TPC ExB distortion at LHC-ALICE experiment Yasuto Hori for the ALICE-TPC collaboration Center for Nuclear Study, University of Tokyo 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Time Projection Chamber
Advertisements

TPC status Marian Ivanov. Outlook TPC performance ExB correction Alignment Nonlinearities and edge effects Drift velocity calibration.
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.
E-field calculations for the TPC/HBD N. Smirnov Upgrade Working Group Meeting 05/13/03, BNL.
HLT & Calibration.
Measuring distortions in a TPC with photoelectrons D. Karlen University of Victoria & TRIUMF June 2, 2007.
1 HLT – a source of calibration data One of the main tasks of HLT (especially in the first years) –Monitoring of the detector performance –Analysing calibration.
STAR Collaboration Meeting, Nantes, July2002 SVT Analysis/Status Update Jun Takahashi – University of Sao Paulo.
28 February, 2003 STAR Collaboration meeting Status of the dE/dx calibration Yuri Fisyak.
FTPC calibration status Joern Putschke for the STAR FTPC group STAR Analysis Meeting 2002 October 22-24, 2002.
F.M.H. Cheung School of Physics, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
JSPS Research Fellow / University of Tsukuba T. Horaguchi Oct for HAWAII /10/15HAWAII
Pion test beam from KEK: momentum studies Data provided by Toho group: 2512 beam tracks D. Duchesneau April 27 th 2011 Track  x Track  y Base track positions.
Report of the NTPC Test Experiment in 2007Sep and Others Yohei Nakatsugawa.
JT: 1 The Berkeley Lab STAR TPC Distortions in the Transverse Plane: An Update Jim Thomas.
MdcPatRec Tracking Status Zhang Yao, Zhang Xueyao Shandong University.
1.Check Laser track of B=0 run and exclude some tracks in order to get precise GGV eff, which in turn is used when extract T1, T2 value by pos-B and neg-B.
Progress with the TPC gas monitor Dariusz Antończyk Outline : Motivation Simulations Measurements Summary & Outlook.
PHENIX Drift Chamber operation principles Modified by Victor Riabov Focus meeting 01/06/04 Original by Sergey Butsyk Focus meeting 01/14/03.
1 Jim Thomas - LBL New Pad Plane Design Proposal & Specifications Jim Thomas, John Hammond, Bob Scheetz, Jon Wirth, etc., etc., and a cast of thousands.
1 TPC Basics H. Wieman LBNL Oct. 18, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci : 217.
108 Mar 2007L. Musa TPC Commissioning ALICE Technical Forum, CERN, 8 th March 2007 L. Musa Outline Pre-commissioning above ground (2006) Preparing for.
STAR Collaboration Meeting Rene Bellwied – Wayne State University July 2004 SVT Calibration and STI tracking status An update of work since the SVT review.
Update on TPC R&D C. Woody BNL DC Upgrades Meeting October 9, 2003.
TPC R&D status in Japan T. Isobe, H. Hamagaki, K. Ozawa, and M. Inuzuka Center for Nuclear Study, University of Tokyo Contents 1.Development of a prototype.
EPS-HEP 2015, Vienna. 1 Test of MPGD modules with a large prototype Time Projection Chamber Deb Sankar Bhattacharya On behalf of.
GEM-TPC Resolution Studies ECFA/DESY LC Workshop Prague, November 2002 Dean Karlen University of Victoria / TRIUMF.
LASER CALIBRATION SYSTEM for STAR TPC Alexei Lebedev (BNL) for STAR collaboration  Design and description  Performance  Goals and results  Future developments.
TPC in Heavy Ion Experiments Jørgen A. Lien, Høgskolen i Bergen and Universitetet i Bergen, Norway for the ALICE Collaboration. Outlook: Presenting some.
Taku Gunji Center for Nuclear Study The University of Tokyo
A TPC for ILC CEA/Irfu, Apero, D S Bhattacharya, 19th June Deb Sankar Bhattacharya D.Attie, P.Colas, S. Ganjour,
Measurement of photons via conversion pairs with PHENIX at RHIC - Torsten Dahms - Stony Brook University HotQuarks 2006 – May 18, 2006.
Charged Particle Multiplicity and Transverse Energy in √s nn = 130 GeV Au+Au Collisions Klaus Reygers University of Münster, Germany for the PHENIX Collaboration.
TPC/HBD R&D at BNL Craig Woody BNL Mini Workshop on PHENIX Upgrade Plans August 6, 2002.
Marian Ivanov TPC ExB and V drift calibration and alignment.
Jonathan BouchetBerkeley School on Collective Dynamics 1 Performance of the Silicon Strip Detector of the STAR Experiment Jonathan Bouchet Subatech STAR.
Roberto Barbera (Alberto Pulvirenti) University of Catania and INFN ACAT 2003 – Tsukuba – Combined tracking in the ALICE detector.
Mochalskyy Serhiy NI modeling workshop, Chiba, Japan, 2013 Recent state and progress in negative ion modeling by means ONIX code Mochalskyy Serhiy 1, Dirk.
Detector alignment Stefania and Bepo Martellotti 20/12/10.
 Measurement of  x E  (Fig. 4) Assorted correlations between a fixed high-p T trigger hadron (  p Ttrig  =4.7GeV/c) and lower p T associated hadrons.
Electron Transmission Measurement of GEM Gate Hirotoshi KUROIWA (Saga Univ.) Collaboration with KEK, TUAT, Kogakuin U, Kinki U, Saga U Introduction Motivation.
FTPC calibration status & plans for Y03 Joern Putschke for the STAR FTPC group STAR Calibration Meeting 2002 November 7, 2002.
Chris Parkes, Silvia Borghi, Christoph Hombach WP2 Alignment Task: Status Report Introduction Alignment Monitoring – LHCb VELO Weak Modes – LHCb VELO AIDA.
Measurement of photons via conversion pairs with the PHENIX experiment at RHIC - Torsten Dahms - State University of New York at Stony Brook for the PHENIX.
Study of Charged Hadrons in Au-Au Collisions at with the PHENIX Time Expansion Chamber Dmitri Kotchetkov for the PHENIX Collaboration Department of Physics,
Calibration algorithm and detector monitoring - TPC Marian Ivanov.
Tracking software of the BESIII drift chamber Linghui WU For the BESIII MDC software group.
Particle Identification of the ALICE TPC via dE/dx
Grid Pix Field Simulations and precision needed for a module Peter Kluit, Jan Timmermans Prepared 16 May 2016.
INFN - PadovaBeauty Measurements in pp with the Central Detector 1 Beauty Measurements in p-p with the Central Detector F. Antinori, C. Bombonati, A. Dainese,
Non-Prompt J/ψ Measurements at STAR Zaochen Ye for the STAR Collaboration University of Illinois at Chicago The STAR Collaboration:
1 Azimuthal angle fluctuations (draft of NA49 publication) NA61/SHINE and NA49 Software/Analysis meeting February 15 th – 18 th, WUT Katarzyna Grebieszkow.
June 4, 2009 STAR TPC review Estimation of TPC Aging Based on dE/dx Measurements Yuri Fisyak.
IPHC, Strasbourg / GSI, Darmstadt
The NA61 TPCs (1) Overview: Mechanics readout Position resolution
TPC status report Marian Ivanov.
The GOOFIE detector as a Ternary Mixture Monitor
C.Cheshkov 15/09/2005 Weekly Offline Meeting
Marian Ivanov TPC status report.
Laser calibration systems
Grid Pix Field Simulations and precision needed for a module
CLAS12 Torus Magnetic Field Mapping
Analysis Test Beam Pixel TPC
HLT & Calibration.
Space-point Distortions
TPC sector alignment Marian Ivanov.
NA61 and NA49 Collaboration Meeting May 14-19, 2012, Budapest
Study of non-uniformity of magnetic field
GLD IR optimization and background study
Pad Response Function Nuclear Physics Group Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica Jia-Ye Chen
Presentation transcript:

TPC ExB distortion at LHC-ALICE experiment Yasuto Hori for the ALICE-TPC collaboration Center for Nuclear Study, University of Tokyo 1

Outline 2 Introduction: ALICE-TPC and ExB distortion Calculation technique of ExB distortion Many kinds of ExB distortion ExB Twist distortion Summary and Outlook

Overview of ALICE-TPC 100kV A side ROC C side (muon-side) ROC E field Main central tracking device diameter x length = 5 m x 5 m,|  | < 0.9, 2  azimuthal coverage Max drift length ~ 2.5 m, Central electrode ~100kV  E ~ 400V/cm gas Ne-CO 2 -N 2 (85.7%:9.5%:4.8%)  low diffusion & high drift velocity(drift time 92  sec), but strong temperature dependent drift velocity temperature stability & homogenity < 0.1K  cooling system and P,T monitor UV laser system used for drift velocity, ExB, alignment B field beam IP z gx gy UV Laser tracks in TPC drift volume 3

ExB distortion in ALICE-TPC E &B field Drift electrons Track Pad plane Distorted drift electron Electrons are drifted at the E field direction if ExB is zero. If ExB is non-zero  Space point distortion on the Pad plane (or x-y, r- phi) occurs This distortion may degrade DCA-to-Vertex distribution, DCA-btw-2tracks distribution, ITS-TPC matching efficiency,.. Gating Grid wire

Calculation technique via Langevin equation Langevin eq. which describes this distortion can be decomposed into E field part and B field part if Ez ≫ Er,E  & Bz ≫ Br,B  We have to know parameter T 1, T 2 of Ne:CO 2 :N 2  Next slide 5 E field distortionB field distortion Space point distortion Decompose +  tensor Steady-state langevin eq

T 1, T 2 extraction via Laser track distortion with Gating Grid Voltage (GGV) Scan Procedure 1.Calibrate Voltage at GG plane by measuring C 1 &C 0 using B=0 laser tracks ( C 1 &C 0 must be 0 & 1 at B=0 ) 2. Measure change of track distortion with GGV scan at B=5kGaus 3. Compare with calculation using T 1 and T 2  T 1 = , T 2 = is obtained! Z [cm] Radi [cm] 6 Zigzag pattern of Real data is from Pad geometry T 1 = 1.0 T 2 = 1.0 GGV= 10 V dr  [cm] Radi [cm] Distortion change [cm]

ExB distortion Sources and Models 7 B field non-uniformity  B field is measured, non-zero Br, B , corrected to ~0.3mm Twist between E and B field axis  TPC is tilted from the B field axis E field distortion by misalignment of TPC components ( field cage, each rod, ROC, central electrode ) GGV Error from normal setting E field distortion because of space charge  Next 3 slides gX [cm] gY [cm] dr  [mm] dr [mm] R [cm] Z [cm] B field E field TPC

Twist between E and B axis space point distortion ∝ drift length and angle between E and B axis track distortion is similar to translation, but A side track is translated to the opposite direction of C side track translation gX[cm] gY[cm] Z[cm] dr [cm] dr  [cm] Zdrift = 250 cm 8 R [cm] Value to be measured

A/C vertex shift due to ExB Twist By ExB Twist Distortion, x-y position of vertex reconstructed by only A side tracks is shifted from that of only C side tracks 9 fast simulation full simulation (small statistics) TPC pad plane Distorted A track Original track Distorted C track A/C Vertex shift Inner wall Outer wall A/C vertex shift is almost proportional to Twist angle !! 

Twist angles extraction and verification at p+p collision data 10 A/C vertex shift can be found at pp collision data! Position of A /C vertex are swapped with B field polarity Primary vertex (by ITS&TPC all tracks) lays on the middle of the A/C vertex Twist angles are extracted and verified !! A vertex C vertex B positive data B negative data A Vertex C Vertex Primary Vertex Non corrected Vertex shift [cm] Extracted  x[mrad] Extracted  y[mrad] B pos B neg Corrected Vertex shift [cm]

Summary and Outlook 11 We construct framework for calculation of ExB distortion T 1 &T 2 values are extracted by Laser track distortion with GGV scan List up many kinds of ExB distortion ExB distortion due to B non-uniformity is already corrected ExB Twist distortion is measured via A/C vertex shift in p+p collision real data measure A/C ROC rotation and translation, which causes A/C vertex shift estimate how Rods shift (dominant part of E field distortion) causes A/C vertex shift finalize Twist angles ExB due to E field distortion like Rods shift, … Space charge at PbPb collision data

- back up - 12

Misalignment between A side ROC & C side ROC dY dX dd 13

T 1, T 2 parameters measurement via Laser track distortion with Gating Grid Voltage (GGV) Scan 1 Change Gating Grid Voltage from normal setting ~ 70Volt  Change “effective” voltage at GG plane “effective” means that voltage at GG plane depend on GGV setting itself as well as E field leakage from under GG plane  E field distortion change  ExB space point distortion change, which can be observed by laser tracks and calculated using T 1 and T 2 parameters Z [cm] Radi [cm] 14 Zigzag pattern of Real data is from Pad geometry T 1 = 1.0 T 2 = 1.0 GGV= 10 V dr  [cm] Radi [cm] Distortion change [cm]

T 1, T 2 parameters measurement via Laser track distortion with Gating Grid Voltage (GGV) Scan 2 “effective” voltage at GG plane can be calculated by garfield simulation  GGV eff [V] = *GGV setting [V] This can be confirmed by measuring C 0 & C 1 value at B=0 data, which must be 1 & 0  Reasonable agreement (left chi2 plot) 15 With above relation, T 1 &T 2 values are extracted by B=5kGaus laser data  T 1 = T 2 = Good agreement with garfield simulation

16 Sigma of DCA-to-Vertex distribution with 2 sets of correction parameters. Black line is almost consistent to MC With Old corr. With New corr.