1 / 34

Large/Huge Detector Concept

Large/Huge Detector Concept. 9. Nov. 2004 @7 th ACFA LCWS in Taipei Y. Sugimoto KEK. Background. History of ACFA detector study. 1992 Dec. “JLC-I” report (JLC Detector) 2T solenoid, R=4.5m Compensating EM- and H-CAL, 2.5<R<4.0m Small-cell Jet chamber, 0.45<R<2.3m, L=4.6m

beatrice-barton
Télécharger la présentation

Large/Huge Detector Concept

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. Large/Huge Detector Concept 9. Nov. 2004 @7th ACFA LCWS in Taipei Y. Sugimoto KEK

  2. Background

  3. History of ACFA detector study • 1992 Dec. “JLC-I” report (JLC Detector) • 2T solenoid, R=4.5m • Compensating EM- and H-CAL, 2.5<R<4.0m • Small-cell Jet chamber, 0.45<R<2.3m, L=4.6m • 2001 Nov. “ACFA report” • 2003 Sep. “GLC report” (GLC Detector) • 3T solenoid, R=4m: Pair B.G. suppression • Compensating EM- and H-CAL, 1.6<R<3.4m • Small cell Jet chamber, 0.45<R<1.55m, L=3.1m ( Keep ptmin same as before) Degraded pt res. • 2004 Aug. ITRP technology choice • Good chance to re-start a new detector optimization study • Regional study  Inter-regional (world-wide) study • Milestone: Detector cost estimation at the end of 2005

  4. Large/Huge detector study so far • Actually, discussion on Large/Huge detector study has started before the ITRP decision • Started discussionafter LCWS2004 • Brief presentation at Victoria US WS (Jul.2004) • Presentation at Durham ECFA WS (Sep.2004) • Detector full simulator (JUPITER) construction on going • Discussion on the key components has started still earlier • TPC R&D for GLC detector started in 2003 • R&D for the calorimeter of GLC detector optimized for PFA (digital calorimeter) has proposed in Aug. 2003

  5. Design Concept

  6. Basic design concept • Performance goal (common to all det. concepts) • Vertex Detector: • Tracking: • Jet energy res.:  Detector optimized for Particle Flow Algorithm (PFA) • Large/Huge detector concept • GLC detector as a starting point • Move inner surface of ECAL outwards to optimize for PFA • Larger tracker to improve dpt/pt2 • Re-consider the optimum sub-detector technologies based on the recent progresses

  7. Optimization for PFA • Jet energy resolution • sjet2 = sch2 + sg2 + snh2 + sconfusion2 + sthreashold2 • Perfectparticleseparation: • Charged-g/nh separation • Confusion of g/nh shower with charged particles is the source of sconfusion  Separation between charged particle and g/nh shower is important • Charged particles should be spread out by B field • Lateral size of EM shower of g should be as small as possible ( ~ Rmeffective: effective Moliere length) • Tracking capability for shower particles in HCAL is a very attractive option  Digital HCAL

  8. Optimization for PFA • Figure of merit (ECAL): • Barrel: B Rin2/ Rmeffective • Endcap: B Z2/ Rmeffective Rin : Inner radius of Barrel ECAL Z : Z of EC ECAL front face (Actually, it is not so simple. Even with B=0, photon energy inside a certain distance from a charged track scales as ~Rin2) • Different approaches • B Rin2 : SiD • B Rin2 : TESLA • BRin2 : Large/Huge Detector

  9. Effective Moliere Length xg xa Effective Moliere Length = Rm(1+xg/xa) Gap : Sensor + R.O. elec + etc. Absorber W : Rm ~ 9mm Pb : Rm ~ 16mm

  10. Central Tracker • Figure of merit: n is proportional to L if sampling pitch is constant 

  11. A possible modification from GLC detector model • Larger Rmax (2.0m) of the tracker and Rin (2.1m) of ECAL • TPC would be a natural solution for such a large tracker • Keep solenoid radius same:  Somewhat thinner CAL (but still 6l), but does it matter? • Use W instead of Pb for ECAL absorber • Effective Rm: 25.5mm  16.2mm (2.5mm W / 2.0mm Gap) • Small segmentation by Si pad layers or scintillator-strip layers • Put EC CAL at larger Z (2.05m2.8m)  Longer Solenoid • Preferable for B-field uniformity if TPC is used • It is preferable Zpole-tip < l* (4.3m?) both for neutron b.g. and QC support (l* :distance between IP and QC1)

  12. Comparison of parameters [1] GLD is a tentative name of the Large/Huge detector model. All parameters are tentative.

  13. Comparison of parameters

  14. Detector size • EM Calorimeter • Area of EM CAL (Barrel + Endcap) • SiD: ~40 m2 / layer • TESLA: ~80 m2 / layer • GLD: ~ 100 m2 / layer • (JLC: ~130 m2 / layer)

  15. Global geometry (All parameters are tentative)

  16. Global geometry

  17. Global geometry GLD is smaller than CMS “Large” is smaller than “Compact” 

  18. Merits and demerits of Large/Huge detector • Merits • Advantage for PFA • Better pt and dE/dx resolution for the main tracker • Higher efficiency for long lived neutral particles (Ks, L, and unknown new particles) • Demerits • Cost ? – but it can be recovered by • Lower B field of 3T (Less stored energy) • Inexpensive option for ECAL (e.g. scintillator) • Vertex resolution for low momentum particles • Lower B requires larger Rmin of VTX because of beam background • d(IP)~5  10/(pbsin3/2q) mm is still achievable using wafers of ~50mm thick

  19. Detector Components

  20. Detector components • EM Calorimeter • Small Rmeff  • W radiator • Make gaps as small as possible • Small segmentation : sseg < Rmeff • Hadron Calorimeter • Options • Absorber: Pb or Fe ? • Sensor: Scintillator or GEM ? • Digital or not digital ? • Tail catcher behind solenoid needed? • Choice of calorimeter options depends on the results of future detector R&D and detector simulation

  21. Detector components • Main tracker • TPC is a natural solution for the Large tracker • Positive ion feedback (2-g background) ? • Study of gas with small diffusion • Small-cell jet chamber as an option (End plate would be much thicker than TPC) • Solenoid magnet • Field uniformity in a large tracking volume (TESLA TDR)

  22. Detector components • Muon system • No serious study for GLD so far • Design of muon system is indispensable for the solenoid/iron-yoke design, which takes large fraction of the total cost • Si inner/outer(?) tracker • Time stamping capability (separation of bunches) • High resolution Si strip det. improves momentum resolution • Si endcap tracker • Improves momentum resolution in the end-cap region where main tracker coverage is limited SIT: s=7mm, 3 layers VTX: s=3mm, 5 layers

  23. Detector components • Si forward disks / Forward Calorimeter • Tracking down to cosq=0.99 • Luminosity measurement • Beam calorimeter • Not considered in GLC detector • At ILC, background is 1/200. Need serious consideration • Careful design needed not to make back-splash to VTX • Minimum veto angle ~5mrad (?)  Physics • Si pair monitor • Measure beam profile from r-phi distribution of pair-background • Radiation-hard Si detector (Si 3D-pixel)

  24. Vertex Detector Relatively low B-field of Large/Huge detector requires larger radius of the innermost layer Rmin (pair background) Detailed simulation of background (pair b.g. and synchrotron b.g. ) is necessary to determine Rmin and beam pipe radius R&D for thin wafer is very important to compensate for the degradation of I.P. resolution atlow momentum due to large Rmin TOF (?) K-p separation by dE/dx of TPC has a gap in 0.9–2 GeV/c TOF system with s=100ps can fill up the gap 1st layer of ECAL or additional detector ? What is the physics case? Detector components

  25. Detector components • TOF (Cont.) Assumptions: d(TOF)=100ps L=2.1m d(dE/dx)=4.5% K-p Separation (s) Momentum (GeV/c)

  26. Status of the study

  27. Full Simulator • Installation of a new geometry into a full simulator “JUPITER” is under way

  28. Charged – g separation • Simulation by A. Miyamoto • Events are generated by Pythia6.2, simulated by Quick Simulator • Particle positions at the entrance of EM-CAL • Advantage of Large/Huge detector is confirmed • Inconsistent with J.C.B’s result  need more investigation F dcut

  29. Charged – g separation • Simulation by J.C. Brient (LCWS2004) e+e-  ZH  jets at Ecm=500GeV SD (6T) TESLA (4T)

  30. Magnet • ANSYS calculation by H.Yamaoka • Field uniformity in tracking region is OK • Geometry of muon detector is tentative. More realistic input is necessary

  31. Other studies • See presentations in parallel sessions and http://ilcphys.kek.jp/

  32. Summary • Optimization study of Large/Huge detector concept has just started • GLC detector is the starting point of the Large/Huge detector, but its geometry and sub-detector technologies will be largely modified • A key concept of Large/Huge detector is optimization for PFA • A milestone of this study is the detector cost estimation scheduled at the end of 2005. A firm report backed up with simulation studies and detector R&D should be written • A lot of jobs including clarification of physics requirements, detector full/quick simulation, and detector R&D are awaiting us • Please join the Kick-off meeting: Date: Nov. 10 Time: 17:30 - 19:30 Place: Room 204

  33. Backup slides

  34. Pair background track density • Beam Calorimeter is placed in the high background region Same sign Opposite sign GLC Parameter, B=4T by T.Aso

More Related