1 / 11

WP8.5.2 TASD and MIND Detectors – A few points for discussion...

WP8.5.2 TASD and MIND Detectors – A few points for discussion. E. Noah - 17.05.2012. Hardware questions to be addressed. General: What performance criteria do we aim for? Do we operate TASD and MIND in parallel?

dawson
Télécharger la présentation

WP8.5.2 TASD and MIND Detectors – A few points for discussion...

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. WP8.5.2 TASD and MIND Detectors – A few points for discussion... E. Noah - 17.05.2012

  2. Hardware questions to be addressed • General: • What performance criteria do we aim for? • Do we operate TASD and MIND in parallel? • Do we assume we share TASD and MIND components wherever possible (scintillator/SiPM/electronics)? • Do we go for 2 planes per module (XY) or 3 planes per module (UVW)? • SiPM: • What type of SiPMs (overall size, shape square/circular, cell size)? • What type of packaging? • What should we address as questions during “small” R&D phase on SiPMs (Temperature stability, coupling to WLS, variability)? • Do we have scope for SiPMs with integrated digital circuitry? • How do we address procurement of SiPMs? • Plastic scintillator: • What shape of scintillator is optimal? • Should we assume same shape for TASD and MIND? • Do we have scope to investigate new manufacturing possibilities? • Connectors: • Where do we place connectors (WLS-SiPM)? • Do we need to develop readout boards placed close to the scintillators (stability of SiPM temperatures)? • Magnetisation of MIND: • How do we best optimise the geometry of the MIND prototype detector? • Should we pursue Superconducting Transmission Line technology? • Electronics: • What examples can we draw from (MINOS CalDet tests at CERN of PS?, ND280?) • What other projects might be interested to share/contribute?

  3. Simulation questions to be addressed • General: • Do we adopt a common framework? • How best to compare real detectors from test beam detectors (i.e. v. different sources/sizes). • Any idea what happened to Minos calibration detector analysis? • Dimensioning the test beam prototypes: • How should the source term be described? (e.g. generation at random on XY detector front plane within 10x10cm, z=0). • What information is required from WP8.2.1 (beam description)? • What is missing in the current tools? Kalman filter seeding optimised for muons, how to optimise for pions (done already?)? • How to handle hadron showers? • How to handle electron showers? • Far detector: • What parameters are needed for far detector simulations? • What are expected detected particle energy spectra for a 10-13 GeV NF?

  4. Example beam composition MiniBooNE - Proton beam 8 GeV

  5. MINOS CalDet • MINOS CalDet Tests at CERN provide good example on how such a test can be run: • References for calibration procedures tested with CalDet: • NIM A 556 (2006) 119-133 • Reference for electronics (comparison of near and far detector, and CalDet) and analysis of data online: • Systematic comparison of near and far detector readout systems, Thesis, Anatael Cabrera NIMA 637 (2011) p25-46

  6. MINOS CalDet CalDet detector at T7 East area in dual readout configuration: ND and FD electronics

  7. PS T7 Beam for CalDet

  8. Minos calibration detector • Used to develop and demonstrate calibration procedure for both near and far detectors • Unmagnetized: in contrast with MINOS near and far detectors • Tested off PS 24 GeV/c, E.H., dual polarity, mixed composition (e,μ,p,π), 0.2-3.6 GEV/c (T11)and 1-10 GeV/c (T7)? • Procedure corrects for: • Gain non-uniformity • Gain drift over time • PMT and electronics non-linearity • Non-uniformity in strip light output • Attenuation in optical cabling • Temperature dependent response variations Ref: NIM A 556 (2006) 119-133

  9. MINOS Detector Performance

  10. Muon selection over CalDet energy range

  11. MINOS Near Detector • 980 tons, 100m underground • Veto region (20 planes) eliminates background from neutrons produced upstream of detector • Target region (40 planes) any useful neutrino interaction will have its vertex here. • Hadron region (60 planes) used to contain hadron showers resulting from most neutrino interactions. • Spectrometer region (160 planes) used to measure muons in νμ interactions and extract momentum based on curvature in B-field. • Rate of cosmic muons: 20 Hz • Rate of neutrino events: 10 events per spill at nominal luminosity for low energy beam

More Related