1 / 35

Muon Collider: Workshop, Physics/Detector R&D, and Accelerator Development Plans Ronald Lipton, Fermilab

Muon Collider: Workshop, Physics/Detector R&D, and Accelerator Development Plans Ronald Lipton, Fermilab. Outline Muon Collider Concept Muon Accelerator Program status Physics Environment Machine Detector Interface Studies Physics and detector studies Future plans and outlook.

murray
Télécharger la présentation

Muon Collider: Workshop, Physics/Detector R&D, and Accelerator Development Plans Ronald Lipton, Fermilab

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. Muon Collider: Workshop, Physics/Detector R&D, andAccelerator Development PlansRonald Lipton, Fermilab Outline • Muon Collider Concept • Muon Accelerator Program status • Physics Environment • Machine Detector Interface Studies • Physics and detector studies • Future plans and outlook

  2. Muon Collider Motivation • Amuon collider is an attractive multi-TeV lepton collider option because muons don’t radiate as readily as electrons (mm / me ~ 207): • Compact • Fits on laboratory site • Multi-pass acceleration • Cost effective operation & construction • Multipass collisions in a ring (~1000 turns) • Relaxed emittance requirements & hence relaxed tolerances A 4 TeVMuon Collider wouldfit on the Fermilab Site

  3. Challenges • Muons are produced as tertiary particles. To make enough of them we must start with a MW scale proton source & target facility. • Muons decay  everything must be done fast and we must deal with the decay electrons.A 1.5 TeVmuon travels 9,300 km in one lifetime (~2000 turns in MuCol ring). • Muons are born within a large 6D phase-space. For a MC we must cool them by O(106) before they decay  New cooling techniques (ionization cooling) must be demonstrated, and it requires components with demanding performance (NCRF in magnetic channel, high field solenoids.) • After cooling, beams still have relatively large emittance

  4. Muon Collider Schematic √s = 3 TeV Circumference = 4.5kmL = 3×1034 cm-2s-1m/bunch = 2x1012 s(p)/p = 0.1% eN = 25 mm, e//N=70 mm b* = 5mm Rep Rate = 12Hz 1021muons per year that fit within the acceptance of an accelerator: eN=6000 mm e//N=25 mm Proton source: Example: upgraded PROJECT X (4 MW, 2±1 ns long bunches)

  5. Neutrino Factory c.f. Muon Collider NEUTRINOFACTORY MUONCOLLIDER In present MC baseline design, Front End is same as for NF

  6. MAP • Oct 1, 2009 letter from DOE-OHEP to FNAL Director: “Our office believes that it is timely to mount a concerted national R&D program that addresses the technical challenges and feasibility issues relevant to the capabilities needed for future Neutrino Factory and multi-TeVMuon Collider facilities. ...” • Letter requested a new organization for a national Muon Collider & Neutrino Factory R&D program, hosted at FNAL. • MuonAccelerator Program organization is now in place & functioning: >200 participants from 15 institutions: • ANL, BNL, FNAL, JLab, LBNL, ORNL, SLAC, Cornell, IIT, Princeton, UCB, UCLA, UCR, U-Miss, U. Chicago • http://map.fnal.gov/ • MAP R&D proposal reviewed August 2010 … committee concluded that the “proposed work was very important to the field of high energy physics.”

  7. Map Organization Level 0 Level 1

  8. MAP Organization – L1 & L2 “Level 1” • L2 assignments • - FNAL; 5 people • - Other Labs: 3 people • - Universities: 3 people • - SBIR Companies: 1 person

  9. Fermilab Contributions • Exploits Fermilab’s expertise and assets. • Tackle the most critical and hardest problems. • Exploit Fermilab’s unique testing capabilities • Significant activities: • Organization & leadership (Level 0, Level 1, Level 2) • Front- end, cooling channel, & Collider Ring design studies. • Machine –Detector Interface studies (interfacing to the Muon Collider physics/detector activities, including MARS background simulations). • Ionization cooling channel component development and testing, including magnet and RF studies.

  10. Muon Accelerator – Merit 1 cm Merit-Proof-of-principle demonstration of a liquid Hg jet target in high-field solenoid CERN PS in Fall 2007. • Demonstrated a 20m/s liquid Hg jet injected into a 15 T solenoid, & hit with a suitably intense beam (115 KJ / pulse !). • Results suggest this technology OK for beam powers up to 8 MW with rep. rate of 70Hz ! Hg jet in a 15 T solenoid Measured disruption length = 28 cm

  11. Cooling Channel Design • Perhaps the most challenging piece of MC design. Requires ideas & detailed design work to identify a set of hardware that can, if developed, do the job. • Important FNAL contributors: Y. Alexahin, K. Yonehara, V. Balbekov

  12. MuonAccelerator - Mucool MuCool Test Area • Built at end of FNAL Linac for ionization cooling component testing • 5 T magnet, RF power at 805 MHz & 201 MHz, clean room, LH2handling capability,400 MeV beam from linac. • Muon cooling channel requires NCRF operating in a magnetic channel. MTA measurements show max. RF gradient reduced inmagnetic field. • Several innovative ideas on how to mitigate this →critical R&D at MTA (FNAL contributors: A. Bross, A. Moretti, Y. Torun, K. Yonehara, M. Popovic, M. Jana, A. Tollestrup) First beam in MTA 28 February 2011 High Pressure RF Cavity (FNAL & Muons Inc.)

  13. Muon Accelerator - MICE Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment (MICE) • Tests short cooling section, in muon beam, measuring the muons before & after the cooling section. one at a time. • Learn about cost, complexity, & engineering issues associated with cooling channels. • Vary RF, solenoid & absorber parameters & demonstrate ability to simulate response of muons FNAL Contributors: A. Bross, Y. Torun, M. Popovic, V. Kashikhin To be completed ~2014 Spectro-meter Cooling section Spectro-meter

  14. Muon Accelerator – Front end Design (Neuffler) With a 4MW proton source, this will enable O(1021) muons/year to be produced, bunched, cooled & fit within the acceptance of an accelerator.

  15. Muon Accelerator – Ringand Magnet • Lattice design for 1.5 TeV Collider exists, & 3 TeVring progressing (Y. Alexahin, E. Gianfelice-Wendt) • Ring magnet design studies, including radiation& thermal management, progressing. Requires lattice, magnet & MARS simulation expertise Have studied open mid-plane magnet design (radiation & heat loads, field non-uniformity & affect on lattice performance) → looks OK. More engineering studies needed. (N. Mokhov, S. Striganov, Y. Alexahin, V.V. Kashikhin, I. Novitski, A. Zlobin) MARS energy deposition map for 1.5 TeV collider dipole

  16. Physics and Detector • Although there is a revived muon accelerator effort, there has been little corresponding detector effort which could study the large beam-related backgrounds with modern simulation tools and detector technologies • Beginning such an effort is crucial to understanding the physics reach of such a device and beginning a program to explore detector development for the muon collider environment. • It is also crucial for community buy-in • We hope to commission this effort at the Muon Collider 2011 meeting in Telluride next week.

  17. Physics Environment Beamstrahlung in any e+e- collider E/E  2 • Narrow beam energy spread • Precision scan • Kinematic constraints • 2 Detectors • DTbunch ~ 10 ms • Lots of time for readout • Backgrounds don’t pile up • (mm/me)2 = ~40000 • Enhanced s-channel rates for Higgs-like particles • Multi-TeV lepton collider cross sections dominated by fusion (Eichten)

  18. (Eichten) Luminosity Goals for High Energy MuonCollider • L~1034 at 3 TeV provides ~965 events/unit R • Much of the yield is in fusion reactions • Need to resolve W, Z jets • Large missing energies • Physics environment similar to CLIC with lower beamstrahlung, higher decay backgrounds, lower polarization and central 10 degrees obscured by “the nose”

  19. It’s All About the Background Experiments at the Muon Collider will endure very harsh background environments. The first order of business in evaluating physics capabilities is to understand and simulate the machine backgrounds. • IP m+m- collisions – real physics: Production x-section 1.34 pb at √S = 1.5 TeV. • IP incoherent e+e- pair production: of 3×104 electron pairs per bunch crossing • Muon beam decays: For 0.75-TeV muon beam of 2x1012, 4.28x105dec/m per bunch crossing, or 1.28x1010dec/m/s for 2 beams; 0.5 kW/m. • Beam halo: Beam loss at limiting apertures; severe, can be taken care of by an appropriate collimation system far upstream of IP.

  20. The Nose •  Ivan Yakovlevitch… glanced into the roll's middle. To his intensesurprise he saw something glimmering there..   He stuck inhis fingers, and pulled out — a nose! .. .A nose! Sure enough a nose! Yes, and one familiar to him, somehow! Oh, horror spread upon his features! - “The Nose” Gogol (from google) • A 10 degree tungsten/borated poly “noise”surrounds the beam pipe to absorb the e-m backgrounds 100-1000x background reduction.

  21. MDI Model There has been excellent progress in modeling the intense decaybackgrounds . Large weights have been removed and accurate background simulations are available from MARS and G4beamline Q = 10o 6 < z < 600 cm x:z = 1:17 Q1 W BCH2

  22. Neutron Background Non-ionizing background ~ LHC

  23. Energy Distributions 164 TeV 5.8 TeV 92 TeV 92 TeV 172 TeV 12 TeV

  24. Detector Simulation Status • A small group from Lecce has been working on Muon Collider simulations in the ILCROOT framework for about a year • First studies using full GEANT simulation of a detector with MARS backgrounds imbedded • First studies of calorimeter and tracker background with timing cuts • A detector simulation using LCSIM (SLAC) has been implemented and first studies are beginning. This is complementary to the ILCROOT studies – the detector is more “generic” and the simulation is more flexible. We have not yet simulated full background events in this framework

  25. Detector Models based on ILC (SiD, ILD, 4Th) LCSIM Detector Model ILCROOT Detector Model

  26. ILCROOT Background Studies (Dual Readout Calorimeter) Central barrel 4x4 cm em+had cell (DiBenedetto)

  27. LCSIM Background Studies An example of background reduction utilizing timing • ECal: Tungsten, 10 x 1cm layers 1x1x1cm cells • Background • 1ns timing cut 10 GeV e No timing Cut EM cal layer Reduction: EM – 23% of energy survives a 1 ns timing cut 6% of that energy is beyond 1st EM cell Hadron- 0.95% of energy survives a 1 ns cut

  28. Track Information (LCSIM) DT • Tracking can benefit from precise timing, low occupancy in a pixelated silicon detector. DE/DX DT +/- 5 ns Background DE/DX DT +/- 5 ns Single Muon DE/DX

  29. ILCSIM Tracking Studies Recently demonstrated track finding in a full background event • Cuts on IP, DEDX, and TOF (3ns) • Dominated by neutrons and photons • This is not energy weighted, many are soft tracks DE/DX and IP (3cm) Cut 2110 tracks TOF cut at 3 ns 41 tracks (Mazzacane) (Terentiev)

  30. Accomplishments in the last Year • Introduced an SiD-like Muon Collider detector into the LCSIM framework • Provided LCSIM simulation infrastructure at Fermilab • Incorporated MARS backgrounds into LCSIM • Initiated physics studies by university and laboratory groups based on SiD/LCSIM model. • Detailed background studies • Hit rates in various regions of the tracker • Energy deposit in various regions and depths in the calorimeter • Time dependence of tracker and calorimeter hits • Studies of single tracks with backgrounds Much of these studies were by the Lecce group in collaboration with the FNAL MDI group

  31. Collaboration on Lepton Collider R&D • Laboratory “White Paper” on Lepton Colliders last summer established the goals of future efforts: • Establish the requirements of detector systems so the physics can be extracted, taking into account the very different operating conditions at each machine. • Provide feedback to the machine design to further optimize the physics potential. • Propose necessary detector and other R&D to verify detector technologies. • Compare the physics potential of these machines and carry out a cost‐benefit analysis. • Coordinate the detector and physics program. • First joint effort was to submit a unified proposal to the “Collider Detector R&D” program (program not funded in FY2011) • Included support for Muon Collider simulation at FNAL and SLAC • Muon Collider detector R&D would come later

  32. Plans • Summer 2011 – Fall 2011 • Parameterize backgrounds to enable faster physics simulation • Initial physics study including full background simulation • Physics studies using parameterized background Iterate both the shielding and detector designs based on results of simulation studies. • 2012-2013 Define detector requirements, and identify needed detector R&D, begin studies to establish a long-term simulation and analysis environment. • 2014- 2015 Detector R&D + simulation studies to establish likely detector performance • 2015-2017 Define overall detector design, complete studies for the design feasibility report.

  33. Muon Collider Workshop at Telluride next week • We hope the workshop will provide a venue to introduce the community to the current state of physics and background simulations and serve as an entry point for more extensive university collaboration on Muon Collider Physics • We hope to come out of the workshop with a specific set of short and long term goals for physics and detector studies. We aim for demonstration of the physics capability of the machine on the same time scale as the MAP accelerator program goals for accelerator feasibility studies (~FY16)

  34. Manpower • We had hoped to receive some funding for computing support through the KA15 detector R&D program. That has been delayed until next FY. • The Lecce (ILCROOT) group has contributed a great deal, but are likely to dissipate without strong FNAL support. • Work at NIU and FNAL is beginning using the LCSIM framework provided by SLAC. More work needs to be done to build up momentum for this effort. We hope to make significant progress at Telluride, but we will need an increased level of support to mount a sustained effort

  35. Conclusions • Muon Accelerator Project is up and running – making substantial progress • We are beginning a renewed physics and detector program • We now have a strong foundation – reliable MARS simulation of backgrounds integrated into GEANT-based detector models. • We hope to build on that foundation at Telluride an beyond and provide studies comparable to those undertaken for CLIC and ILC that will provide the HEP community with a basis for informed decisions in the future.

More Related