Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Published byDelaney Hodgins Modified over 2 years ago

1
SuperNEMO Thoughts about next generation NEMO experiment Ruben Saakyan UCL

2
Outline Motivation Possible Scheme R&D needed Sensitivity Time scale

3
Motivation Need to access < 0.1 eV scale Realistic project with sensitivity 0.05 eV with “modest” cost (~$15-20M) NEMO technology very well known/understood Measure background/source purity with NEMO Feasibility estimate based on NEMO-3 results

4
The Idea NEMO3×10 = SuperNEMO ~100 kg Candidate Isotopes: 100 Mo, 82 Se, 116 Cd, 130 Te Modular structure Improve energy resolution (see later) Time resolution 250ps, vertex: 1cm (1 ) – as in NEMO3 Improve efficiency to from 12% to ~ 20% No B-field ? (check with NEMO3) Better geometry Thinner wires in tracking detector Improved event selection

5
Which Isotope? IsotopeQ, MeV 100 Mo Se Cd Te2.529 Factor of 10 lower BG for 82 Se Can be produced in centrifuge - $30K-$50K/kg

6
Possible Layouts “Clone” structure 10×NEMO3 “Large scale” structure Source diameter – 25m (passive shielding: 29m) “Intermediate” 4 cylinders with source diameter ~ 7m NEMO-3 like 2.5 m

7
Possible Layouts Low BG (NEMO) PMTs – 5000 (2.5×NEMO3) 30×30 ×10 cm 3 scint blocks 30,000 Geiger cells (5×NEMO3) Passive shielding: 20cm Fe cm antineutron shield Space needed: 30 ×12 ×6m 3 New Lab, Boulby? (visited on 17-July-03) Planar Geometry (preferred) 4 supermodules 25 kg each

8
Energy Resolution 2 – the only BG (check with 3MeV: E /E) = 3.5-4%(NEMO3) ( E /E) = 2.5-3% (SuperNEMO) Gains factor of ~7 F ~ ( E /E) 6

9
Energy Resolution Scintillator R&D Optimise: Optical coupling to PMT Surface treatment Scint-r size PMT size New scintillator? Combination of organic/non-organic scintillator? MC input UK contribution (MINOS scintillator experience) 207 Bi 482 keV 976 keV There are a few NEMO3 scint blocks with E /E 4.5% 3 MeV

10
SuperNEMO advantages Well known technology “Smart” detector (tracking) High Q-value Feasibility checked by NEMO-3 BG only from 2 (for 82 Se and 100 Mo) E /E 4.5% at 1 MeV (R&D) Modular structure One supermodule even simpler than NEMO3 100kg of isotope “only” Modest price ~ $15M (isotope: $5-7M)

11
SuperNEMO disadvantages Big detector Energy resolution (can be improved further?) Detection Efficiency

12
Sensitivity calculation Assumptions: E /E = 1MeV = 20% Isotope purity: 214 Bi: < 50 Bq/kg 208 Tl < 5 Bq/kg T measur = 5 yr

13
Sensitivity Isotope Q, MeV Rad BG 2 BG T 1/2, yr, eV 82 Se ~ × Mo ~ × Cd ~ × Te ~ ×

14
Time Scale 2-4 December 2003 – first meeting (LAL) to discuss R&D plans and proposal submission E/E (UK) Efficiency BG Isotope production/purification 2006: NEMO-3 upgrade with kg of 82 Se and run ~0.1 eV 2008: Start SuperNEMO installation (new Frejus lab, Boulby?) 2010: Start taking data

15
Future projects sensitivity (5 yr exposure) ExperimentSource and Mass Sensitivity to T 1/2 (y) Sensitivity to (eV) * Majorana $50M GENIUS $100M 76 Ge, 500kg 76 Ge. 1000kg 3× × – – 0.05 CUORE $25M 130 Te, 750kg(nat) 2× – 0.17 EXO $50M-100M 136 Xe 1 ton 8× – 0.12 SuperNEMO $15M 82 Se (or other) 100 kg 2× – 0.11 * 5 different latest NME calculations

16
Concluding Remarks NEMO-3 will test experimentally feasibility of SuperNEMO First step: kg 82 Se from kg 82 Se ~0.04 eV is achievable at relatively low cost (~$15M) and with very well known technology Could measure other isotopes Collaborators welcome 2-4 December 1 st meeting at LAL(Orsay)

Similar presentations

© 2016 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

Ads by Google