1 / 35

Towards EE/HE detectors performance with coverage up to |η|=4

Towards EE/HE detectors performance with coverage up to |η|=4 I.Kurochkin , A.Dabrowski *, H.Vincke DGS-RP-AS, CERN *CMS-BRIL, CERN. For CMS Upgrade Project. Outline. Motivation From the conceptual design towards FLUKA models with |η| up to 4 : step by step

samuru
Download Presentation

Towards EE/HE detectors performance with coverage up to |η|=4

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. Towards EE/HE detectors performance with coverage up to |η|=4 I.Kurochkin, A.Dabrowski*, H.Vincke DGS-RP-AS, CERN *CMS-BRIL, CERN For CMS Upgrade Project Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  2. Outline • Motivation • From the conceptual design towards FLUKA models with |η| up to 4: step by step • New FLUKA nominal model (Model NN) • Model 0 • Model A • Model B • The radiation environment of the CMS detectors: neutron flux density and 1MeV-neutron equivalent fluence • Data comparison • Summary & discussion Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  3. Motivation • Goal • Estimate the radiation environment of the CMS detectors due to CMS central vacuum beam pipe upgrades and EE/HE upgrades towards a CMS detector performance with coverage up to |η| = 4. • Sub-goal • Try to define possible realistic scenarios towards aCMS detector performance with coverage up to |η| = 4using a conceptual design by A.Surkov, some mechanical limits and approaches. Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  4. Towards new conceptual design for CMS • Any conceptual design for the EE/HE detector performance with coverage up to |η| ≤ 4 has not approved yet. • No drawings available for the EE/HE detectors with coverage up to |η| ≤ 4. ? Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  5. FLUKA simulation: CMS scenario after LS1 Note*. Data are normalized on nominal luminosity and irradiation time of 180 days. Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  6. First step:New CMS central beam pipe LHCVC5C_0029-v0.plt  and data from vacuum group (P.Lepeule & M.Gallilee) Be-bp (S200F) Al-alloy bp (AA2219) Al-alloy flange(AA2219) Steel flange(ANSI316LN) Collar(AMC640XA) Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  7. First step: Comparison with previous data Flange Joint Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  8. First step: Comparison with previous data Neutron flux density in layer at z =272 cm Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  9. First step: Comparison with previous data 1 MeV neqfluencein layer at z =272 cm Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  10. Summary I • The implementation of the new CMS beam pipe changes the particles flux density close the beam pipe which are very sensitive to fine structure of the beam pipe. The particles flux density decrease up to a factor of 2 close to massive elements: joints and flanges. • At a distance of more than 50 cm from the beam line values of the particles flux density are similar as for “nominal” input . • Values of the neutron flux density and silicon 1 MeV-neutron equivalent fluence in the last layer (z = 272 cm) of the silicon tracker did not change much. Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  11. Second step: towards η up to 4 (model 0) Conceptual design by A.Surkov • Approaches: • The new CMS central beam pipe • TOTEM removed • Rescale for Al-cone/flange (conceptual design by A.Surkovfor cone angle ~ 2.8º) • Rescale for Preshower elements • Al-plate (correct size, but old position) • Sizes of EE/HE up to |η| < 4 • Rescale of back flange (new design), gap - 20 mm • Rescale of PE – shielding between EE/HE • Modified PE – shielding (to extend up to |η| < 4) Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  12. Second step: Model 0 Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  13. Second step: Neutron flux density in silicon tracker • R = 8.5·108 p-p int./s FLUKA model 0 towards η up to 4 FLUKA nominal model & new central beam pipe Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  14. Second step: Neutron flux density in silicon tracker Neutron flux density in layer at z =272 cm Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  15. Second step: Silicon 1 MeV-neutron equivalent fluence in silicon tracker • R =1.32·1016p-p int./year FLUKA model 0 towards η up to 4 FLUKA nominal model & new central beam pipe Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  16. Second step: Silicon 1 MeV-neutron equivalent fluence in silicon tracker = 1 MeV neqfluencein layer at z =272 cm Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  17. Second step: Particle spectra in silicon tracker 272 cm <z < 272.05 (model 0) • R = 8.5·108 p-p int./s 2.6 < η < 2.83 2.2 < η < 2.6 Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  18. Second step: Particle spectra in silicon tracker 272 cm <z < 272.05 (model 0) • R = 8.5·108 p-p int./s 1.8 < η < 2.2 1.65 < η < 1.8 Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  19. Second step: Neutron spectra in silicon tracker 272 cm <z < 272.05 (model 0&NN) • R = 8.5·108 p-p int./s 2.6 < η < 2.83 2.2 < η < 2.6 Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  20. Second step: Neutron spectra in silicon tracker 272 cm <z < 272.05 (model 0 & NN) • R = 8.5·108 p-p int./s 1.8 < η < 2.2 1.65 < η < 1.8 Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  21. Second step: Comparison Ratio of particles flux density of model M0 to model NN for four η-bins in last layer (z = 272 cm) of silicon tracker Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  22. Next step: towards η up to 4: model A&B Crucial points Radial limits ~ 20 cm Mechanical limits Al-cone Endcapbpipe EE must be free moved at 10.4 m during maintenance when CMS open Model A: Preshower and alignment system remain Model B: Preshower and alignment system will not be installed Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  23. Next step: model A Model A (with preshower&alignment system): Al-cone as in nominal input, |η| ≤ 3.0 for EE, |η| ≤ 3.68 for HE, new design of back flange. BRIL Radiation Simulation Meeting

  24. Next step: Neutron flux density in silicon tracker Neutron flux density in layer at z =272 cm Model NN – “nominal” model & new CMS central beam pipe; Model 0 - full rescale of model NN; Model A - Al-cone as in nominal input, |η| ≤ 3.0 for EE, |η| ≤ 3.68 for HE Model B - Al-cone (rescale), no preshower (air), |η| ≤ 3.3 for EE, |η| ≤ 3.68 for HE Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  25. Next step: Silicon 1 MeV-neutron equivalent fluence in silicon tracker = 1 MeV neqfluence in layer at z =272 cm Model NN – “nominal” model & new CMS central beam pipe; Model 0 - full rescale of model NN; Model A - Al-cone as in nominal input, |η| ≤ 3.0 for EE, |η| ≤ 3.68 for HE Model B - Al-cone (rescale), no preshower (air), |η| ≤ 3.3 for EE, |η| ≤ 3.68 for HE Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  26. Next step: model B Model B (without preshower&alignment system): Al-cone is limited by EndCap beam pipe, |η| ≤ 3.3 for EE, |η| ≤ 3.68 for HE,new design of back flange. BRIL Radiation Simulation Meeting

  27. Next step: Neutron flux density in silicon tracker Neutron flux density in layer at z =272 cm Model NN – “nominal” model & new CMS central beam pipe; Model 0 - full rescale of model NN; Model A - Al-cone as in nominal input, |η| ≤ 3.0 for EE, |η| ≤ 3.68 for HE Model B - Al-cone (rescale), no preshower (air), |η| ≤ 3.3 for EE, |η| ≤ 3.68 for HE Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  28. Next step: Silicon 1 MeV-neutron equivalent fluence in silicon tracker = 1 MeV neqfluence in layer at z =272 cm Model NN – “nominal” model & new CMS central beam pipe; Model 0 - full rescale of model NN; Model A - Al-cone as in nominal input, |η| ≤ 3.0 for EE, |η| ≤ 3.68 for HE Model B - Al-cone (rescale), no preshower (air), |η| ≤ 3.3 for EE, |η| ≤ 3.68 for HE Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  29. FLUKA simulation: Neutron flux density in silicon tracker • R = 8.5·108 p-p int./s • Model NN – “nominal” model & new CMS central beam pipe; • Model 0 - full rescale of model NN; • Model A - Al-cone as in nominal input, |η| ≤ 3.0 for EE, • |η| ≤ 3.68 for HE • Model B - Al-cone (rescale), no preshower (air), |η| ≤ 3.3 for EE, |η| ≤ 3.68 for HE Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  30. FLUKA simulation: Silicon 1 MeV-neutron equivalent fluencein silicon tracker • R =1.32·1016 p-p int./year • Model NN – “nominal” model & new CMS central beam pipe; • Model 0 - full rescale of model NN; • Model A - Al-cone as in nominal input, |η| ≤ 3.0 for EE, • |η| ≤ 3.68 for HE • Model B - Al-cone (rescale), no preshower (air), |η| ≤ 3.3 for EE, |η| ≤ 3.68 for HE Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  31. FLUKA simulation: Neutron flux density in EE layer of electronics (z = 342 cm) • R = 8.5·108 p-p int./s BRIL Radiation Simulation Meeting

  32. FLUKA simulation: Silicon 1 MeV-neutron equivalent fluence in EE layer of electronics (z = 342 cm) • R =1.32·1016 p-p int./year BRIL Radiation Simulation Meeting

  33. Summary II • Possible radiation impact on sensitive elements of CMS detector has been estimated for three models with η up to 4. • Model 0 and model B show significant growth of the neutron flux density (~1.5-3.0) and 1 MeV-neutron equivalent fluence in the silicon tracker system (~1.2-3.5) • Resultsof simulation are very sensitive to details of design and material budget. • Without the Endcap beam pipe upgrades it’s not possible to reach the required η-coverage. • Next step – realistic design and material budget,the optimization of shielding between tracker and EE to reduce radiation impact on silicon tracker system. Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  34. Appendix: Particle spectra in silicon tracker 272 cm <z < 272.05 (model NN) • R = 8.5·108 p-p int./s 2.6 < η < 2.83 2.2 < η < 2.6 Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

  35. Appendix: Particle spectra in silicon tracker 272 cm <z < 272.05 (model NN) • R = 8.5·108 p-p int./s 1.8 < η < 2.2 1.65 < η < 1.8 Towards EE/HE detectors performance with η up to 4

More Related