I. Machikhiliyan (LAPP, Annecy) for the LHCb calorimeter group

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ATLAS Tile Calorimeter Performance Henric Wilkens (CERN), on behalf of the ATLAS collaboration.
Advertisements

Jet and Jet Shapes in CMS
27 th June 2008Johannes Albrecht, BEACH 2008 Johannes Albrecht Physikalisches Institut Universität Heidelberg on behalf of the LHCb Collaboration The LHCb.
J. Leonard, U. Wisconsin 1 Commissioning the Trigger of the CMS Experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider Jessica L. Leonard Real-Time Conference Lisbon,
The performance of LHCf calorimeter was tested at CERN SPS in For electron of GeV, the energy resolution is < 5% and the position resolution.
Application of Neural Networks for Energy Reconstruction J. Damgov and L. Litov University of Sofia.
FMS review, Sep FPD/FMS: calibrations and offline reconstruction Measurements of inclusive  0 production Reconstruction algorithm - clustering.
SPD spill-over and the subtractor Míriam Calvo 23 June 2010.
The Transverse detector is made of an array of 256 scintillating fibers coupled to Avalanche PhotoDiodes (APD). The small size of the fibers (5X5mm) results.
Study of response uniformity of LHCb ECAL Mikhail Prokudin, ITEP.
Monitoring system of the LHCb electromagnetic calorimeter NEC’2007, Varna, Bulgaria Ivan Korolko (ITEP Moscow)
1 Status of the calorimeter PMT’s time alignment LHCb CALO meeting Anatoli Konoplyannikov /ITEP/ Introduction Development status of the PMT time.
A N DY Status Commissioning with colliding beams (p  +p  at  s=500 GeV) L.C.Bland, for AnDY 8 March 2011 Time Meeting, BNL.
Light Calibration System (LCS) Temperature & Voltage Dependence Option 2: Optical system Option 2: LED driver Calibration of the Hadronic Calorimeter Prototype.
Calibration of the CMS Electromagnetic Calorimeter with first LHC data
28 June 2010 LHCb week St Petersburg M.N Minard 1 Calorimeter status Hardware status Controls & monitoring Timing alignment Calorimeters calibration Pending.
Shashlyk FE-DAQ requirements Pavel Semenov IHEP, Protvino on behalf of the IHEP PANDA group PANDA FE-DAQ workshop, Bodenmais April 2009.
08-June-2006 / Mayda M. VelascoCALOR Chicago1 Initial Calibration for the CMS Hadronic Calorimeter Barrel Mayda M. Velasco Northwestern University.
The Status of the ATLAS Experiment Dr Alan Watson University of Birmingham on behalf of the ATLAS Collaboration.
BES-III Workshop Oct.2001,Beijing The BESIII Luminosity Monitor High Energy Physics Group Dept. of Modern Physics,USTC P.O.Box 4 Hefei,
Andreas Schopper Overview of the LHCb Calorimeter System TIPP09 Tsukuba, Japan March 2009 Tsukuba, March 2009TIPP091 presented by Andreas Schopper.
Calo preparation for 2015 Goals: -Trigger stability -Good calibration for HLT2 processing -Improved calibration ( timing, e/gamma response) for all calo.
1 Calorimeters LED control LHCb CALO meeting Anatoli Konoplyannikov /ITEP/ Status of the calorimeters LV power supply and ECS control Status of.
1 LHCb CALO commissioning meeting Anatoli Konoplyannikov /ITEP/ XCAL commissioning with LED Outline Scan data collected on HCAL and ECAL during.
5-9 June 2006Erika Garutti - CALOR CALICE scintillator HCAL commissioning experience and test beam program Erika Garutti On behalf of the CALICE.
(s)T3B Update – Calibration and Temperature Corrections AHCAL meeting– December 13 th 2011 – Hamburg Christian Soldner Max-Planck-Institute for Physics.
The LHCb Electromagnetic Calorimeter Ivan Belyaev, ITEP/Moscow.
STAR Collaboration Meeting, BNL – march 2003 Alexandre A. P. Suaide Wayne State University Slide 1 EMC Update Update on EMC –Hardware installed and current.
ScECAL Beam FNAL Short summary & Introduction to analysis S. Uozumi Nov ScECAL meeting.
CP violation in B decays: prospects for LHCb Werner Ruckstuhl, NIKHEF, 3 July 1998.
26/May/2008Calor LHCb Preshower(PS) and Scintillating pad detector (SPD): commissioning, calibration, and monitoring Eduardo Picatoste Universitat.
 0 life time analysis updates, preliminary results from Primex experiment 08/13/2007 I.Larin, Hall-B meeting.
PSD upgrade: concept and plans - Why the PSD upgrade is necessary? - Concept of the PSD temperature stabilization and control - Upgrade of HV control system.
Calibration of energies at the photon collider Valery Telnov Budker INP, Novosibirsk TILC09, Tsukuba April 18, 2009.
Overview of the LHCb calorimeter detectors Pascal Perret LPC Clermont 8 February 2013 CERN Detector Seminar.
Sergey BarsukElectromagnetic Calorimeter for 1 Electromagnetic Calorimeter for the LHCb experiment Perugia, Italy March 29 – April 2, 2004 ECAL CALO Sergey.
27/02/2014 INSTR14 S.Filippov1 First Years of Running for the LHCb Calorimeter System Sergey Filippov (Institute for Nuclear Research of RAS, Moscow) on.
1 XCAL LED quality check and time alignment consideration CALO meeting Anatoli Konoplyannikov [ITEP / LAPP] Outline  CALO sub-detector status.
3/06/06 CALOR 06Alexandre Zabi - Imperial College1 CMS ECAL Performance: Test Beam Results Alexandre Zabi on behalf of the CMS ECAL Group CMS ECAL.
The LHCb Calorimeter Triggers LAL Orsay and INFN Bologna.
 13 Readout Electronics A First Look 28-Jan-2004.
First collisions in LHC
COMPASS calorimeters S. Platchkov IRFU, CEA-Saclay GDR, 8-9 avril 2008
PreShower Characterisations
K+e+γ using OKA detector
Pre-calibration of PM gain by photo-statistics
FSC status and plans Pavel Semenov IHEP, Protvino
The LHCb Calorimeter system
Test Beam Request for the Semi-Digital Hadronic Calorimeter
Resolution Studies of the CMS ECAL in the 2003 Test Beam
NRC Kurchatov Institute, ITEP I. Korolko, M.Prokudin, Yu.Zaitsev
PSD Front-End-Electronics A.Ivashkin, V.Marin (INR, Moscow)
Approved Plots from CMS Cosmic Runs (mostly CRUZET, some earlier)
Preparation of LHCb for data taking
PEDESTAL STABILITY OF HCAL DURING GLOBAL RUNS AND 2009 CASTOR DQM ANALYSIS Emine GÜRPINAR Cukurova University 7/31/2018.
Panagiotis Kokkas Univ. of Ioannina
Detection of muons at 150 GeV/c with a CMS Preshower Prototype
A First Look J. Pilcher 12-Mar-2004
CMS ECAL Calibration and Test Beam Results
Physics with the LHCb calorimeter
The Pixel Hybrid Photon Detectors of the LHCb RICH
The Level-0 Calorimeter Trigger and the software triggers
° status report analysis details: overview; “where we are”; plans: before finalizing result.. I.Larin 02/13/2009.
Use of Beam Loss Monitor type detectors in CNGS muon station
BESIII EMC electronics
LHCb HCAL: performance and calibration
Plans for checking hadronic energy
Commissioning of the ALICE-PHOS trigger
LHCb Particle Identification and Performance
Installation, Commissioning and Startup of ATLAS & CMS Experiments
Presentation transcript:

I. Machikhiliyan (LAPP, Annecy) for the LHCb calorimeter group Current status and performance of the LHCb electromagnetic and hadron calorimeters I. Machikhiliyan (LAPP, Annecy) for the LHCb calorimeter group

The LHCb detector Forward single-arm spectrometer aimed at studies of CP-symmetry violation and rear decays of b-quark The LHCb Calorimeter system: Fast trigger on energetic e/γ/πº/h Distance to i.p. ~13 m Solid angle coverage 300x250 mrad Four sub-detectors: Scintillator Pad Detector SPD (by Ricardo), Preshower PS (by Valentin), Electromagnetic (ECAL) and Hadron (HCAL) calorimeters Irina.Machikhilyan@cern.ch

Electromagnetic Calorimeter 3312 separate modules of square section 12.12x12.12 см² “Shashlik” technology: lead absorber, volume ratio Pb:Sc 2:4 Moliere radius: 3.5 cm longitudinal size is equivalent to 25 X / 1.1 λ average light yield:~3000 p.e./GeV energy resolution (beam tests): σE/E = (8. ÷ 10.)%/√E  0.9% Transverse segmentation: three sections Inner, Middle and Outer (9, 4 and 1 cells per module) Number of readout channels: 6016 Dynamic range: 10 ÷ 12 GeV of transverse energy E(max, GeV)=7 + 10 /sin(θ) sin(θ) = √(x²+y²)/ (x²+y²+z²) I Irina.Machikhilyan@cern.ch

Hadron calorimeter 26x2 big horizontal modules The same design as in ATLAS TileCal: interleaving Sc tiles and iron plates parallel to the beam axis. Volume ratio Fe:Sc = 5.58:1 longitudinal size: 5.6 λ → mostly used as triggering device (~70% of L0 decisions) average light yield: 105 p.e./GeV energy resolution (beam tests): σE/E = (69±5)%/√E  (9±2)% Transverse segmentation: two sections Inner and Outer (cell size 13.1x13.1 cm² and 26.2x26.2 cm² cell size) Number of readout channels: 1488 Dynamic range: 15 ГэВ of transverse energy I Irina.Machikhilyan@cern.ch

LED-based Monitoring System Readout System Light readout: photomultipliers LHC bunch spacing: 25 ns → shaping of PM anode pulses 192 Ecal + 54 Hcal Front-End Boards. Signals are integrated and processed by 12-bit (80 pC) 40 MHz two-stage bipolar flash ADC. Trigger part: selection of cluster candidate (2x2) with highest Et LED-based Monitoring System Major goals: check readout channels serviceability control the stability of r/o chains ECAL: one LED illuminates a group of channels (9 in the Inner, 16 in the Middle/Outer sections); HCAL: 2 LEDs per each PM Stability of LEDs themselves is traced by PIN photodiodes Irina.Machikhilyan@cern.ch

Operating calorimeters: major issues Time alignment: on the general level: precise synchronization of calorimeters with each other and with accelerator cycle on the level of each detector: adjustment of timing of individual r/o channels (up to 5 ns dispersion, compensated by delay chips on the level of Front-End Boards) Absolute calibration of detector response on the level of individual cells Monitoring of the stability of calorimeters with LED / PIN systems. Done in parallel with data taking: LEDs are fired synchronously with one of “empty” bunches with frequency 50-100 Hz Irina.Machikhilyan@cern.ch

Shape of the integrated signal Time alignment Shape of the integrated signal Artificial timing shift on 12.5 ns to calculate the mis-alignment in time Additional few ns delay scan to verify the safe position on the ‘flat-top’ Special time-alignment events (TAE) containing up to 7 consecutive time slots around the one under interest Cosmic particles + special injection events in 2009: relative time alignment of different detectors and their subparts (like r/o crates etc) Fine absolute synchronization of individual r/o channel with accelerator cycle: 450x450 GeV collisions in the end of 2009 / cross-checked in the end of March 2010 with 3.5x3.5 TeV collisions dt =-0.5ns S(dt) = 0.4 ns R , final time alignment Irina.Machikhilyan@cern.ch 7

Stability of r/o chains for 2010 data taking 6 Apr 26 Apr Ecal: 83% - within 1% 97% - within 2% 99% - within 3% Hcal: 68% - within 1% 93% - within 2% 98% - within 3% Relative run # (physics only) Typical behaviour of the normalized response on LED in one r/o channel Stability of r/o chains (6 Apr – 26 Apr 2010). LED drift if any is corrected according to PIN readings Stability of LEDs (by PINs): Ecal: mean 0.5% (rms 0.5%) for 93% of cells <1% for 98% of cells<3% Hcal: mean 0.6%, rms 0.3% for 87% of cells<1% for 99% of cells<2% !WORST CASE! ~2% ~20% Relative run # (physics only) Relative run # (physics only) Response on unstable LED (ADC cnt), one r/o channel (ECAL) Normalized PM/PIN ratio (the same r/o channel) Irina.Machikhilyan@cern.ch

Ecal: pre-calibration of PM gains Two steps: measurement of absolute value of G in the reference point (high gain, low LED flash intensity). Presumption is that the width of the distribution of PM responses on LED is defined by photostatistics ~√Np.e. G = К * (σ(LED)² - σ(pedestal)²) / (A(LED) – A(pedestal)) К – parameter, defined by hardware properties (ADC sensitivity, modules light yield, etc) measurement of the normalized dependence G(HV) with respect to the reference point: according to the change of PM response with HV at fixed intensity Reference point G in reference point (3 months interval between two measurements). Mean/σ are compatible with the statistical error G Ecal operating range Mean:0.029 σ =0.058 HV, kV [G(2)-G(1)] / G[2] Irina.Machikhilyan@cern.ch

Ecal: cell-to-cell inter-calibration level before 2009 data taking G(HV): measured for 99.5% of phototubes: statistical error: 3-4% accuracy of the method: within 8% Dispersion of modules light yield: < 8% R/O ADC sensitivities: within ±5% Clear πº→γγ signal was observed immediately after LHC start-up in the end of 2009 Di-photon invariant mass distribution, MeV/c² Irina.Machikhilyan@cern.ch 10

Ecal calibration: Energy Flow Improvement of cell-to-cell inter-calibration up to 4% level on the basis of relatively small statistics (few M of events) Smoothing of the map of transverse energy depositions in detector: for each cell correction factor is produced on the basis of the mean deposit over 8 neighbouring cells (3x3) No information from other sub-detectors is required; raw energy deposits in detector cells are used → no dependence on MC-based parameters employed in the reconstruction software Absolute normalization: position of the net peak for πº→γγ in given section. [common scaling factor ~6% for all Ecal cells to achieve right value] Before After MC π°, Inner 8.5±0.2 7.2±0.1 5.9±0.1 π°, Middle 8.1±0.2 6.8±0.1 6.3±0.1 π°, Outer 9.6±0.2 7.9±0.1 8.0±0.1 η 6.1±0.4 5.4±0.3 3.2±0.2 Outer Hcal (calibrated by other method) Relative widths of πº→γγ / η→γγ peaks, % Irina.Machikhilyan@cern.ch

Ecal: fine calibration Next step: fine calibration with π°’s on the level of individual cells. Method is successfully tested on Monte Carlo data. Real data: large amount of statistics is required (up to 250M for most peripheral cells). Under collection. Energy of photon / electron candidate: E = α E3x3 + β Eps + in case of photons SPD is involved to suppress conversions in front of the Calorimeter System PS is now calibrated with precision better than 5% (Valentin’s talk) α / β factors are under verification Work on fine calibration of Ecal with π° is well in progress. Long-term plans: look at electrons (E/p method) E/p Middle Irina.Machikhilyan@cern.ch

Physics with Ecal (2010) (also for PS and SPD) N(η)/N(π°) =(16.7±1.6)% MC:(17.6±1.7)% η→γγ η→γ γ π°→γ γ Di-photon invariant mass distribution, MeV/c² Di-photon invariant mass distribution, MeV/c² Irina.Machikhilyan@cern.ch 13

Hcal: radioactive source calibration Originally developed for ATLAS TileCal Two ~ 10 mCi Cs sources (one per each detector half) driven by hydraulic system Each source propagates consecutively through 26 Hcal modules with an average velocity of about 20–40 cm/s. System of dedicated integrators measures PM anode currents every 5 ms Relation factor between anode current and the measured particle energy is known from test beam: Inner: C=41.07 (nA/mCi)/(pCl/GeV) Outer: C=20.88 (nA/mCi)/(pCl/GeV) Accuracy of the method: absolute normalization ≈10% - dominated by the uncertainty in the sources activity cell-to-cell intercalibration: better than 4% (test beam, confirmed by Energy Flow method) Calibration is done regularly (every 1-2 months) 137 PM gain variation, ~3 month Irina.Machikhilyan@cern.ch

Hcal: basic signals(2010) Outer Inner MC prediction: 0.824 E/p E/p Inner Outer MIPs, muons MIPs, muons E, MeV E, MeV Irina.Machikhilyan@cern.ch 15

Conclusions both Ecal and Hcal are in good shape: >99.8% of r/o channels are operational calorimeters provide L0 trigger since the moment when LHC started to deliver pp-interactions smooth and stable operation during first months of data taking for the vast majority of the cells timing is set with precision ±1ns both Ecal and Hcal are already inter-calibrated with accuracy better than 4÷5%: Ecal fine calibration is in progress accuracy of the Hcal calibration is already sufficient to fulfill all detector tasks in the LHCb experiment Irina.Machikhilyan@cern.ch 16