1 / 29

The Performance of Strip-Fiber Electromagnetic Calorimeter

The Performance of Strip-Fiber Electromagnetic Calorimeter. ILC Detector Workshop March,8-11, 2005, APPI A. Nagano University of Tsukuba. Contents. Calorimeter test module Linearity Response Uniformity Shower profile Spatial resolution Angle measurement Summary.

fallon
Télécharger la présentation

The Performance of Strip-Fiber Electromagnetic Calorimeter

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. The Performance of Strip-Fiber Electromagnetic Calorimeter ILC Detector Workshop March,8-11, 2005, APPI A. Nagano University of Tsukuba

  2. Contents • Calorimeter test module • Linearity • Response Uniformity • Shower profile • Spatial resolution • Angle measurement • Summary APPI 2005

  3. Module design for test beam • 1cmx20cmx2mm thick Scint. strip • 1 Layer • Lead (4mm thick ) • X-strips x 20 • Y-strips y 20 • Total 24 layers • 17 X0 • 6 Superlayers • 1 Superlayer=4 layer • KEK PS March 2004 • Unseparated beam • 1-4 GeV (e, mu, pion) APPI 2005

  4. Linearity APPI 2005

  5. Energy Resolution • All Strips • Stochastic term • 13.10 +- 0.12 % • Constant term • 0.00 +0.72-0.00 % • Simulation • Photo statistics • Noise effect APPI 2005

  6. Response uniformity is examined to check if it is uniform enough to keep the good energy resolution Scanning step : 0.5 mm Tracking resolution : 380 mm The response uniformity is calculated as a RMS of the response over a mean of the response in a central region of 7mm. Response uniformity in the 1 cm-width direction : 2.4 % Response uniformity in the 1 cm-width direction The minimum ionizing particle (MIP) 1st super layer APPI 2005

  7. Scanning step : 1 cm Uniformity in the 1st super layer superposed 9-11 strip events. Read out is +10cm, Wave Length Shifter fiber attenuation is seen. The response uniformity is calculated as deviation from the fitted straight line in a central region of 18cm. Response uniformity in the 20 cm-long direction : 1.6 % Response uniformity in the 20 cm-long direction The minimum ionizing particle (MIP) APPI 2005

  8. Scanning step : 1 mm Response uniformity in which the response sum over the longitudinal strips and the response sum over all x-strips are plotted as a function of the incident beam position. Response uniformity for x-layer : 1.1 % Response uniformity in the 1 cm-width direction 4 GeV electron APPI 2005

  9. In the idea of the fine-segmented electromagnetic calorimeter, it is very important to have a good capability of separating photon-originated electromagnetic clusters from charged tracks. A typical event display for 4 GeV electron. Shower profile APPI 2005

  10. Integrated lateral shower profile • The energy fraction I(x) • Xdc; the incident position reconstructed with drift chamber • Xi ; position of i th strip. • x = Xdc – Xi • I(0) = 0.5 Pulse height (MIPs) x Xi Xdc APPI 2005

  11. Integrated shower profile, I(x) of a shower cluster for 4 GeV electron and MIP. The widths for 90 % shower containment : 1.7 cm at 2nd superlayer (shower max). The MIP spread which originated from the light leakage between adjacent strips is much smaller than electron spread. Integrated lateral shower profile APPI 2005

  12. A small deviation between 4 GeV electron data and GEANT3-based shower simulation. This deviation is thought to come from the detector effect such as light leakage between adjacent strips. The smearing of the lateral shower spread in the simulation using the information on the light leakage seen in the MIP signal spread. Smeared function of the lateral shower spread Smeared function Beam test data APPI 2005

  13. Lateral shower profile • Integrated lateral shower profile I(x) can be parameterized as a double exponential of the following form: • The smeared function fs(x) is defined by the following equation • This smeared lateral shower profile in the simulation is consistent with the lateral shower profile for electron data. APPI 2005

  14. RMS of the cluster To examine the fluctuation of the lateral shower profile. The measured lateral shower profile for electron data was found to be well described by the simulation, including the fluctuation on the shower by shower basis. RMS of lateral shower profile data simulation APPI 2005

  15. The shower centroid , xshower is obtained by the fitting energy deposits in 5 strips to a Gaussian. The distribution of the position difference between the shower centroid, xshower at the 2nd super layer and the track extrapolation, xdc for 4 GeV electron. Spatial resolution at 2nd super layer for 4 GeV electron APPI 2005

  16. The position resolution can be parameterized as the following form : at the 2nd Super layer in the energy range 1 GeV and 4 GeV. Spatial resolution APPI 2005

  17. The shower direction is obtained by a linear fit of the centroid positions in the super layer In this calculation, only first 4 super layers are used for fitting because in the last 2 super layers the signals are small and the resolutions are worse. The angle distribution measured by the calorimeter APPI 2005

  18. The angular resolution using the electron beams with 0 degree in the energy range between 1 GeV and 4 GeV. The angular resolution APPI 2005

  19. In the beam test, we performed data taking with the electron trigger, with an incident beam angle varying from 0 to 15.9 degree. The distribution of the angle measured by the calorimeter. Angle measurement APPI 2005

  20. The comparison of the angles measured by the calorimeter with the incident angle. The comparison with the incident angle APPI 2005

  21. Summary • Linearity : 1 % level • Energy resolution : • Stochastic 13.10 +- 0.12 % • Constant 0.00 +0.72-0.00 % • Response uniformity • MIP 1cm-width direction : 2.4 % • MIP 20cm-long direction : 1.6 % • 4 GeV electron x-layer : 1.1 % • Lateral shower spread • The width for 90 % shower containment 1.7 cm at 2nd super layer • Position resolution at 2nd super layer • 4 GeV electron ; 2.06 +- 0.03 (mm) • Angle resolution • 4 GeV electron ; 2.45 +- 0.05 (degrees) APPI 2005

  22. Appendix Energy deposit Tracking Longitudinal shower profile Spatial resolution

  23. Energy deposit in all strips APPI 2005

  24. Position distribution at the most down stream chamber. This beam profile indicates that the beam profile is smaller than the size (5x5 cm) of the nearest trigger counter. Tracking Position distribution APPI 2005

  25. The incident position resolution at the calorimeter surface is evaluated to be 300 micro m Tracking Residual distribution APPI 2005

  26. The response in a certain region of each scintillator is determined by the mean of the pulse height distribution. The response at x=-0.5 cm APPI 2005

  27. The longitudinal shower profiles for electron data are also consistent with the simulation result. Longitudinal shower profile APPI 2005

  28. The position calculated by the method is compared with that determined with the drift chamber. Correlation plot at the 2nd super layer APPI 2005

  29. The position resolution at each super layer APPI 2005

More Related