1 / 7

Background Workshop: why & how

Background Workshop: why & how. W. Kozanecki, CEA-Saclay. Three themes.... In-depth review of radiation-abort policies  Monday 9/22 Harnessing the run-4 backgrounds (oper’l issues)  Tuesday 9/23 Long-term projections Experimental extrapolations  Tuesday 9/23

shaun
Download Presentation

Background Workshop: why & how

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. Background Workshop: why & how W. Kozanecki, CEA-Saclay • Three themes.... • In-depth review of radiation-abort policies  Monday 9/22 • Harnessing the run-4 backgrounds (oper’l issues)  Tuesday 9/23 • Long-term projections • Experimental extrapolations  Tuesday 9/23 • Background simulations & new IR design  Wed. 9/24 • ...in a wider context • Machine-background experience @ Belle/KEKB • PEP-II parameter projections  Tuesday 9/23 • IR upgrade strategy  Wed. 9/24

  2. In-depth review of radiation-abort policies: the goals • Push the envelope: where are the hard limits? • How much reserve do we have in the radiation budget? • What happens if we relax some threshold(s)? What are the implications for • detector damage (SVT, DCH, EMC) • integrated dose (SVT, EMC) • data quality (all) • What could SVTRAD change in its modus operandi (e.g. algorithms, thresholds, abort the ‘bad’ beam only...) that would • make life easier/more efficient (for PEP-II & BBR considered as a whole) .... • ...while preserving the safety & the performance of the detector • Share the pain between • running efficiency • detector integrated dose • BaBar data quality

  3. In-depth review of radiation-abort policies: the issues • SVT radiation hardness • damage mechanisms (slow, fast) & pain thresholds • measurement results; tests in progress/upcoming; uncertainties • Radiation exposure, past & future (mostly SVT, EMC) • accumulated dose to date, characterization (MID vs T/B, sources) • dose transfer from pin diodes  SVT modules, ATOM chips • updated experimental projections on integrated dose (incl. injection asspt’s) • comparison of measured dose rates vs Ibeam, normalized to extrapolations • SVT maintenance/rotation scenarios • SVTRAD upgrade plans • Data quality measures • define an ‘occupancy meter’ in each subdetector • cross-calibration of data quality & pin-diode dose? • Beam-abort algorithms • stable beams: fast aborts, timer aborts, fast/slow thresholds, flexibility • injection (inhibit/abort)

  4. Long-term projections (2003-2009) • experimental extrapolation of ‘traditional’ backgrounds(in present geometry)valid 2006 ? • b* ==> Coulomb still OK? ( simulate present machine) • how does one extrapolate beam-beam backgrounds? • BTW...how believable are these extrapolations? • any limitations/vulnerabilities in Babar hardware or physics performance? • SVT radiation hardness? SVTRAD reliability ? • background ==> • power supply limitations? • dataflow BW? • p0 reconstruction ? • tracking occupancy?

  5. Harnessing the run-4 backgrounds • Stored-beam tails • Trickle injection • recent experience, open issues, work in progress • Injection backgrounds • strategy (possible experimental / monitoring actions) ? • Radiation bursts • strategy (possible experimental / monitoring actions) ? • How else can we improve the overall (P-II +BBR) operational efficiency? • fast monitoring, P-II  BaBar on-line info exchange • ‘new’ liaison (??),...

  6. Background simulations new IR design (primarily) • Synchrotron radiation (SR) • overview of new IR design • [summary of past SR simulations for the SVT] • status of SR simulations for new IR design • Beam-gas • Overview of simulation architecture • Summary of past background simulation studies (SVT, DCH, EMC) • Status of Turtle decks • Status of GEANT-4 geometry implementation • Strategy, plans, timeline, milestones  validation of P-II upgrade design • Beam-beam tails • new (or relocated) collimators? (simulations + experiments) • modelling collimation secondaries

  7. Conclusions • “You cannot collimate electrons: you can only make them mad!” • However.... Lots of people in this room know how to handle “bees” ! Have a great workshop!

More Related