M. Gilchriese LHC Startup Luminosity Planning July 29, 2005.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Low x workshop Helsinki 2007 Joël Feltesse 1 Inclusive F 2 at low x and F L measurement at HERA Joël Feltesse Desy/Hamburg/Saclay On behalf of the H1 and.
Advertisements

June 6 th, 2011 N. Cartiglia 1 “Measurement of the pp inelastic cross section using pile-up events with the CMS detector” How to use pile-up.
Jet and Jet Shapes in CMS
Recent Electroweak Results from the Tevatron Weak Interactions and Neutrinos Workshop Delphi, Greece, 6-11 June, 2005 Dhiman Chakraborty Northern Illinois.
The new Silicon detector at RunIIb Tevatron II: the world’s highest energy collider What’s new?  Data will be collected from 5 to 15 fb -1 at  s=1.96.
Increasing Field Integral between Velo and TT S. Blusk Sept 02, 2009 SU Group Meeting.
1 Hadronic In-Situ Calibration of the ATLAS Detector N. Davidson The University of Melbourne.
Chris Barnes, Imperial CollegeWIN 2005 B mixing at DØ B mixing at DØ WIN 2005 Delphi, Greece Chris Barnes, Imperial College.
Measurement of B (D + →μ + ν μ ) and the Pseudoscalar Decay Constant f D at CLEO István Dankó Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute representing the CLEO Collaboration.
Lot’s of time lost due to cryo problem in IR8. Major impact, therefore review of MD program… Start discussion here, please let us know your input. Will.
February 19th 2009AlbaNova Instrumentation Seminar1 Christian Bohm Instrumentation Physics, SU Upgrading the ATLAS detector Overview Motivation The current.
CDF Joint Physics Group June 27, 2003 Rick FieldPage 1 PYTHIA Tune A versus Run 2 Data  Compare PYTHIA Tune A with Run 2 data on the “underlying event”.
W properties AT CDF J. E. Garcia INFN Pisa. Outline Corfu Summer Institute Corfu Summer Institute September 10 th 2 1.CDF detector 2.W cross section measurements.
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.
Tracking at LHCb Introduction: Tracking Performance at LHCb Kalman Filter Technique Speed Optimization Status & Plans.
2012 Tel Aviv, October 15, 2012 Rick Field – Florida/CDF/CMSPage 1 Rick Field University of Florida Outline of Talk CMS at the LHC CDF Run 2 
Z AND W PHYSICS AT CEPC Haijun Yang, Hengne Li, Qiang Li, Jun Guo, Manqi Ruan, Yusheng Wu, Zhijun Liang 1.
October 4-5, Electron Lens Beam Physics Overview Yun Luo for RHIC e-lens team October 4-5, 2010 Electron Lens.
A few slides to summarise what Alessandro and I were up to for March 24th video meeting Taking for granted that W+/- are good measurements to make- are.
HERA-LHC, CERN Oct Preliminary study of Z+b in ATLAS /1 A preliminary study of Z+b production in ATLAS The D0 measurement of  (Z+b)/  (Z+jet)
4 th International Workshop on VHMP, Alushta 2 June 2003 Carmine Elvezio Pagliarone A j u m p i n t o t h e F u t u r e !
Fermilab MC Workshop April 30, 2003 Rick Field - Florida/CDFPage 1 The “Underlying Event” in Run 2 at CDF  Study the “underlying event” as defined by.
Organisation of the Beatenberg Trigger Workshop Ricardo Gonçalo Higgs WG Meeting - 22 Jan.09.
Machine development - results and plans – critical results, what’s to be done? R. Assmann 15/07/2011 R. Assmann for the LHC MD coordination team (R. Assmann,
Precision Cross section measurements at LHC (CMS) Some remarks from the Binn workshop André Holzner IPP ETH Zürich DIS 2004 Štrbské Pleso Štrbské Pleso.
Precision Measurements of W and Z Boson Production at the Tevatron Jonathan Hays Northwestern University On Behalf of the CDF and DØ Collaborations XIII.
LHCb: Xmas 2010 Tara Shears, On behalf of the LHCb group.
P. 1K. Eggert – Early TOTEM Running with the  * =90m Optics Karsten Eggert on behalf of the TOTEM Collaboration Politecnico di Bari and Sezione INFN Bari,
Measurement of the Charge Ratio of Cosmic Muons using CMS Data M. Aldaya, P. García-Abia (CIEMAT-Madrid) On behalf of the CMS Collaboration Sector 10 Sector.
By Henry Brown Henry Brown, LHCb, IOP 10/04/13 1.
Longitudinal Spin Asymmetry and Cross Section of Inclusive  0 Production in Polarized p+p Collisions at 200 GeV Outline  Introduction  Experimental.
T. LeCompte Argonne National Laboratory Evolution of the Run Plan.
accelerator centers worldwide
Measurement of inclusive jet and dijet production in pp collisions at √s = 7 TeV using the ATLAS detector Seminar talk by Eduardo Garcia-Valdecasas Tenreiro.
Mike HildrethEPS/Aachen, July B Physics Results from DØ Mike Hildreth Université de Notre Dame du Lac DØ Collaboration for the DØ Collaboration.
Jet Studies at CDF Anwar Ahmad Bhatti The Rockefeller University CDF Collaboration DIS03 St. Petersburg Russia April 24,2003 Inclusive Jet Cross Section.
Chamonix 2006, B.Dehning 1 Commissioning of Beam Loss Monitors B. Dehning CERN AB/BDI.
From the Standard Model to Discoveries - Physics with the CMS Experiment at the Dawn of the LHC Era Dimitri Bourilkov University of Florida CMS Collaboration.
1 Arnold Pompoš, SUSY03, Tucson, Arizona, June 5-10, 2003.
Penny Kasper Fermilab Heavy Quarkonium Workshop 21 June Upsilon production DØ Penny Kasper Fermilab (DØ collaboration) 29 June 2006 Heavy Quarkonium.
Top quarks at the LHC: the early days Detector commissioning and first results T. Wengler Standard Model workshop UCL, London, 31 March 09.
Moriond QCD March 24, 2003Eric Kajfasz, CPPM/D01 b-production cross-section at the TeVatron Eric Kajfasz, CPPM/D0 for the CDF and D0 collaborations.
La Thuile, March, 15 th, 2003 f Makoto Tomoto ( FNAL ) Prospects for Higgs Searches at DØ Makoto Tomoto Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (For the.
CONTENT: Beam characteristics and MP concerns BI configuration Operational settings Collimators Planning Shift breakdown Thanks to: P.Baudrenghien, G.Bellodi,
Cryo back at 17:30 Beam back at 19:00 IR2 aperture until ~03:00 Since then no beam from the SPS:  Connector problem on MKD  Connector eroded, needs to.
P.F.Ermolov SVD-2 status and experimental program VHMP 16 April 2005 SVD-2 status and experimental program 1.SVD history 2.SVD-2 setup 3.Experiment characteristics.
LHC Machine Operational Status and Plans LHCC, 22nd September 2010 Steve Myers (On behalf of the LHC team and international collaborators)
Update on Diffractive Dijet Production Search Hardeep Bansil University of Birmingham 23/07/2012.
Backgrounds at FP420 Henri Kowalski DESY 18 th of May 2006.
1 Underlying Event studies & Charged particle multiplicities in inelastic pp events with the ATLAS.
QCD Prospects for ATLAS Rainer Stamen Universität Mainz On behalf of the ATLAS collaboration QCD 06 Montpellier, July 3rd 2006.
Charged particle yields and spectra in p+p and Heavy Ion Collisions with ATLAS at the LHC Jiří Dolejší (Charles University Prague) for the ATLAS collaboration.
Introduction 08/11/2007 Higgs WG – Trigger meeting Ricardo Gonçalo, RHUL.
First collisions in LHC
Luminosity monitor and LHC operation
Cryo Problem MD Planning Tue (1.11.) C B Day Time MD MP Tue 01:00
First data from TOTEM experiment at LHC
Beam-beam effects in eRHIC and MeRHIC
Emmanuel Tsesmelis TS/LEA 26 January 2007
Follow-up of HL-LHC Annual meeting
Machine plans - Alignment workshop
Intensity Evolution Estimate for LHC
Quarkonium production in ALICE
J. Uythoven, W. Venturini Delsolaro, CERN, Geneva
Overall commissioning strategy for protons (estd. 2005)
LHC Beam Operations Past, Present and Future
Summary Thursday h21: Stable beams fill #1303.
Prospects for quarkonium studies at LHCb
Ronan McNulty University College Dublin
Another Immortal Fill….
Presentation transcript:

M. Gilchriese LHC Startup Luminosity Planning July 29, 2005

M. Gilchriese 2 References Background on LHC Relatively recent workshop (Chamonix in January 2005) Other Have stolen liberally from last reference above Some references on early physics (not necessarily so early…) –Some previous talks at these Friday meetings(Ian, Andreas….) –hep-ph/ –Talk by Polisello at recent LHCC meeting

M. Gilchriese 3 Introduction and Disclaimer The talk has a narrow scope Not pedagogical regarding LHC LHC startup is obviously very complex but I will ignore all of the complexity and focus on stated luminosity goals Luminosity will likely vary by orders of magnitude in first year or more of operation, so plenty of room to be wrong in predictions! Purpose is to (hopefully) initiate thinking locally (and maybe some work) on very, very early physics eg. from pilot run Warning: I’m a pessimist about luminosity…..

M. Gilchriese 4 Design Goals Nominal Parameters Beam energy (TeV)7.0 Number of particles per bunch Number of bunches per beam2808 Time between crossings(ns)25 Crossing angle (  rad) 285 Nomalised transverse emittance (  m rad) 3.75 Beta function at IP 1, 2, 5, 8 (m)0.55,10,0.55,10 Luminosity in IP 1 & 5 (cm -2 s -1 )10 34 Luminosity in IP 2 & 8 (cm -2 s -1 )~ Transverse beam size at IP 1 & 5 (  m) 16.7 Transverse beam size at IP 1 & 5 (  m) 70.9 Stored energy per beam (MJ)362

M. Gilchriese 5 Early Conditions Compared to design conditions……………. Beam energy very likely below 7 TeV. –6 TeV? –6.5 TeV? Fewer protons per bunch Many fewer bunches Head-on collisions Much larger  *(less “squeeze”) On-time for physics much less (same for detector no doubt) Primary goal of first (pilot) run – achieve and sustain collisions, start understanding of machine.

M. Gilchriese 6 How To Get Started(I) Avoid quenches (and damage) –Reduce total current to reduce stored beam energy Lower ib Fewer bunches –Higher  * to avoid problems in the (later part of) the squeeze –Reduce energy to get more margin Against transient beam losses Against magnet operating close to training limit Both machine and experiments will have to learn how to stand running at nominal intensities An early aim is to find a balance between robust operation and satisfying the experiments –Maximize integrated luminosity –Minimize event pile-up

M. Gilchriese 7 How To Get Started(II) Electron cloud ( LHC simulations and SPS experience ) –ib < 35% nominal for 25ns spacing –ib ~ nominal for > 50ns With lower currents in mind, two machine systems will be staged –Only 8 of 20 beam dump dilution kickers initially installed Total beam intensity < 50% nominal Install the rest when needed –Collimators ( robustness, impedance and other issues ) Phased approach Run at the impedance limit during phase I –Lower currents –Higher  *

M. Gilchriese 8 Planning Phase I collimators and partial beam dump –Pilot physics run with few bunches No parasitic bunch crossings Machine de-bugging no crossing angle 43 bunches, unsqueezed, low intensity Push performance (156 bunches, partial squeeze, higher intensity) –75ns operation Establish multi-bunch operation Relaxed machine parameters (squeeze and crossing angle) Push squeeze and crossing angle –25ns operation with Phase I collimators + partial beam dump Needs scrubbing for higher intensities ( ib > ) Phase II collimators and full beam dump –25ns operation Push towards nominal performance

M. Gilchriese 9 Stage 1 – Pilot Run Luminosities No squeeze to start 43 bunches per beam (some displaced in one beam for LHCb) Around per bunch Push one or all of –156 bunches per beam (some displaced in one beam for LHCb) –Partial optics squeeze –Increase bunch intensity Beam energy (TeV) 6.0, 6.5 or 7.0 Number of bunches per beam * in IP 1, 2, 5, 8 (m) 18,10,18,102,10,2,10 Crossing Angle (rad) 000 Transverse emittance ( m rad ) 3.75 Bunch spacing (s) Bunch Intensity Luminosity IP 1 & 5 (cm -2 s -1 ) ~ ~ ~ Luminosity IP 2 (cm -2 s -1 ) ~ ~ ~

M. Gilchriese 10 Stage 2 – 75ns Luminosities Partial squeeze and smaller crossing angle to start Luminosity tuning, limited by event pileup Establish routine operation in this mode Move to nominal squeeze and crossing angle Increase bunch intensity ? Tune IP2 and IP8 to meet experimental needs Beam energy (TeV) 6.0, 6.5 or 7.0 Number of bunches per beam 936 * in IP 1, 2, 5, 8 (m) 2,10,2,100.55,10,0.55,10 Crossing Angle (rad) Transverse emittance ( m rad ) 3.75 Bunch Intensity Luminosity IP 1 & 5 (cm -2 s -1 ) ~ ~ ~ Luminosity IP 2 & 8 (cm -2 s -1 ) ~ ~

M. Gilchriese 11 Stage 3 – 25ns Luminosities Production physics running Start with bunch intensities below electron cloud threshold –Scrubbing run (1-2 weeks) Increase bunch intensities to beam dump & collimator limit –Install beam dump kickers –Install phase II collimators Increase bunch intensities towards nominal Tune IP2 and IP8 to meet experimental needs Beam energy (TeV) 6.0, 6.5 or Number of bunches per beam 2808 * in IP 1, 2, 5, 8 (m) 0.55,10,0.55,10 Crossing Angle (rad) 285 Transverse emittance ( m rad ) 3.75 Bunch Intensity Luminosity IP 1 & 5 (cm -2 s -1 ) ~ ~ Luminosity IP 2 & 8 (cm -2 s -1 ) ~ ~ ~ Long shutdown (6months) After shutdown

M. Gilchriese 12 Typical Year

M. Gilchriese 13 The First Years? ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ If one takes the luminosities from previous…..

M. Gilchriese 14 Pilot Run Integrated Luminosity? Very hard to estimate. Efficiency factor(colliding beam time of machine and ATLAS working together) 10%? 20%...who knows Optimistic??? Pessimistic??? guess would be about for about 30 days or very roughly 1 pb -1 In my opinion, useful to understand what physics can be done with 0.1, 1, 10 pb -1 soon. Limited scope of study.

M. Gilchriese 15 Some Rates for 1 pb -1 Channel# of Events W -> µ 7000 Z -> µµ1100 t tbar -> µ + X80 QCD jets PT>150 GeV1000(for 10% of trigger bandwith) Minimum biasTrigger limited gluino-gluino, M~ 1TeV1-10 Taken from table in hep-ph/

M. Gilchriese 16 Follow On Some studies have been done (see Rome meeting) that could be used as as starting point for “≤1-10pb -1 physics” investigations –Minimum bias dN/d  and so forth –W and Z production –Jets I think would be good idea to systematically go through these in the next few months…

M. Gilchriese Extra Stuff From Polesello’s Talk to LHCC in June

M. Gilchriese 18 “Minimum Bias” 1000 events  dN ch /d  dN ch /dp T Comparison of generated charged particles with reconstructed tracks Black = Generated (Pythia6.2) Blue = TrkTrack: iPatRec Red = TrkTrack: xKalman Only a fraction of tracks reconstructed, because: Only a fraction of tracks reconstructed, because: 1)limited rapidity coverage 2)can only reconstruct track p T with good efficiency down to ~500MeV Previous dN ch /d  measurements published for p T > 0, so need to apply correction factor. Biggest systematic uncertainty? Previous dN ch /d  measurements published for p T > 0, so need to apply correction factor. Biggest systematic uncertainty? Explore special runs with reduced solenoidal magnetic field? Explore special runs with reduced solenoidal magnetic field? Reconstruct tracks with: 1) pT>500MeV 1) pT>500MeV 2) |d 0 | < 1mm 2) |d 0 | < 1mm 3) # B-layer hits >= 1 3) # B-layer hits >= 1 4) # precision hits >= 8 4) # precision hits >= 8 p T (MeV) dNch/d  dNch/d  robust measurement: do not need full ID reconstruction

M. Gilchriese 19 Studies on W production Large statistics Basic benchmark process to check our ability to perform measurements Aim at constraining proton PDFs Emphasis on understanding systematic detector effects Rome Production W +/- -> e +/- Sample –HERWIG + CTEQ5L, U.E. with Jimmy –~67K fully simulated events (5 pb-1). –Analysis performed with new ATLAS analysis tools Concentrate on rapidity variables sensitive to PDF parametrisations and uncertainties –W->e Rapidity distributions at GEN and DET Level –W->e Asymmetry and Ratio at GEN and DET Level Preliminary evaluation of charge misassignment systematics

M. Gilchriese 20 Require M w within 10 GeV of nominal W mass S/B = 1.77 Top mass (GeV) m(t) Top peak clearly visible after 1 week of LHC data(NOT AT !!!) Measured top mass ± 1.0 GeV, stat error on xs: 8.3% Work in progress on systematics Selection cuts: E Tmiss > 20 GeV, 1 lep Pt > 20 GeV, 4 jets Pt > 20 GeV No trigger selection efficiency taken into account yet Top for about 300 pb -1 Slide from Polesello at LHCC