1 / 28

GDR Neutrino at Orsay-PNO October 11 th , 2010 LAGUNA and beyond

GDR Neutrino at Orsay-PNO October 11 th , 2010 LAGUNA and beyond. Luigi MOSCA CEA-Saclay and LSM-Fréjus. Plan of the Talk - The LAGUNA European Network (2008 - 2011) - The main results of the studies - The different neutrino beams strategies - How to go beyond : LAGUNA-NEXT ?

gelizabeth
Télécharger la présentation

GDR Neutrino at Orsay-PNO October 11 th , 2010 LAGUNA and beyond

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. GDR Neutrino at Orsay-PNO October 11th, 2010 LAGUNA and beyond Luigi MOSCA CEA-Saclay and LSM-Fréjus GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  2. Plan of the Talk - The LAGUNA European Network (2008 - 2011) - The main results of the studies - The different neutrino beams strategies - How to go beyond : LAGUNA-NEXT ? - World competition / cooperation - Conclusions and outlook GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  3. The European Cooperation Project LAGUNA (28 Institutions in 10 countries // 1.7 M€ from Europe) The Physics case Grand Unification Proton Decayup to ≈ 1035 years lifetime mainly to study Supernovae (burst + “relics”) the Sun (solar ’s ) Neutrinos from Cosmic rays (atmospheric ’s) the Earth (geo ’s ) Neutrino propertiesaccelerators(super-beam and beta-beam) and Astrophysics GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  4. In the LAGUNA Cooperation the main Physics goals are common, while 3 different detection techniques are proposed 3 detector types : GLACIER (Liquid Argon), LENA (liquid scintillator), and MEMPHYS (Water Cherenkov), and 7 candidate sites : Boulby (UK), Fréjus (France/Italy), Umbria (Italy), LSC (Spain), Pyhäsalmi (Finland), Sunlab (Poland), Slanic (Romenia) There is a strong complementarity among the 3 detector approaches GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  5. Large detectors considered in LAGUNA LENA: Liquid Scintillator MEMPHYS:Water Ċerenkov GLACIER: Liquid Argon GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  6. An example of complementarity : GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  7. = CERN Pyhäsalmi 2300 Km Bulby mine: 1050 Km SUNLAB 950 Km 130 Km Unirea Salt Mine 630 Km GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010 CASO 659 Km

  8. LAGUNA as an FP7 Design Study Network Four Working Packages : WP1 : Management and coordination WP2 : Underground Infrastructures and engineering (including tanks and liquids handling) WP3 : Safety and environmental and socio-economic issues WP4 : Science Impact and Outreach Main deliverable : a “conceptual design report” on the feasibility of a megaton-scale underground infrastructure to allow policy makers to define the European strategy in this field of research GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  9. Main topics addressed in the WP2 Design Study : 1) determination of the best shape for very large cavities and of their possible dimensions (using simulations constrained by the knowledge of the type, structure and stress of the rock) 2) optimisation of the access to these cavities (tunnels, shafts, local bypasses, …) 3) study of the basic equipment and facilities : ventilation and air-filtering and conditioning, liquid production (if any) and transportation and continuous purification “factories” (in connection with WP3), electrical power supply, clean rooms, computing facilities, etc. 4) incorporation of the relevant safety conditions and equipments (for long term stability of the cavities, for fire, liquid leaks and evaporation risks, etc), in connection with WP3. 5) evaluation of the cost and time of realisation of the different parts of the site’s infrastructure (and also maintenance cost) L. Mosca GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010 9

  10. The main results of the LAGUNA studies GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  11. The WP2 Design study • All reports (for the 7 sites) are now finalized (≈ 1200 pages) : a very impressive work! • Starting from : (7 sites) x (3 detectors) = 21 configurations, it comes out that in all sites at least one type of detector can be safely hosted (detector size, tank installation, liquid introduction, etc) at least at the minimal required depth • A cost estimate of the laboratory (excavation and basic infrastructure) has been done for each feasible configuration : also if non negligible it is not the driving cost (compared to tank, detector, liquid, and … beams) GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  12. Laboratory feasibility in the different sites for each detector GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  13. At this stage, several configurations (site+detector) remain as possible choicesTo finalize the choice of one or two configurations it is necessary to take into account ALL the relevant parameters :- the feasibility of the excavation for a given detector- the depth- the access type and quality - the physics goals considerations- the possible neutrino beam(s)- the competition/synergy with non-European projects (USA, Japan, …)- the total cost of the project : laboratory excavation, tank, full detector instrumentation, liquid procurement, filling and purification, neutrino beam, … - the running cost of the experiment- the socio-economic impact of the experiment- and, last not least, the safety conditions of the installation (WP3) GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  14. The different neutrino beams strategies GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  15. Concerning the distance of a given site from CERN two different strategiescan be considered : a) “short” long-baseline (with “low” n energy) : - low background (absence of inelastic events) - negligible matter effect (good for a clean CP-V measurement) - “mass hierarchy” determined by atmospheric n events - feasible with the present CERN accelerators (PS and SPS) b) “long” long-baseline (with “high” n energy) : - higher background due to inelastic events - “mass hierarchy” determination possible without atmospheric n, • but need to disentangle it from CP-Violation effects - need more important upgrade of the CERN accelerators GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  16. a) “short” long-baseline (with “low” n energy) : The considered neutrino beams : Super-beam : CERN to Fréjus (≈ 130 Km) (En ≈ 260 MeV) Beta-beam(s) : CERN to Fréjus (≈ 130 Km) (g ≈100) (En ≈ 350 MeV) ( DESY to Fréjus (?) (≈ 960 Km) (g ≈ 500) (En ≈ 1.8 GeV) (Achim Stahl)) --> Both CERN to Fréjus Super-beam and Beta-beam have been (are) extensively studied by the CARE/BENE and then by the EURONU European networks GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  17. 130 Km L. Mosca L. Mosca GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010 GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010 17 17 17

  18. b) “long” long-baselines (with “high” n energy) GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  19. CERN proton sources : bottleneck ? GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  20. L. Mosca GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010 GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010 20

  21. How to go beyond LAGUNA : LAGUNA-NEXT ? (Dead-line : November 25th for the FP7 Design Study call) At the last LAGUNA meeting (at Fréjus/Aussois) a tentative programme has been outlined : WP1 : Management and International relations WP2 : Detector R&D, Design and safety for the 3 technologies and cost estimate (+ large volume magnetisation) WP3 : Definition of detectors operation and safety, including liquid processes, and cost estimate. WP4 : Study of Neutrino Super-beams from CERN to the LAGUNA sites. This of course requires a specific and sufficient CERN experts implication (for the CERN to Fréjus baseline this is already largely in progress (together with the Beta-Beam option) in the EURO-Nu Network) WP5 : LAGUNA project’s Physics potential, Underground science and Outreach GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  22. World competition / cooperation At USA : the LBNE project considers both Water Cherenkov and Liquid-Ar options, with a Neutrino long-baseline of 1300 Km from Fermi-Lab to the Homestake site At Japan : The existing J-PARC Neutrino beam has an upgrade Plan to 1.66 MW after 2014, and 2 fixed possibilities for the baseline (Kamioka at 300 km and Okinoscima at 658 km) In Europe : the situation is more flexible especially concerning the baseline We tentatively focus on 3 options : CERN to Fréjus : 130 Km (the shortest “long base-line”) CERN to Umbria : existing CNGS (or LNGS’) : 650 Km (or 732 Km) CERN to Pyhäsalmi : 2300 Km (the longest “long base-line”) GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  23. L. Mosca GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010 GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010 23

  24. Conclusions and outlook - The main physics goals are common inside the LAGUNA Cooperation - The LAGUNA programme aims at otherwise inaccessible fundamental phenomena - The 3 detector approaches are complementary - Emerging scenarios in Europe : - MEMPHYS (Water Cherenkov, a well proved technology) at Fréjus, with Super-beam and/or Beta-beam from CERN (well advanced study) - LENA (Liquid Scintillator, a well proved technology) at Pyhäsalmi or Fréjus (alternatively a combination of “renormalized” MEMPHYS + LENA at Fréjus) - GLACIER (much more ambitious technology) at Pyhäsalmi or Umbria or … still needs a large R&D effort and a 1 Kton prototype, with a “long” long-baseline Super-beam : needs a major realisation (HP-PS/2MW or RCS/4MW) in the CERN sector to be competitive (CNGS type SPS beam is not sufficient) L. Mosca GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010 GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010 24

  25. - Anyway it is necessary to go beyond the present LAGUNA network : LAGUNA-NEXT (or something equivalent ? via ESFRI) mainly : - to complete the study of each detector type, and - to study the “long” long-baseline beam scenario (the “short” long-baseline scenario is already included in EURO-Nu) - Synergy with non-European projects : a good cooperation with the USA and Japan projects is highly desirable and is already partially existing  For the Neutrino Factory possible scenarios see the Alain Blondel talk  For a comparison of the sensitivity of the different projects over the world see e.g. the talk of Mauro Mezzetto at the last LAGUNA general meeting at Aussois (7-9 September 2010) ____________________ GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  26. Thank You ! GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  27. Back-up GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

  28. Top-view of the “MLF” MEMPHYS-LENA Fusion project near the existing Laboratory (LSM) FRANCE MEMPHYS LSM (1982) Safety tunnel (2009 – under construction) LENA ITALY MEMPHYS Road tunnel (1974 – 1978) GDR Neutrino October 11th, 2010

More Related