Impact of LHCf on BRAN and beam monitoring Y.Itow, H.Menjo (Nagoya University) The 1 st TAN integration workshop Mar10, 2006.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Status of DHCAL Slice Test Data Analysis Lei Xia ANL-HEP All results preliminary.
Advertisements

LHCf Aspen Workshop on CRP, Apr 2007 W.C. Turner – The LHCf Experiment1 LHCf - an experiment for measuring the very forward production of neutral.
M. Ruspa - FP420 meeting, DESY 18/05/06 1 G4 simulation: where are we? Marta Ruspa on behalf of Alexander Zokhin FP420 Collaboration Meeting DESY 18 th.
Alignment study 19/May/2010 (S. Haino). Summary on Alignment review Inner layers are expected to be kept “almost” aligned when AMS arrives at ISS Small.
ATLAS LHCf Detector 140m away from the interaction point LHCf: calibration of hadron interaction models for high energy cosmic-ray physics at the LHC energy.
LHCf: a LHC Detector for Astroparticle Physics LHCf: a LHC Detector for Astroparticle Physics Lorenzo Bonechi on behalf of the LHCf Collaboration * University.
Super-B Factory Workshop April 20-23, 2005 Super-B IR design M. Sullivan 1 Status on an IR Design for a Super-B Factory M. Sullivan for the Super-B Factory.
LHCf: Calibration of hadron interaction models for high energy cosmic-ray physics at the LHC energy T.Mase for the LHCf collaboration Nagoya University,
The performance of LHCf calorimeter was tested at CERN SPS in For electron of GeV, the energy resolution is < 5% and the position resolution.
Increasing Field Integral between Velo and TT S. Blusk Sept 02, 2009 SU Group Meeting.
MARS flux simulations - update Sergei Striganov Fermilab August 12, 2009.
Scintillator (semi)DHCAL? Vishnu Zutshi for. Introduction Can a scintillator (semi)digital calorimeter work? Cell sizes are necessarily 6-12 cm 2 Can.
The LHCf experiment Hiroaki MENJO INFN Firenze on behalf for the LHCf collaboration at 29 March 2010, MC4LHC.
The SLHC and the Challenges of the CMS Upgrade William Ferguson First year seminar March 2 nd
Beam profile measurements based on modern vertex detectors and beam-gas interactions Slides from: Colin Barschel - TIPP 2014 third international conference.
Contents of talk May 2 nd 2006 Y. Muraki on behalf of the LHCf 1. Physics goal 2. The BRAN detector 3. The particle distribution inside the BRAN 4. In.
1 Luminosity monitor and LHC operation H. Burkhardt AB/ABP, TAN integration workshop, 10/3/2006 Thanks for discussions and input from Enrico Bravin, Ralph.
SHMS Optics and Background Studies Tanja Horn Hall C Summer Meeting 5 August 2008.
Angular resolution study of isolated gamma with GLD detector simulation 2007/Feb/ ACFA ILC Workshop M1 ICEPP, Tokyo Hitoshi HANO collaborated with Acfa-Sim-J.
1 LumiCal Optimization and Design Takashi Maruyama SLAC SiD Workshop, Boulder, September 18, 2008.
CERN, July 7 th, 2010 LHCf status report Oscar Adriani Università degli Studi di Firenze INFN Sezione di Firenze On behalf of the LHCf Collaboration.
ATLAS Forward Detector Trigger ATLAS is presently planning to install forward detectors (Roman Pot system) in the LHC tunnel with prime goal to measure.
Comparison of hadron interaction models with measurement of forward spectra by the LHCf apparatus Hiroaki MENJO INFN Firenze, Italy on behalf for the LHCf.
Preliminary analysis of p-Pb data update n. 6 Lorenzo Bonechi LHCf Catania meeting – 19 December 2013.
AFP Introduction September 10th 2014 M. Bruschi, INFN Bologna (Italy) 1.
LCWS2004 Paris 1 Beam background study for GLC Tsukasa Aso, Toyama College of Maritime Technology and GLC Vertex Group H.Aihara, K.Tanabe, Tokyo Univ.
1 Muon Collider Backgrounds Steve Geer Fermilab Steve Geer MC Detector & Physics DOE June 24, 2009.
BES-III Workshop Oct.2001,Beijing The BESIII Luminosity Monitor High Energy Physics Group Dept. of Modern Physics,USTC P.O.Box 4 Hefei,
Apollo Go, NCU Taiwan BES III Luminosity Monitor Apollo Go National Central University, Taiwan September 16, 2002.
LHCf Report Takashi SAKO for the LHCf Collaboration 18-Dec-2009 CERN Main Auditorium.
Feasibility Study of Forward Calorimeter in ALICE experiment Sanjib Muhuri Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre Kolkata.
SIGNAL AND BACKGROUND SIMULATION AT THE RECOMBINATION CHAMBER Vadim TALANOV CERN and IHEP, Protvino Joint LHC Machine-Experiments Workshop on Very Forward.
Muon absolute flux measurement in anti-neutrino mode A.Ariga 1, C. Pistillo 1, S. Aoki 2 1 University of Bern, 2 Kobe University.
Magnetized hadronic calorimeter and muon veto for the K +   +  experiment L. DiLella, May 25, 2004 Purpose:  Provide pion – muon separation (muon veto)
Luminosity Monitoring Issues  ZDC  what’s the advantage?  problems  BBC  can they do it? A. Drees QCD critical point workshop, Mar
Luminosity measurement at LHC (The machine point of view) Enrico Bravin AB/BDI Large part of the material presented here has been produced by the LBNL.
April 5, 2003Gregory A. Davis1 Jet Cross Sections From DØ Run II American Physical Society Division of Particles and Fields Philadelphia, PA April 5, 2003.
March 22, 2006LHCf Technical Design ReportO. Adriani LHCf Technical Design Report CERN-LHCC LHCF-TDR February 2006 Measurement of Photons.
LHCf Detectors Sampling Calorimeter W 44 r.l, 1.6λ I Scintilator x 16 Layers Position Detector Scifi x 4 (Arm#1) Scilicon Tracker x 4(Arm#2) Detector size.
BRANs at HL-LHC Sune Jakobsen (BE-BI-PM) 1st HL-LHC WP13 Project Meeting
Overview of Wire Compensation for the LHC Jean-Pierre Koutchouk CARE-HHH Meeting on beam-beam effects and beam-beam compensation CERN 08/28/2008.
Gas detectors in a ZDC (at LHC) Edwin Norbeck and Yasar Onel University of Iowa For7 th CMS Heavy-Ion meeting at Delphi June 2003.
Beam Background Simulation at Belle/KEKB Motivation SR background Particle background Feedback to the detector design SR alarm Summary O. Tajima (Tohoku.
H. Matis, S. Hedges, M. Placidi, A. Ratti, W. Turner [+several students] (LBNL) R. Miyamoto (now at ESSS) H. Matis - LARP CM18 - May 8, Fluka Modeling.
1 Angular resolution study of isolated gamma with GLD detector simulation 2007/Feb/5 ACFA ILC Workshop M1 ICEPP, Tokyo Hitoshi HANO On behalf of the Acfa-Sim-J.
Physics Simulation for E
PPAC Jonathan Olson University of Iowa HCAL November 11-13, 2004.
LHCf: Integration and compatibility with the luminosity monitor
On behalf of the Acfa-Sim-J Group
Luminosity monitor and LHC operation
Operating IP8 at high luminosity in the HL-LHC era
Updates on vertex detector
Impact of running with LHCf and early Totem 90 m optics
The ATLAS Zero Degree Calorimeter Brookhaven National Laboratory, USA
IHEP group Shashlyk activity towards TDR
Kevin Burkett Harvard University June 12, 2001
The LHC collider in Geneva
on behalf for the LHCf collaboration
Radiation Backgrounds in the ATLAS New Small Wheel
News da LHCf Oscar Adriani Università degli Studi di Firenze
Special Considerations for SIDIS
Luminosity measurement at LHC (The machine point of view)
Luminometer Integration at IR2
HL-LHC operations with LHCb at high luminosity
LHCf - an experiment for measuring the very forward
Backgrounds using v7 Mask in 9 Si Layers at a Muon Higgs Factory
The Measurement of Forward Particle Production in LHC
LC Calorimeter Testbeam Requirements
CLIC luminosity monitoring/re-tuning using beamstrahlung ?
Presentation transcript:

Impact of LHCf on BRAN and beam monitoring Y.Itow, H.Menjo (Nagoya University) The 1 st TAN integration workshop Mar10, 2006

Typical run conditions Beam parameters for commissioning is desirable for us ! Beam parameter Value # of bunches < 43 Bunch separation > 2  sec Crossing angle 0 rad 140  rad downward Luminosity per bunch < 2 x cm -2 s -1 Luminosity < 0.8 x cm -2 s -1 Bunch intensity 4x10 10 ppb (  *=18m) 1x10 10 ppb (  *= 1m) ( No radiation problem for 10kGy by a “year” operation with this luminosity )

LHCf running scenario Phase-I – Parasite running during the early stage of LHC commissioning in 2007 – Remove the detector when luminosity reaches cm -2 s -1 level for radiation reason Phase-II –Re-install the detector at the next opportunity of low luminosity run –Presumably parasite running during TOTEM run in 2008 Phase-III –Future extension for p-A, A-A run with upgraded detectors.

Geometry The Detector #1 The Detector #2 Side view

LHCf 3 Cu bars The 1st three Cu bars will be replaced by the LHCf detector – 3 Cu bars (9.9cm t ): 21 r.l. / 2 int – LHCf has 22 W plates (0.7cmt): 47(44) r.l. / 1.7 int Difference is in their coverage – 2x2cm+4x4cm (detector #1) –2.5x2.5cm+3.5x3.5cm(detector #2) Effect on BRAN measurements –Reduction of shower particles at BRAN –Position dependence on beam displacement –Check by simple simulation ( by H. Menjo ) Solution :  If beam displacement is < a few mm, reduction is < 10%.  LHCf itself should provide the center of neutral flux instead

BRAN response vs beam displacement Since the LHCf detectors just cover a part of the aperture in front of the BRAN, the response of the BRAN depends on beam displacement. The ratio, ( #of neutral hadrons in the LHCf aperture / that for whole aperture) is estimated as a “reduction factor to BRAN” for various beam displacements at the TAN position. Here 10K inelastic interactions by the DPMJET3 model were used ( so the result slightly depends on the interaction model)

Flux vs beam displacements The Detector #1 The contour maps of energy flux of hadrons (energy×flux) in each aperture, all area (the left) or the LHCf aperture (the right), are shown for various positions of beam center. The Detector #2 H.Menjo

The BRAN reduction factor vs beam displacements The Detector #1 The Detector #2 The reduction factors for BRAN response for various positions of beam center. When beam center at the center of beam-pipe, the factors are 0.2 and 0.3 for the Detector #1 and Detector #2, respectively. H.Menjo

The dependence of the BRAN reduction factor on the beam displacements The Detector #1 The Detector #2 The relative change of the reduction factors for BRAN with respective to the nominal value for the case of the beam center at the beam-pipe center. If the position of beam center stays within a few mm from the beam-pipe center, the reduction factors do not change more than 10%. H.Menjo

Summary of BRAN reduction factors Detector #1Detector #2 X displacement Y displacement

Determination of neutral flux center by LHCf LHCf can provide the center of neutral flux from the collisions –LHCf has X-Y position sensitive layers, SciFi and Si for detector #1 and #2,respectively However the material of LHCf does not cover uniformly 10cm×10cm aperture – Complex position dependence of shower development – Also bring complex in the position determination by BRAN Need to study LHCf capability for position determination Position sensitive layers particles

Simulation MC simulation to provide position and energy of incident particles at LHCf – 1E6 interactions (DPMJET) – corresponding to 100sec data w/ L=10 29 Shower center position is assumed as – true hit position for gamma’s – 1mm smearing for hadrons Beam test result  ~ 200  m No position dependence of 

Particle density distribution H.Menjo

2-D Fit of flux distribution Use true  entering positions For hadrons, 1mm position resolution assumed Fit X-Y distribution of the flux with “2-D exponential” fucntion. (not used 2mm from edges) H.Menjo

Fitting accuracy for the neutral flux center ( at the 2x2cm calorimeter center ) Fitted with hadron flux at 2x2cm only H.Menjo

Fitting accuracy for the neutral flux center ( with Y offset of - 5mm) Fitted with hadron flux at 2x2cm only H.Menjo

Conclusion If the displacement of the beam center is less than a few mm, change of BRAN reduction factor is less than 10%. Neutral center can be measured with – < 0.5mm if the flux center is well inside the 2cmx2cm calorimter – a few mm if the flux center is out side of calorimeters The results should be interaction model dependent. However it can be tuned by the data itself. Next step –Full detector simulation including the BRAN

Typical event rate on LHCf Detector #1Detector #2 2 cm x 2 cm 4cm x 4cm2.5cmx2.5cm3.5cmx3.5cm s s 0s 0s hadrons Detector acceptance for single inelastic collision ( The detectors at “ the zero degree” position.) For L= cm -2 s -1, ~ 10kHz inelastic collisions  0 0 hadrons Rate at 2cm x 2cm 670 Hz 7 Hz 150 Hz 30% analysis efficiency Is assumed for hadrons

Results ( the flux center inside the calorimeter) True posfitted posDifference Hadron flux ( in cm ) Fit with the hadron flux at the 2cmx2cm calorimeter only H.Menjo

Results (detail) difference Gamma flux dist.hadron flux dist. True pos ( in cm) H.Menjo