Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

The PrimEx-I Beam line. A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 2 MC Results for the PrimEx-I configuration Beam Background on HyCal: Energy Distribution.

Published byPreston Tyler Modified over 8 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "The PrimEx-I Beam line. A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 2 MC Results for the PrimEx-I configuration Beam Background on HyCal: Energy Distribution."— Presentation transcript:

1 The PrimEx-I Beam line

2 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 2 MC Results for the PrimEx-I configuration Beam Background on HyCal: Energy Distribution (arbitrary numbers) (Photons)/(All)=(50,250/72,980) = 69% (Charged Part.)/(All)=(22,730/72,980) = 31% Charged particles dominate at E> 1 GeV Photons dominate at E < 1 GeV Pay attention the Y-scale is LOG

3 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 3 MC Results for PrimEx-I confogureation: Beam Background on HyCal: XY Distribution (for illustration) Charged Particle Distribution on HyCal Photon Distribution on HyCal

4 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 4 Step #1: What if we take the Permanent Magnet off from the beam line? (Charged Particles only, for now) Conclusion #1 Permanent magnet effectively cuts the Charged background at less than ~1 GeV range. Total efficiency is a factor of 2. We need Permanent Magnet!!! Effect of the Permanent Magnet Field On the CHARGED background: B perm =0 KG, total Number=42,680 (188%) B perm =7 KG (the Current)= 22,730 (100%) B perm =14 KG (doubled) = 7,769 (34%)

5 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 5 Step #1: What if we take the Permanent Magnet off from the beam line? (All Particles now) Conclusion #2 Permanent magnet does not cut the Photon component of the background. But, the total net effect is ~30% reduction for 7KG We need Permanent Magnet!!! Effect of the Permanent Magnet Field on all particle background: B perm =0 KG, total Number=95,170 (130%) B perm =7 KG (the Current)=72,980 (100%) B perm =14 KG (doubled) = 47,600 (74%)

6 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 6 Step#2: Different Diameter Pb-Shieldings (B perm =7KG (current one), for now) Charged Particles Effect of the Pb-shield diameter on charged particle background: Diam.= 2.5”, total Number=32,050 (141%) diam.=1.53”(the Current) =22,730 (100%) diam.=0.8” = 8,801 (39%) Conclusion # 3 Pb-shield effectively cuts the Charged background at less than ~2 GeV range. Total efficiency is about factor of 2.5 We need smaller diam. Pb-shielding!!!

7 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 7 Step#2: Different Diameter Pb-Shieldings (B perm =7KG (current one) for now) Photons Only Effect of the Pb-shield diameter on Photon background: Diam.= 2.5”, total Number=56,160 (112%) diam.=1.53”(the Current) =50,250 (100%) diam.=0.8” = 28,970 (58%) Conclusion # 4 Smaller diam. Pb-shielding effectively cuts the Photon background also. Total efficiency: factor of ~2 We need smaller diam. Pb-shielding!!!

8 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 8 Background Relative Composition for 0.8” Pb-Shild and B perm = 0 KG Relative composition of particles for 0.8 inch diam. Collimator and Bperm = 0 KG All particles > 0.1 GeV (57,330)100% Photons (33,120 58% Charged particles (24,210) 42% Conclusion # 5 For this case Photon to Charged Ratio is about 50:50 Try to increase the Permanent Magnet !!!

9 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 9 Effect of B perm on Charged Background for 0.8” diameter PB-Shielding Relative cut efficiency of the Permanent Magnet for the fixed collimator (0.8 inch diam.) B(perm. m.) = 0 KG100% B(perm. m. ) = 7 KG 36% B(perm. m.) = 14 KG 10% B(perm. m.) = 21 KG 5% Conclusion # 6 For 0.8” Pb-shielding 7 KG or more field in permanent magnet is needed. We need smaller diam. Pb-shielding And higher Bdl permanent magnet !!!

10 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 10 XY-Distribution on HyCal for 0.8 “ Pb-Shielding (B perm = 0 KG) Charged Particle Distribution on HyCalPhoton Distribution on HyCal

11 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 11 XY-Distribution on HyCal for 0.8 “ Pb-Shielding ( B perm = 7 KG) Charged Particle Distribution on HyCalPhoton Distribution on HyCal

12 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 12 XY-Distribution on HyCal for 0.8 “ Pb-Shielding ( B perm = 14 KG) Charged Particle Distribution on HyCalPhoton Distribution on HyCal

13 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 13 Conclusion # 7 Next question is: do we gain if we try to extend the distance from Collimator to Pb-shielding ? MC simulations show that the optimum configuration for the PrimEx-II Beam line is: 1)Pb-shielding with the 0.8” diameter hole; 2)Permanent magnet with either one element (7KG) or two (14 KG)

14 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 14 Effect of Moving Down the Target and PS (+50 cm) on Beam Background for 0.8” diameter Pb-Shielding, All Particles Relative cut efficiency of the Permanent Magnet for the fixed collimator (0.8 inch diam.) PrimEx-I Conf., Bperm=7 KG100% +50 cm, Bperm = 7 KG 41% +50 cm, Bperm =14 KG 35% Conclusion # 7 For 0.8” Pb-shielding 7 KG or more field in permanent magnet is needed. We need smaller diam. Pb-shielding And higher Bdl permanent magnet !!!

15 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 15 Effect of Moving Down the Target and PS (+50 cm) on Beam Background for 0.8” diameter Pb-Shielding, Charged Particles Conclusion # 8 We need smaller diam. Pb-shielding And higher Bdl permanent magnet !!!

16 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 16 Effect of Main Collimator “Tapering” on Background Charged Particles, 14 KG Conclusion # 9 Tapered Collimator is better Everything is the same as was in the Previous slide only the down half of the Permanent magnet is “tapered” by 1 mm Relative efficiency of the main Collimator PrimEx-I Conf., + 50 cm down, Bperm=7 KG existed collimator 100 % 1 mm tapered collimator 74 %

17 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 17 Effect of Main Collimator “Tapering” on Background Photons, 14 KG Conclusion # 10 Tapered Collimator is better Everything is the same as was in the Previous slide only the down half of the Permanent magnet is “tapered” by 1 mm Relative efficiency of the main Collimator PrimEx-I Conf., + 50 cm down, Bperm=7 KG existed collimator 100 % 1 mm tapered collimator 65 %

18 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 18 Effect of Main Collimator “Tapering” on Background All Particles, 14 KG Conclusion # 10 Tapered Collimator is better Everything is the same as was in the Previous slide only the down half of the Permanent magnet is “tapered” by 1 mm Relative efficiency of the main Collimator PrimEx-I Conf., + 50 cm down, Bperm=7 KG existed collimator 100 % 1 mm tapered collimator 65 %

19 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 19 Effect of Main Collimator “Tapering” on Background All Particles, 21 KG Conclusion # 10 Tapered Collimator is better Everything is the same as was in the Previous slide only the down half of the Permanent magnet is “tapered” by 1 mm Relative efficiency of the main Collimator PrimEx-I Conf., + 50 cm down, Bperm=7 KG existed collimator 100 % 1 mm tapered collimator 58 %

20 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 20 Effect of Main Collimator “Tapering” on Background All Particles, 21 KG, 2 mm “tapering” Conclusion # 11 1mm wall tapered Coll. is enough! Everything is the same as was in the Previous slide only the down half of the Permanent magnet is “tapered” by 1 mm Relative efficiency of the main Collimator PrimEx-I Conf., + 50 cm down, Bperm=7 KG existed collimator 100 % 1 mm tapered collimator 63 %

21 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 21 Final Comparison of Background Net Gain All Particles Conclusion # 12 We expect ~5 times less background! The old PrimEx-I configuration vs. the Suggested new PrimEx-II configuration: (+50 cm, 21 KG perm. mag, 1mm tapered Collimator) Relative gain: PrimEx-I conf. 100 % sugg. PrimEx-II conf. 19 %

22 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 22 Final Comparison of Background Net Gain All Particles Conclusion # 12 We expect ~5 times less background! The old PrimEx-I configuration vs. the Suggested new PrimEx-II configuration: (+50 cm, 21 KG perm. mag, 1mm tapered Collimator) Relative gain: PrimEx-I conf. 100 % sugg. PrimEx-II conf. 19 %

23 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 23 Effect of Z-distance on HyCal background No Physics Target (All Particles) Conclusion # 13 Practically no change in background The Target and PS moved down for 32 cm Relative Change: PrimEx-I Zdist. 100 % sugg. +32 cm PS down 105 %

24 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 24 Effect of Z-distance on HyCal background No Physics Target (Charged Particles) Conclusion # 14 Practically no Charge Particle contribution in background The Target and PS moved down for 32 cm

25 A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 25 Summary++ Based on the current Monte Carlo simulations: 1)We do not need to increase the Pb-shielding diameter; 2)The background on HyCal is significantly less for the smaller diameter Pb-shielding; 3) 0.8” diameter is the smallest we can have. It can be done by inserting a ~10 r.l. ring inside of the existing beam pipe (Dave Kashy); 4)“Tapered” main Collimator is another factor of 2 more effective 5) D. Kashy’s suggested version #3 is the best for the PrimEx-II beam line 6) It will potentially reduce the background on HyCal by factor of 5 7) Interactive Geant shows that +32 cm down for PS is not critical for the  0 run. Detail simulations for this part will be provided in next few days.

Download ppt "The PrimEx-I Beam line. A. GasparianPrimEx-II Beam Line, August 5, 2010 2 MC Results for the PrimEx-I configuration Beam Background on HyCal: Energy Distribution."

Similar presentations

Preliminary studies for T2 primary target for the NA61 fragmentation beam run 11 th October 2010 – NA61 Collaboration Meeting M. Calviani on behalf of.

Preliminary studies for T2 primary target for the NA61 fragmentation beam run 11 th October 2010 – NA61 Collaboration Meeting M. Calviani on behalf of.
Monte Carlo simulation of the background for the Drell-Yan COMPASS Marialaura Colantoni Laboratory of Nuclear Problems Dubna 14-12-2006 Marialaura.

Monte Carlo simulation of the background for the Drell-Yan COMPASS Marialaura Colantoni Laboratory of Nuclear Problems Dubna Marialaura.
Beam-plug and shielding studies related to HCAL and M2 Robert Paluch, Burkhard Schmidt November 25, 2014 1.

Beam-plug and shielding studies related to HCAL and M2 Robert Paluch, Burkhard Schmidt November 25,
EAR2 simulation update Collaboration board meeting 06.10.2011 Christina Weiss & Vasilis Vlachoudis.

EAR2 simulation update Collaboration board meeting Christina Weiss & Vasilis Vlachoudis.
Simulations with ‘Realistic’ Photon Spectra Mike Jenkins Lancaster University and The Cockcroft Institute.

Simulations with ‘Realistic’ Photon Spectra Mike Jenkins Lancaster University and The Cockcroft Institute.
1 Vacuum Requirements in the Detector Region from Beam Gas and other Considerations Takashi Maruyama (SLAC) LCWA 2009, Albuquerque October 2, 2009.

1 Vacuum Requirements in the Detector Region from Beam Gas and other Considerations Takashi Maruyama (SLAC) LCWA 2009, Albuquerque October 2, 2009.
Status of the  0  Experiment A. Gasparian NC A&T State University, Greensboro, NC for the PrimEx Collaboration Outline  Physics Motivation  PrimEx-I.

Status of the  0  Experiment A. Gasparian NC A&T State University, Greensboro, NC for the PrimEx Collaboration Outline  Physics Motivation  PrimEx-I.
Pair Spectrometer Design Optimization Pair Spectrometer Design Optimization A. Somov, Jefferson Lab GlueX Collaboration Meeting September 9 2009.

Pair Spectrometer Design Optimization Pair Spectrometer Design Optimization A. Somov, Jefferson Lab GlueX Collaboration Meeting September
Hall D Photon Beam Simulation and Rates Part 1: photon beam line Part 2: tagger Richard Jones, University of Connecticut Hall D Beam Line and Tagger Review.

Hall D Photon Beam Simulation and Rates Part 1: photon beam line Part 2: tagger Richard Jones, University of Connecticut Hall D Beam Line and Tagger Review.
Projected results for OLYMPUS 1000 hours each for e+ and e- assuming two (of eight) sectors instrumented and Lumi = 2 x 10 33 cm -2 s -1 – 100 mA on 3.

Projected results for OLYMPUS 1000 hours each for e+ and e- assuming two (of eight) sectors instrumented and Lumi = 2 x cm -2 s -1 – 100 mA on 3.
Diversion of Plasma in Beam Port with a Vertical Magnetic Field: 3-D Simulations D. V. Rose, D. R. Welch, and S. S. Yu Presented at the ARIES Project Meeting.

Diversion of Plasma in Beam Port with a Vertical Magnetic Field: 3-D Simulations D. V. Rose, D. R. Welch, and S. S. Yu Presented at the ARIES Project Meeting.
1 G4MICE studies of PID transverse acceptance MICE video conference 2006-05-24 Rikard Sandström.

1 G4MICE studies of PID transverse acceptance MICE video conference Rikard Sandström.
Downstream e-  identification 1. Questions raised by the Committee 2. Particle tracking in stray magnetic field 3. Cerenkov and calorimeter sizes 4. Preliminary.

Downstream e-  identification 1. Questions raised by the Committee 2. Particle tracking in stray magnetic field 3. Cerenkov and calorimeter sizes 4. Preliminary.
J. Tinslay 1, B. Faddegon 2, J. Perl 1 and M. Asai 1 (1) Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Menlo Park, CA, (2) UC San Francisco, San Francisco, CA Verification.

J. Tinslay 1, B. Faddegon 2, J. Perl 1 and M. Asai 1 (1) Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Menlo Park, CA, (2) UC San Francisco, San Francisco, CA Verification.
GLAST LAT Project Test Beam Meeting, June 6, 2006 S. Funk 1/6 PS Positron Simulations Stefan Funk June 6, 2006.

GLAST LAT Project Test Beam Meeting, June 6, 2006 S. Funk 1/6 PS Positron Simulations Stefan Funk June 6, 2006.
Diversion of Plasma in Beam Port with a Vertical Magnetic Field D. R. Welch, D. V. Rose, S. S. Yu and W. Sharp Presented at the ARIES Project Meeting April.

Diversion of Plasma in Beam Port with a Vertical Magnetic Field D. R. Welch, D. V. Rose, S. S. Yu and W. Sharp Presented at the ARIES Project Meeting April.
5/10/20101GlueX Col meeting, A. Gasparian1 The PrimEx HyCal Calorimeter A. Gasparian NC A&T State University, Greensboro, NC Outline  HyCal calorimeter.

5/10/20101GlueX Col meeting, A. Gasparian1 The PrimEx HyCal Calorimeter A. Gasparian NC A&T State University, Greensboro, NC Outline  HyCal calorimeter.
20 October, 2004GlueX Detector Review 1 The GlueX Detector Curtis A. Meyer This talk Next talk.

20 October, 2004GlueX Detector Review 1 The GlueX Detector Curtis A. Meyer This talk Next talk.
Experiment Rosen07: Measurement of R =  L /  T on Deuterium in the Nucleon Resonance Region. 1  Physics  Data Analysis  Cross Section calculation.

Experiment Rosen07: Measurement of R =  L /  T on Deuterium in the Nucleon Resonance Region. 1  Physics  Data Analysis  Cross Section calculation.
Design of the Photon Collimators for the ILC Positron Helical Undulator Adriana Bungau The University of Manchester Positron Source Meeting, July 2008.

Design of the Photon Collimators for the ILC Positron Helical Undulator Adriana Bungau The University of Manchester Positron Source Meeting, July 2008.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google