Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

GLD DOD to do list and plan for IR section What to write in DOD What do be done before Jan-19 meeting (and after up to Bangalore meeting) - length : (guideline.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "GLD DOD to do list and plan for IR section What to write in DOD What do be done before Jan-19 meeting (and after up to Bangalore meeting) - length : (guideline."— Presentation transcript:

1 GLD DOD to do list and plan for IR section What to write in DOD What do be done before Jan-19 meeting (and after up to Bangalore meeting) - length : (guideline from H.Y.) ~ 5 pages - contents: FCAL/BCAL and pair monitor (anything else?)

2 What to write (FCAL/BCAL) An optimized detector technology/geometry for FCAL/BCAL Currently, we have FCAL (mask) BCAL H.B.Park (2005) We also have inputs from Y.Sugimoto but similar to this (FCAL z was 230 cm) Any change against 2 mRad/20 mRad options? Proposed technology : W-Si CAL (note: other concepts consider W-Si/W-diamond/PBWO4 crystal)  FCAL: 13 < r < 44 mRad  BCAL: 1.4 < r < 13 mRad  FCAL: 260 cm ~ 285 cm in z-direction 12 cm ~ 36 cm in r-direction  BCAL: 430 cm ~ 450 cm in z-direction 2 cm ~ 18 cm in r-direction

3 What to write (FCAL/BCAL) Segmentation (I took the liberty of extracting parameters from H.B.Park’s idea originated from SLD experience) FCALBCAL # of layers1023 Interaction length (X 0 ) 1.74/layer0.86/layer Any change against 2 mRad/20 mRad options? How do they interface with the pair background core… Luminosity measurement performance: people are talking about  L/L ~10 -4 in other concepts. We need study on this if to be included

4 What to write (pair monitor) Beam profile monitor using pixel detector (H.Yamamoto, snowmass2005) - hit locations for zero crossing angle and 20 mrad angle - expected  y for various B fields and crossing angles - pixel size : 0.4 x 0.4 mm - sensor size : 2.54 x 1.27 cm 2 - 27 by 54 pixels/sensor - readout electronics defined (preamp/discriminator/counter/latch) - readout circuit design and layout done (true?) - readout electronics submitted to fab (MOSIS, end of 2005. again true?)

5 What to be done (in general) FCAL/BCAL: Choice of technology and reason should be addressed - W-Si is baseline and W-diamond/PBWO4 as backup? (Need inputs from relevant people) FCAL/ECAL: Optimizing thickness/segmentation parameters - H.B.Park working on FCAL/ECAL: Performance - missing (simulation in progress, by H.B.Park) FCAL/ECAL: Readout electronics - completely missing (both technology and cost) FCAL/ECAL: Costing to Maki-san - communication with the company in progress for a rough estimation (H.B.Park) Pair monitor - realistic B field in sim., measurements on others (  x,horizontal shifts, azimuthal tilt of bunch, etc), updates on electronics R&D

6 What to be done (before Jan 19) Identify missing items to be included (need help from all of you) Rough cost estimate for FCAL/BCAL/pair monitor? - could it be delayed? - should it be easy? (It looks easy for FCAL/BCAL at least) Update on your R&D if not listed in this talk - I’ll be at KEK on Jan 19 so please use that slot (or email to eunil@hep.korea.ac.kr for communication before 19 th ) eunil@hep.korea.ac.kr

7 What to be done (longer term) Fill missing items FCAL/BCAL - Segmentation optimization - impact on background - electronics - simulation with physics Pair monitor - update on the readout electronics R&D - study with realistic B field - other parameters such as  x, horizontal shift, etc  Well defined technology choice (and reason) by the end of 2006


Download ppt "GLD DOD to do list and plan for IR section What to write in DOD What do be done before Jan-19 meeting (and after up to Bangalore meeting) - length : (guideline."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google