MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June MICE collaboration meeting 12 at Frascati -- Introduction -- MICE: progress and challenges

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June Why MICE? Based on Muon collider ideas and development (Palmer et al, 92->), the Neutrino Factory concept (Geer, 1998) resonated in 1998 with the final demonstration of Atmospheric Neutrino Oscillations by the SuperK Collaboration. International workshops: NUFACT 99 (Lyon, France) NUFACT 00 (Montery, California) NUFACT 01 (Tsukuba, Japan) NUFACT 02 (London, UK) NUFACT 03 (Columbia,NY,USA) NUFACT 04 (Osaka, Japan) NUFACT 05 (Frascati,Italy)  Neutrino Factory is the ultimate tool for study of Neutrino Oscillations -- unique source of high energy e --reach/sensitivity better by order(s) of magnitude wrt other techniques (e.g. super-beams) for    ** matter effects ** *** leptonic CP violation *** **** e   and   **** NB : leptonic CP violation is a key ingredient in the leading explanations for the mystery of the baryon-antibaryon asymmetry in our universe    e + e   _

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June ~NOvA +PD

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June encouraging signs from CERN… report from Scientific Policy Committee to council

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June Avenues identified as promising a) Superbeam alone + large detector(s) (e.g. T2HK, NOvA) a) SuperBeam + Beta-Beam + Megaton detector (SB+BB+MD) Fréjus b) Neutrino Factory (NuFact) + magnetic detector (40kton)+… The physics abilities of the neutrino factory are superior but….. « what is the realistic time scale? » (Hardware) cost estimate of a neutrino factory ~1B€ + detectors. This needs to be verifed and ascertained on a localized scenario (CERN, RAL…) and accounting. The cost of a (BB+SB+MD) is not very different Cost/physics performance/feasibility comparison needed An ambitious neutrino programme is a distinct possibility, but it must be well prepared to have a good proposal in time for the big decision period in 2010 (Funding window: )  ‘scoping study’

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June Detectors (NEW!) Water Cherenkov (1000kton) Magnetized Iron Calorimeter (50kton) Low Z scintillator (100 kton) Liquid Argon TPC (100 kton) Hybrid Emulsion (4 kton) Near detectors (and instrumentation) Physics compare performance of various options on equal footing of parameters and conventions and agreed standards of resolutions, simulation etc. identify tools needed to do so (e.g. Globes upgraded) propose « best values » of baselines, beam energies etc.. Accelerator: M.Zisman -- proton driver (energy, time structure and consequences) -- target and capture (chose target and capture system) -- phase rotation and cooling -- acceleration and storage evaluate economic interplays and risks include a measure of costing and safety assessment AB + Ken Long Peter Dornan MICE and the SCOPING STUDY…

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June Time scales: NUFACT05 (Sunday 26 June 2005) launch of scoping study September 2005: ISS report0 NUFACT06 (summer 2006) discussion of results of scoping study September 2006 ISS report 2007 full design study proposal 2010 conclusions of Design Study & CDR NB: This matches well the time scales set up at CERN

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June Particle physicist: Q: Can a Neutrino Factory be built? Accelerator physisicst: A: YES! (US Study II, CERN) but… it is expensive, and many ingredients have never been demonstrated!  R&D is needed. (est. 5yrs) to 1.ascertain performance 2.reduce costs among critical items: ***Target*** *** COOLING *** Cooling component development programme+ ‘blast test’: MUCOOL collabration (US-Japan-UK) *** Acceleration ***

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June IONIZATION COOLING principle: this will surely work..! reality (simplified) ….maybe… Difficulty: affordable prototype of cooling section only cools beam by 10%, while standard emittance measurements barely achieve this precision. Solution: measure the beam particle-by-particle A delicate technology and integration problem Need to build a realistic prototype and verify that it works (i.e. cools a beam) Difficulties lay in particular in  operating RF cavities in Mag. Field,  interface with SC magnets and LH2 absorbers What performance can one get? state-of-the-art particle physics instrumentation will test state-of-the-art accelerator technology.  RF Noise!!

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June  Incoming muon beam Variable Diffuser Beam PID TOF 0 Cherenkov TOF 1 Trackers 1 & 2 measurement of emittance in and out Liquid Hydrogen absorbers 1,2,3 Downstream particle ID: TOF 2 Cherenkov Calorimeter RF cavities 1RF cavities 2 Spectrometer solenoid 1 Matching coils 1&2 Focus coils 1 Spectrometer solenoid 2 Coupling Coils 1&2 Focus coils 2Focus coils 3 Matching coils 1&2 10% cooling of 200 MeV/c muons requires ~ 20 MV of RF single particle measurements => measurement precision can be as good as  out /  in ) = never done before either…

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June MHz RF cavity with beryllium windows Liquid-hydrogen absorbers Scintillating-fiber tracker Muon Ionization Cooling Experiment Status: Approved at RAL(UK) First beam: Funded in: UK,CH,JP,NL,US Requests: Be,CH,It,JP,US Single-  beam ~200 MeV/c 4T spectrometer I 4T spectrometer II TOF Cooling cell (~10%)  =5-45cm, liquid H 2, RF Final PID: TOF Cherenkov Calorimeter Aims: demonstrate feasibility and performance of a section of cooling channel Main challenges: RF in magnetic field! meas. of emittance Safety issues Some prototyping:

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June Some challenges of MICE: 1. Operate RF cavities of relatively low frequency (200 MHz) at high gradient (16 MV/m) in highly inhomogeneous magnetic fields (1-3 T) dark currents (can heat up LH 2 ), breakdowns 2. Hydrogen safety (substantial amounts of LH 2 in vicinity of RF cavities) 3. Emittance measurement to relative precision of in environment of RF bkg requires low mass and precise tracker low multiple scattering redundancy to fight dark current induced background excellent immunity to RF noise require complete set of PID detectors (INFN) And… 4. Obtaining funding for R&D towards a facility that is not (yet) in the plans of a major lab

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June NUFACT NUFACT01 7:30 am Sept November 2001 January 2002 June 2002 January 2003 July 2003 October 2003 December 2003 June December 2004 March 2005 Re-activated the recognized need for muon cooling expt Workshops on Muon Cooling Experiment (CERN, Chicago, London) Steering group formed Workshop at CERN where final experiment took shape. Letter of Intent (LOI) submitted to PSI and RAL PSI cannot host experiment, will collaborate (beam solenoid) RAL IPRP Review Panel encouraged submission of a proposal Proposal submitted Recommendation by International Peer Review Panel ‘Scientific approval’ letter by RAL CEO JohnWood Project Manager appointed (P. Drumm, RAL) RAL CM: collaboration charter approved Gateway 1 review Gateway 1 passed on ‘amber’ Gateway 2/3 passed 10 green + 4 amber (MICE PHASE I) Release of funding approved by PPARC and CCLRC 9.7 M£ MICE is an international effort from the start.

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June at this point MICE (PhaseI) is an approved and funded project in 5 countries -- UK: 9.7M£ -- USA: 1.2 M$ approved for next three years (NSF+DOE) ( +RF source + MRI proposal -- some success) + propose to build solenoid magnet within MC budget (+ longer term plan for Coupling coil) (Zisman at CB) -- Japan: US-Japan ~$100k/yr, UK-Japan (travel funds) (+ 500k$ requested) -- Switzerland: PSI solenoid + Uni-Geneva-NSwissF (80KCHF/yr)+ 1 PDA+1PhDS -- Netherlands: Mag probes (in production!) + 1 PhDS + Proposal submitted in Italy (TOF, Calorimeter) and Belgium (Cherenkov) MICE is CERN recognized experiment RE11.

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June  - STEP I: April 2007 STEP II: October 2007 STEP III: 2008 STEP IV: 2008 STEP V 2008? STEP VI 2009? implementation in steps physics-based: understanding of systematics all configurations successfully matched optically PHASE I PHASE II

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June MICE is being designed simulated reviewed MOU’ed dug prototyped and built!

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June SIMULATION -- beam line : Turtle (Kevin Tilley) + G4beamline (Tom Roberts) match input beam (quads and dipoles) to MICE (solenoid) 600 ‘good muons’ per ISIS spill should be achievable  emittance measurement in 1 hr (stat) (work to do for diffuser, variety of optics, etc…) -- optics (Bob Plamer, Ulisse Bravar) ICOOL all steps of MICE have been optically matched (but not to the beam) both in flip mode and solenoid mode (proposed by Migliorati et al) -- physics simulation (G4MICE, Y. Torun et al)

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June SIMULATION and software. RF emission of X-rays (Rikard Sandstrom) less than difference between true and reconstructed Sci-fi simulation of the measurement includes noise dead channels etc.. (Malcolm Ellis et al) Left G4MICE Right ICOOL t E G4MICE-ICOOL comparison Chris Rogers good to 20 ps and a few 100 keV ‘Students are taking over the project’ ‘Simple things should be easy and complicated things should be possible’ Yagmur Torun EMCAL(Rome, Frascati)

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June requirements on spectrometer system: 1a reject incoming e, p,  TOF 0, TOF1) 1.b reject outgoing e => TOF2, Cerenkov + Calorimeter 2. measure x,y,Px, Py E (tracker) and t (TOF counters) to build 6D emittance particle by particle 3. resolution better than 10% of width at equilibrium emittance   meas =   true +   res =   true [ 1+ (  res /  true )2 ] (  correction less than 1%) 4. robust against noise from RF cavities  Sci-Fi tracker was validated with calculations based on G4MICE -- experimental input from prototype (dead channels, efficiency, resolution) -- calculated spectrum and time structure of RF field emission based on LabG 800MHz -- still will need to be scrupulous about multiple scattering in tracker  stepIII Sci-fi prototype II presently assembled  test at KEK in magnetic field (october)

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June Now same exercize needs to be done for TOF requires measured 50ps resolution  double layer scintillator construction of TOF0 prototype this year (Milano,Pavia, Padova, Geneva) funding available (GVA), proposal submitted (Italy) bias on longitudinal emittance ratio 1% 50ps from tracker energy resolution TOF0 (R4998 Hamamatsu with Bicron scintillator)

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June DAQ, controls and monitoring working group aims understand what instrumentation is needed and what data are needed at which frequency (per spill, per muon, independently) in order to perform comparison of data with simulation at the level of started to meet here at Frascati, will have dedicated workshop (so far: Bross+Yoshida+Graulich+Radicioni+Drumm  will need some accelerator physicists!)

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June RF module MICE is foresen with 8 RF cavities Closed with curved Be windows (increase gradient / MW RF power) 201 MHz First cavity prototyped (MUCOOL) Completion in April 2005 RF power sources : Will be assembled from equipement refurbished from Berkeley, Los Alamos, CERN, RAL. Needed 8 MW peak power  23 MV acceleration Operation at LN2 foreseen to increase Volts / MW

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June Initial inspections of 4616 circuits LBL equipment arrived Jan 05 Initial inspections 4616 circuits look ok ! RF circuits arrived from LBNL to Daresbury Lab. MICE test area at Daresbury Moss

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June MICE Muon Beam Design integration: Beam line and shielding, cryogenics MICE: Support systems, RF, services, …

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June Paul Drumm MICE Project Manager Prof. John Wood RAL CEO MOU for PSI solenoid counter-signed

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June Hydrogen Safety Safety Review process under way Internal review organized in Berkeley in Dec Reviewers: D. Allspach (FNAL), G. Benincasa (CERN), M. Seely (Jlab), L. Starritt (NASA), J. Weisend (SLAC), J. Wells (RAL) Evacuated buffer tank needed? NO Burst valves and relief valves? YES Separate vents for vacuum and hydrogen? YES Detailed answers issued. Proceeding now to full safety revue (toward fall 2005) to be set up at this meeting

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June Design and safety working group nominated to ensure that MICE is designed and built according to appropriate and safe engineering and according to RAL safety rules. This will happen with 3 successive milestones internal audit external review (production readiness) external review (OK to operate) production reviews pertinent to PHASE I will have to be passed ***before end 2005*** …! Document Review Review FINAL Document Audit Operate RAL Review RAL

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June Time Line It will be timely (…and not too soon!) to have by then a full design for a cost-optimized neutrino factory, with no questions about practical feasibility of ionization cooling If all goes well and funding is adequate, Muon Ionization cooling will have been demonstrated and measured precisely by 2009 At that time: MINOS and CNGS will have started and measured  m 13 2 more precisely J-Parc-SK (and reactor expt?) will be about to start (  13 measurement ) LHC will be starting as well

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June MICE is getting REAL! First beam 1st April 2007 **** 365* = 642 days to data taking !!!

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June AIMS of the meeting: review ongoing activities design and safety reviews: where do we stand? are we on track to be ready to take data in April 2007? design of diffuser, impact on running strategy? see formation of DAQ Controls and Monitoring group continue to broaden simulation effort  analysis forum creation of editorial board foreseen in MICE constitution NB: we had 6 contributions to PAC05 NB we strongly encourage everyone to document their work within the framework of MICE with MICE Notes!

MICE collaboration meeting Alain Blondel June Editorial Board This body approves publications from the Collaboration. Two types of publications are foreseen. Collaboration Publications These publications are issued as ‘MICE Collaboration’ publications and it is expected that all active members of the collaboration will sign. All analysis results from the experimental data are expected to be in this category as are descriptions of the experiment as a whole and its performance. These must be approved by the Editorial Board. Limited Publications Publications by a limited number of members of the collaboration concerning e.g. the construction and performance of specific subcomponents of the experiment. They are not issued as ‘MICE Collaboration’ publications, however it is recommended that these papers are also submitted to the Editorial Board for approval so that the management are aware of them and can advise of any possible conflicts with other members which may occur.