1 Downstream scraping and detector sizes Rikard Sandström University of Geneva MICE collaboration meeting 2007-02-24 CERN.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
January 14, 2004 TJR - - UPDATED 1/25/04 1 MICE Beamline Analysis Using g4beamline Including Jan 25 Updates for Kevin’s JAN04 Beamline Design Tom Roberts.
Advertisements

1 Acceptance & Scraping Chris Rogers Analysis PC
PID Detector Size & Acceptance Chris Rogers Analysis PC
1 Progress report on Calorimeter design comparison simulations MICE detector phone conference Rikard Sandström.
Emittance definition and MICE staging U. Bravar Univ. of Oxford 1 Apr Topics: a) Figure of merit for MICE b) Performance of MICE stages.
FIGURE OF MERIT FOR MUON IONIZATION COOLING Ulisse Bravar University of Oxford 28 July 2004.
TJR Feb 10, 2005MICE Beamline Analysis -- TRD SEPT041 MICE Beamline Analysis – TRD SEPT04 Tom Roberts Muons, Inc. February 10, 2005.
M.apollonioMICE Analysis meeting 23/1/20071 M. Apollonio – University of Oxford Radius of diffuser and sizes for PID.
Summary of downstream PID MICE collaboration meeting Fermilab Rikard Sandström.
MICE CM16, RAL, 11 Oct 2006V. Palladino Plans for MICE PI detectors & Shielding MICE CM16, RAL Oct 11, 2006 V. Palladino, Univ & INFN Napoli for the small.
1 EMCal & PID Rikard Sandström Universite de Geneve MICE collaboration meeting 26/6-05.
1 PID, emittance and cooling measurement Rikard Sandström University of Geneva MICE Analysis phone conference.
Changing the absorbers: how does it fit in the MICE experimental programme? Besides the requirement that the amount of multiple scattering material be.
30 March Global Mice Particle Identification Steve Kahn 30 March 2004 Mice Collaboration Meeting.
1 Downstream PID update Rikard Sandström PID phone conference
TJR Sept 22, 2004MICE Beamline Analysis -- SEPT041 MICE Beamline Analysis – SEPT04 Tom Roberts Muons, Inc. September 22, 2004.
V.Daniel Elvira Status Report on Cooling Simulations using GEANT4 Motivation: Explore a realistic design of a 44/88 MHz based cooling channel for a -factory.
OPTICS UPDATE Ulisse Bravar University of Oxford 3 August 2004.
1 PID status MICE Analysis phone conference Rikard Sandström.
1 G4MICE studies of PID transverse acceptance MICE video conference Rikard Sandström.
Downstream transversal sizes Rikard Sandström University of Geneva MICE detector meeting.
PID Detector Size & Acceptance Chris Rogers Analysis PC
MICE analysis meeting - (6/4/2006) 1 Update on MICE – step III M. Apollonio – University of Oxford.
MICE analysis meeting - (21/09/2006) 1 Transmittance, scraping and maximum radii for MICE STEPVI M. Apollonio – University of Oxford.
1 G4MICE downstream distributions G4MICE plans Rikard Sandström Universite de Geneve MICE collaboration meeting 27/6-05.
Chris Rogers, MICE CM16 Wednesday Plenary Progress in Cooling Channel Simulation.
Beam line characterization with the TOFs1 Demonstrating the emittance-momentum matrix Mark Rayner, CM26 California, 24 March Initial.
Software parallel session summary MICE collaboration meeting INFN, Frascati 27/6-05.
1 OPTICS OF STAGE III Ulisse Bravar University of Oxford 6 October 2004.
1 Losses in the Cooling Channel Malcolm Ellis PID Meeting 1 st March 2005.
Simulated real beam into simulated MICE1 Mark Rayner CM26.
Downstream e-  identification 1. Questions raised by the Committee 2. Particle tracking in stray magnetic field 3. Cerenkov and calorimeter sizes 4. Preliminary.
1 Downstream PID update - How cooling section affects TOF measurement Rikard Sandström PID phone conference
30 June 2004MICE VC1 MICE  functions Since last VC report: –New Mike Green configurations for decreased spacing between focus and matching coils of 400mm,
M.apollonioImperial College - London1 M. Apollonio University of Oxford the MICE diffuser: issues and operation MICE beamline review Nov. 16 th 2007 Imperial.
Beam Parameter Study - preliminary findings Tim Carlisle.
1 Progress report on Calorimeter design comparison simulations MICE detector phone conference Rikard Sandström.
1 PID Detector Size & Acceptance Chris Rogers Analysis PC
Jun 27, 2005S. Kahn -- Ckov1 Simulation 1 Ckov1 Simulation and Performance Steve Kahn June 27, 2005 MICE Collaboration PID Meeting.
Mark Rayner, Analysis workshop 4 September ‘08: Use of TOFs for Beam measurement & RF phasing, slide 1 Use of TOFs for Beam measurement & RF phasing Analysis.
RF background simulations MICE collaboration meeting Fermilab Rikard Sandström.
1 Tracker Window & Diffuser Radius vs Scraping Aperture Chris Rogers Analysis PC 6th April 06.
M.apollonio/j.cobbMICE UK meeting- RAL - (9/1/2007) 1 Single Particle Amplitude M. Apollonio – University of Oxford.
1 EMCal design MICE collaboration meeting Fermilab Rikard Sandström.
Diffuser Studies Chris Rogers, IC/RAL MICE VC 09 March 2005.
1 Simulations of MICE March 2005 BENE Week Rikard Sandström Geneva University.
M.apollonioCM17 -CERN- (22/2-25/2/2007)1 M. Apollonio – University of Oxford sizes for PID & shields.
Feb 10, 2005 S. Kahn -- Pid Detectors in G4MicePage 1 Pid Detector Implementation in G4Mice Steve Kahn Brookhaven National Lab 10 Feb 2005.
First AWAKE dump calculations Helmut Vincke. Beam on dump Muon axis inside and outside CERN Distances: Beam impact point to end of West hall: ~300 m Beam.
MICE PID size &scraping MICE CM16, RAL, Oct V. Palladino, Univ & INFN Napoli for R. Sandrstrom and others contributing to this effort Yagmur, Holger,
11 Nov 2008PC Analysis PC Schedule 2008 Tuesdays fortnightly 9 September  23 September  2 October  CM22  11 November  25 November 9 December.
Marco apollonio/J.CobbMICE coll. meeting 16- RAL - (10/10/2006) 1 Transmittance, scraping and maximum radii for MICE STEPVI M. Apollonio – University of.
1M. Ellis - NFMCC - 31st January 2007 MICE Analysis.
PID simulations Rikard Sandström University of Geneva MICE collaboration meeting RAL.
1 PID Detector Size & Acceptance Chris Rogers Analysis PC
PID Detector Requirements for Emittance Measurement Chris Rogers, MICE PID Review, Thursday Oct 12.
RF background, update on analysis Rikard Sandström, Geneva University MICE Analysis phone conference, October 30, 2007.
Calorimeter design & simulations for Stage I Rikard Sandström University of Geneva MICE PID phone conference
ch/~bdl/lepc/lepc.ppt 1 MICE Status and Plans Rikard Sandström Université de Geneve International Scoping Study CERN,
Mark Rayner – Analysis SessionCM25, 4 November Beam characterization by the TOFs Mark Rayner The University of Oxford MICE CM25.
M. Ellis - MICE Collaboration Meeting - Wednesday 27th October Sci-Fi Tracker Performance Software Status –RF background simulation –Beam simulation.
Mark Rayner – Analysis SessionCM25, 4 November The TOF detectors: Beyond particle identification Mark Rayner The University of Oxford MICE CM25.
Muons, Inc. Feb Yonehara-AAC AAC Meeting Design of the MANX experiment Katsuya Yonehara Fermilab APC February 4, 2009.
Marco apollonioAnalysis Meeting (9/12/2006)1 transmission vs amplitude with a finite size diffuser M. Apollonio – University of Oxford.
C. Rogers, ASTeC Intense Beams Group Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
Beam Energy-Loss measurement
MICE Step IV Lattice Design Based on Genetic Algorithm Optimizations
C. Rogers, ASTeC Intense Beams Group Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
Design of the MANX experiment
The Detector System of the MICE Experiment
Presentation transcript:

1 Downstream scraping and detector sizes Rikard Sandström University of Geneva MICE collaboration meeting CERN

2 Introduction Study A –Full phase space beam approach. –Radial positions measured at cryostat end thick iron shield surfaces TOF2 thin iron shield surfaces calorimeter layer 0 surfaces calorimeter center and end. Study B –Matched beam approach. 140 MeV/c, 200 MeV/c –Radial positions measured at same z as in Study A.

3 Setup, study A Geometry: –MICE stage6, with updated positions and iron shields. Iron shields not physically present in simulation, but using Virtual detectors at their surfaces. –Now with cryostats physically present. –Empty absorbers. Field: –Holger’s empty channel, beta 42 cm, 200 MeV/c field. 07/CoilconfigWangNMRironshield200MeVbeta42emptychannel.g4mice 07/CoilconfigWangNMRironshield200MeVbeta42emptychannel.g4mice –RF field OFF Beam: –The same “full phase space beam” as was used before.

4 There are no good events going through the cryostat!

5

6

7

8 Outside calorimeter (air)

9 Again… The large radius events are all low momentum, Hence, setting a minimum → pz fixing maximum rho !

10 Setup, study B Geometry: –MICE stage6, with updated positions and iron shields. Iron shields not physically present in simulation, but using Virtual detectors at their surfaces. –Now with cryostats physically present. –4.2 mm diffuser for 140 MeV/c, 7.6 mm diffuser for 200 MeV/c. –Empty absorbers. Field: –Holger’s empty channel, beta 42 cm, 140 MeV/c and 200 MeV/c fields respectively. 07/CoilconfigWangNMRironshield140MeVbeta42emptychannel.g4mice 07/CoilconfigWangNMRironshield140MeVbeta42emptychannel.g4mice –RF field OFF. Beam: –Matched 140 MeV/c beam.

11 Matched 200 MeV/c, thick shield

12 Matched 200 MeV/c, TOF2

13 Matched 200 MeV/c, thin shield

14 Matched 200 MeV/c, EMCal0 Outside calorimeter (air)

15 This beam uses the same field map as the full phase space beam, hence the same dependency on momentum

16 Matched 140 MeV/c, thick shield

17 Matched 140 MeV/c, TOF2

18 Matched 140 MeV/c, thin shield

19 Matched 140 MeV/c, EMCal0 Few muons make it through the preshower layer.

20 Same tendency as before, but shifted w.r.t. p z due to different field map.

21 Emittance Typically it is the high amplitude particles which are missing the detectors. –High bias on emittance measurement. However, MICE will measure change of emittance! –If no change of emittance between upstream and downstream, losing events does not affect the change of emittance measurement. This simulation contains no RF field, and empty absorbers, so bias on change of emittance as a function of TOF2 radius not meaningful here. –Instead, quoting bias on emittance measurement.

22 Emittance Using no field approximation at TOF2 exit to calculate emittances: –ε = sqrt(  x 2  px 2 -  xpx 2 )/m p z [MeV/c]εxεx εyεy p z [MeV/c]R [cm]dε x / ε x dε y / ε y ppm-0.80 ppm ppm-0.80 ppm Requiring dε/ ε < 1 ppm, gives minimum radiuses Typically 1 ppm is at radius where 0.1 ppm is lost.

23 Conclusions The cryostat is no longer an issue. Setting TOF2 radius to –25 cm, start losing events pz<225 MeV/c –30 cm, start losing events pz<169 MeV/c –35 cm, start losing events pz<129 MeV/c According to no field approximation, minimum radius of TOF2 should be 42 cm to achieve dε/ ε < 1 ppm. –30 cm for 200 MeV/c settings. –Usually 0.1 ppm loss radially is barely acceptable.