1. Test Beam: Calorimetric Wishes… Steve Magill, Jose Repond, Andre Turcot, Jae Yu* Jan. 10, 2003 Goals for calorimeter test beam What’s needed for EFA? Requirements –Facilities –Detector Software needs Availability of various facilities –FNAL, BNL, SLAC, JLab, IHEP, KEK Questions to ourselves Conclusions

2. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 2 Goals for Calorimeter Test Beam Test of hardware technologies –Feasibilities, properties and performances of various detector technologies; aging, linearity, responses, resolutions, etc –Feasibilities of digital hadron calorimetry Data for algorithm studies and improvements –Energy Flow Algorithm Development Track-cluster association Charged particle energy removal Neutral particle energy measurement –Tracking through the calorimeter –Determination of optimal cell size Data for simulation validation and improvements –Data for shower libraries for realistic simulation of jets –Magnetic field dependences

3. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 3 EFA Specific Requirements Efficient identification and subtraction of charged track energy Efficient recovery and measurement of neutral particle energy –Verification of photon shower shape in ECAL –Verification of charged hadron transverse and longitudinal shower shape in ECAL and HCAL –Verification of neutral hadron shower shapes Mixture of neutral and charged particles, mimicking jets

4. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 4 Particle Energies in e + +e -  ZZ  4jets @ 500GeV =3.02 GeV =11.0 GeV =6.28 GeV

5. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 5 TB Facility Requirements Beam with wide kinematic ranges and sufficient rates –EM particle beams Electron and photon beams –Charged and neutral hadron beams –Muon beam for calorimeter tracking –Momenta of particles: 1 ~ 100 GeV Beam instrumentation –Good beam momentum and position measurements –Cerenkov counter for PID Sufficient Mechanical Infrastructure Must be available on the right time scale

6. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 6 EM Longitudinal Energy Deposit and Hits 3 GeV e -

7. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 7 Number of Hit Cells vs  R 10 GeV  - Important for Digital HCAL

8. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 8 Energy Weighted Transverse Shower Size 10 GeV  -

9. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 9 Need all 34 layers 20 cm X 20 cm X 30 layer ECAL 80 cm X 80 cm (min.) X 34 layer HCAL Shower Radius (red) Ampl. Fraction (blue) Layer 3.1,5.2 7.8,12.6 15.5,26 cm (front,back) HCAL Longitudinal Energy Deposit and Hits 10 GeV  -

10. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 10 Detector Requirements Adequate size for sufficient shower containment –Preliminary studies by SM & SK show 3 GeV electron shower fully contained in 11 cm x11 cm, 20X 0 ECAL 10 GeV pions: –94% of the time in 20 cmx20 cm ECAL fully contains EM energy deposit –1.3 mx1.3 m Hadron calorimeter with ~5~6 can contain 90% of HCAL energy deposit –More detailed studies based on single particles and physics would be necessary Flexible cell segmentation by changing readout configuration –Number of readout channels 32k for ECAL at 5 mm x 5mm cell size if read out every 1X  676k for HCAL at 1 cm x 1cm with 40 layer readout Shower leakage detection (both lateral and longitudinal)

11. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 11 Detector Requirements cont’d Tracking system for charged track momentum measurement & Energy Flow Algorithm development Muon system for track association and leakage detection Magnet with high field strength for in-field behavior Adjustable absorber thickness for sampling variation Flexible geometry to support various sensitive gap technology

12. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 12 Software Needs TB Development –Analysis algorithms and software for TB Geometry studies Shower size computation Clustering algorithms Energy conversion and sampling weight –Easier simulation of TB Geometry TB Data Taking and Operation –Online Monitoring –Slow control monitoring –Data and code management –Data acquisition and reconstruction Track reconstruction Particle ID –Calibration tools Quick turnaround for faster feedback for faster reflection into TB programs

13. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 13 Test Beam Facility: Fermilab Meson Testbeam Facility (MTF) –Located at MT6 –Primary: 120GeV p from MI –Particle types: p, K,  e –Particle momentum ranges: 5 ~ 120 GeV –First beam early 2003 –Not high priority but seems to be supported –Need simultaneous slow extraction scheme with  p production –Four available user areas w/ 2 control rooms –Five MOUs of with 3 approved –Seems to be available for TB –Contact: Erik Ramberg –MOU’s Needed

14. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 14 Testbeam Facility: SLAC, JLab, IHEP SLAC: End Station A at 10Hz Rep rate, running parasitic on PEP –e + : 1 ~ 25 GeV (parasitic on Babar) or 45 GeV with 0.5% momentum byte at the rate of ~1/pulse –  : e + brem, ~1  /pulse, higher energies could be obtained w/ diamond crystal radiators –Hadrons: e + momentum tune at 13 GeV for higher proton yield (0.0044 p/pulse) but mostly e + and  IHEP, Portvino –Proposal at Prague to use 70 GeV p to produce hadrons, electrons and  in energy range up to ~ 50GeV –Rep. rate ~0.1Hz in 1.8 sec spill time –Hadron energy: 33 - 45 GeV –Electron beam: 1 - 45 GeV –Available in 2004 and beyond JLab: Not clear but surely not in 2007 ~ 2008 due to energy upgrade KEK: No TB in 2004 - 2007

15. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 15 B2 Particle Flux e+e+ ++ p+p+ ++ K+K+ Testbeam Facility: BNL AGS B2 –Particle types: e, p, K,  –Beam momentum can be tuned to 0.3~9 GeV/c –Nominal momentum byte: 5% FWHM –Max flux limited at 2x10 5 /sec for safety –Main issue: Funding 2003 operation not in presidential budget Only operates in user contractual agreement with full cost recovery Forming a consortium for operational budget request

16. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 16 Comparisons of TB Facilities FacilitiesParticlesp-rangesAvailabilityContact FNAL MTF p, K,  e 5-120 GeV/cFrom 2003E. Ramberg SLAC–ESA , e +, had <45GeV e <13GeV had Current IHEP-Protvino had, e,  <45GeV e 33-45GeV h From 2004 BNL-AGSB2 e, p, K,  <10GeV No w/o full fund recovery JLabNA 2007-8 KEKNA 2004-5

17. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 17 Questions How many stages? (I think we need at least two..) When for stage one? 2005? 2006? How long? What program? At which facility? –Multiple ones, depending on the needs?? Who wants to participate? Construction of detector pieces? –When? –Who builds the adjustable absorber plate structure? –How many readout channels with what segmentation? Details for beam: Energies, rates, instrumentations… Funds for TB A separate Test Beam group for a concerted effort

18. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 18 Conclusions Need more thorough studies to determine both hardware and physics based needs of TB –Detailed studies to determine detector sizes, segmentation and the impact of minimal configurations –Tools are being developed but must be timely and consistent –Need common and easy simulation tools for TB geometry A few facilities seem to be available in 2005 – 2006 time scale Time to start organizing toward a concerted TB effort with other detector groups  EFA cannot exist without a tracker A draft report at hand but needs more inputs before a release to wider audience….  July as the target…

19. Jan. 10, 2003CAL Testbeam J. Yu 19 Questions from Gene Fisk for Discussions Short description of the device to test and objectives of the tests Real estate required for the tests (beam line space, assembly space, desk space) Beam conditions wanted/needed (particle types, energies, intensity, spill conditions, etc.) Instrumentation, cables and DAQ system that you anticipate using Contact person Dates when beam is needed, dates when you want to be in the beamline Special requirements? such as: Cerenkov counters, beam hodoscopes, momentum measurement wire chamber and magnet system, e or  identifiers, etc. Where you expect to carry out such tests.