modifications of CNGS beam line are necessary. possible? perhaps easier to build new dk tunnel -- with adequate length and near detector. then why keep the same direction? 3. can SPS really handle 4x more protons? 4. 100 kton Larg or 1Mton water are large investments -- may be they deserve better! A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  12. LINAC4--> PS2: an opportunity for MultiMW physics Eventually the PS should be phased out completely: need for a machine that bridges 1.4 (booster) to 5 GeV, or better 0.16 Linac4 to 5 GeV (PS2) Superconducting Proton Liac or Rapid Cycling Synchrotron both fast cycling (O(10-50 Hz). potentially a high power machine serving -- LHC -- neutrinos -- nuclear physics (Eurisol) for neutrino physics: conventional p decay superbeam proton driver for neutrino factory A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  13. CERN-SPL-based Neutrino SUPERBEAM 300 MeV n m Neutrinos small contamination from ne (no K at 2 GeV!) target! Fréjus underground lab. A large underground water Cherenkov (400 kton) UNO/HyperK or/and a large L.Arg detector. also : proton decay search, supernovae events solar and atmospheric neutrinos. Performance similar to J-PARC II There is a window of opportunity for digging the cavern starting in 2009 (safety tunnel in Frejus) A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  14. CERN SPL LSM-Fréjus Near detector 130km TRE Super-beams: SPL-Frejus A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  15. Low energy --> low Kaon rate better controlled ne contamination SPL (2.2 GeV) superbeam 20m decay tunnel single open horn, L Hg target A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  16. 2 years n run to 440 ktonFrejus En~ 260-350 MeV small cross-sections Main technical issues -- 50 Hz horn operation -- handling of 4 MW in target and environment. limited sensitivity ( sin 2213 ~ 210-3) near detector design? A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  17. Nuclear Physics CERN: b-beam baseline scenario neutrinos of Emax=~600MeV SPL target! Decay ring B = 5 T Lss = 2500 m SPS Decay Ring ISOL target & Ion source ECR Cyclotrons, linac or FFAG Stacking! Rapid cycling synchrotron PS Same detectors as Superbeam ! A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  18. Eurisol baseline Study • CERN site (use PS and SPS as are) • -- could benefit from PS2 • Max. ion in CERN SPS is 450 GeV Z/Mion • g = 150 for 6He, • g = 250 for 18Ne ==> En ~ 600 MeV 2.9*1018 /yr anti-ne from 6He Or 1.1*1018 /yr ne from 18Ne (1017 with avail. tech.) • race track (one baseline) or triangle (2 base lines) • so far study CERN--> Fréjus (130km) • longer baseline ~ 2-300km would be optimal • + moderate cost: ion sources, 450 GeV equiv. storage ring (O(0.5M€)) • + no need for 4MW target Enmax=2. Q0. ion A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  19. Combination of beta beam with super beam combines CP and T violation tests e m (+) (T)me (p+) (CP) e m(-) (T)me (p-) A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  20. 3s sensitivity to sin22q13 10 year exposure issues: -- 18Ne flux? -- low energy --> cross-section accuracy? (assume 2%) -- energy reconstruction OK -- near detector concept? sensitivity sin2213 ~2-5 10-4 combine SPL(3.5 GeV) + bB ==> improves sensitivity by T violation! J-E. Campagne et al. hep/ph0603172 A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  21. Better beta beams: main weakness of He/He beta-beam is low energy (450 GeV proton equiv. storage ring produces 600 MeV neutrinos) Solution 1: Higher g (Hernandez et al) Use SPS+ (1 TeV) or tevatron ==> reach g= 350 expensive! Solution 2: use higher Q isotopes (C.Rubbia) 8B --> 8Be e+ne or 8Li --> 8Be e-anti-ne A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  22. A possible solution to the ion production shortage: Direct production in a small storage ring, filled [Gas + RF cavity] for ionization cooling For 8B or 8Li production, strip-inject 6Li / 7Li beam, collide with gas jet (D2 or 3He) reaction products are ejected and collected goal: >~ 1021 ions per year A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  23. Advantages of 8B5+ (ne Q=18MeV )or 8Li3+ (anti-ne Q=16MeV) vs 18Ne, 6He (Q~=3 MeV) The storage ring rigidity is considerably lower for a given En ==> for ~1 GeV end point beam for 8B5+ : 45 GeV proton equiv. storage ring for 8Li3+:75 GeV proton equiv. storage ring Two ways to see it: 1. Beta-beams to Fréjus (Emax =600 MeV) could be accelerated with PS2 into a 50 GeV proton-equivalent storage ring (save €) 2. Beta beams of both polarities up to end-point energy of ~6 GeV can be produced with the CERN SPS (up to 2000km baseline) A new flurry of opportunities A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  24. Electron Capture: N+e- N’+ne rates are low but very useful for cross-section measurements Burget et al EC: A monochromatic neutrino beam A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  25. A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  26. A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  27. NON MAGNETIC MAGNETIC A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  28. NEUTRINO FACTORY -- paradoxically quite mature option. ISS (International Scoping Study) revisited accelerator and detector options in 2005-2006. A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  29. A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  30. Overall comparisons from ISS (nearly final plots) sign Dm213 q13 CP phase d NuFACT does it all… (+ univ. test etc…) but when can it do it and at what cost? A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  31. A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  32. Conclusions CERN priority to LHC makes it unlikely to raise a new neutrino programme until at least 2016. However opportunities are open by the upgrades of the LHC acclerator complex -- upgrade of CNGS … tempting and politically attractive. but is it feasible? worth it given the time scales? -- SPL would offer a powerful low energy nm beam -- beta-beam offers extremely clean ne beam new ideas to improve flux/energy/cost…. -- baseline detector for sub-GeV neutrinos is WaterCherenkov -- in few GeV range, Larg, TASD etc… competitive -- near detector and monitoring systems should not be forgotten A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  33. Conclusions (ctd) -- neutrino factory still the ultimate contender, especially if q13 is very small. Requires magnetic detectors -- design studies of Superbeam/betabeams/ NuFact and of the associated detector systems will be necessary for a choice around 2010/2012; organization on going. A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  34. A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  35. A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  36. FP7 design studies under ESGARD Design studies : ~2M€ each mostly calculation or engineering work (personnel) 3 years? NUFACT+SuperBeam b-beam SLHC SC-SPS call: february 2007 --> application likely in sept. 1st 2007 funding mid 2008? A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  37. to this, a design study of magnetic detectors (neutrino factory) should be added. 100kton magnetized iron detector magnetized Liquid Argon, Fine grain scintillator or Emulsion detector + near detector and instrumentation A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  38. Integrated Activities - IA ~10 M€, (also called Integrated Infrastructure Initiatives - I3) Joint Research Activities , Network Activities, Trans-national access HE-HI Protons SC RF New acceleration techniques (sLHC,DLHC) (ILC) (CLIC) M.MW p driver & muon RLA (200-800 MHz) power sources M-MW p driver Muon cooling FFAG Target & Collection Call expected not earlier than April 07 A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

  39. Agenda 20 septembre BENE steering group 25 octobre OPEN BENE steering group at CERN 30 October at CERN meeting of the CARE task force to define JRAs 14 november BENE06 15-17 november CARE06 February 19-21 ISS-IDS meeting @ CERN A. Blondel c/o A. Rubbia NNN06, Seattle

More Related