Doses and bunch by bunch fluctuations in BeamCal at the ILC Eliza Teodorescu FCAL Collaboration Meeting June 29-30, 2009, DESY-Zeuthen, Germany.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Background studies Takashi Maruyama SLAC GDE Baseline Assessment Workshop SLAC, January 18-21, 2011.
Advertisements

ILC – The International Linear Collider Project Univ. of Colorado, Boulder, November ILC Valencia SIMULATION OF BEAMCAL WITH B FIELDS SIMULATION.
GUINEA-PIG: A tool for beam-beam effect study C. Rimbault, LAL Orsay Daresbury, April 2006.
Collimator Damage Adriana Bungau The University of Manchester Cockcroft Institute “All Hands Meeting”, January 2006.
17-May-15FCAL collaboration meeting. Krakow.. Radiation hardness of GaAs Sensors K. Afanaciev, Ch. Grah, A. Ignatenko, W. Lange, W. Lohmann, M. Ohlerich.
L. Suszycki, Tel Aviv, Sept, 2005 LumiCal background studies Contents: Guinea Pig results Vermasseren results Remarks on energy reconstruction Conclusions.
Pair backgrounds for different crossing angles Machine-Detector Interface at the ILC SLAC 6th January 2005 Karsten Büßer.
Slide 1 Diamonds in Flash Steve Schnetzer Rd42 Collaboration Meeting May 14.
Background Studies Takashi Maruyama SLAC ALCPG 2004 Winter Workshop January 8, 2004.
27 June 2006Ken Moffeit1 Comparison of 2mrad and 14/20 mrad extraction lines Ken Moffeit ILC BDS 27 June 06.
Background comparison between 20 mrad and 2 mr crossings Takashi Maruyama SLAC Machine-Detector Interface Workshop SLAC January 6-8, 2005.
Backgrounds and Forward Region Backgrounds and Forward Region FCAL Collaboration Workshop TAU, September 18-19, 2005 Christian Grah.
NLC - The Next Linear Collider Project NLC Backgrounds What’s New? Tom Markiewicz LC’99, Frascati, Italy October 1999.
Beamdiagnostics by Beamstrahlung Analysis C.Grah ILC ECFA 2006 Valencia, 9 th November 2006.
August 2005Snowmass Workshop Instrumentation of the Very Forward Region of a Linear Collider Detector Wolfgang Lohmann, DESY.
Karsten Büßer Beam Induced Backgrounds at TESLA for Different Mask Geometries with and w/o a 2*10 mrad Crossing Angle HH-Zeuthen-LC-Meeting Zeuthen September.
1 LumiCal Optimization and Design Takashi Maruyama SLAC SiD Workshop, Boulder, September 18, 2008.
Ronen Ingbir Collaboration High precision design Tel Aviv University HEP Experimental Group Cambridge ILC software tools meeting.
Jan MDI WS SLAC Electron Detection in the Very Forward Region V. Drugakov, W. Lohmann Motivation Talk given by Philip Detection of Electrons and.
Karsten Büßer Beam Induced Backgrounds at TESLA for Different Mask Geometries with and w/o a 2*10 mrad Crossing Angle LCWS 2004 Paris April 19 th 2004.
BeamCal Simulations with Mokka Madalina Stanescu-Bellu West University Timisoara, Romania Desy, Zeuthen 30 Jun 2009 – FCAL Meeting.
Luminosity Monitoring and Beam Diagnostics FCAL Collaboration Workshop TAU, September 18-19, 2005 Christian Grah.
Analysis of Beamstrahlung Pairs ECFA Workshop Vienna, November 14-17, 2005 Christian Grah.
Dec 2004 Simulation of Low Energy backgrounds in the ILC IR Impact on feedback BPMs FONT collaboration  QMUL: P Burrows, G Christian, C Clarke, G White,
Diamond Detector Developments at DESY and Measurements on homoepitaxial sCVD Diamond Christian Grah - DESY Zeuthen 2 nd NoRHDia Workshop at GSI Thursday,
Polycrystalline CVD Diamonds for the Beam Calorimeter of the ILC C. Grah 1, U. Harder 1, H. Henschel 1, E. Kouznetsova 1, W. Lange 1, W. Lohmann 1, M.
26 Apr 2009Paul Dauncey1 Digital ECAL: Lecture 1 Paul Dauncey Imperial College London.
Simulation of Beam-Beam Background at CLIC André Sailer (CERN-PH-LCD, HU Berlin) LCWS2010: BDS+MDI Joint Session 29 March, 2010, Beijing 1.
Septembre SLAC BeamCal W. Lohmann, DESY BeamCal: ensures hermeticity of the detector to smallest polar angles -important for searches Serves as.
Karsten Büßer Instrumentation of the Forward Region of the TESLA Detector International Europhysics Conference on High Energy Physics Aachen, July 19th.
Beam-Beam Background and the Forward Region at a CLIC Detector André Sailer (CERN PH-LCD) LC Physics School, Ambleside 22st August, 2009.
ILC-ECFA Workshop Valencia November 2006 Four-fermion processes as a background in the ILC luminosity calorimeter for the FCAL Collaboration I. Božović-Jelisavčić,
Fast Beam Diagnostics at the ILC Using the Beam Calorimeter Christian Grah, Desy FCAL Workshop February Cracow.
Electron Detection in the SiD BeamCal Jack Gill, Gleb Oleinik, Uriel Nauenberg, University of Colorado ALCPG Meeting ‘09 2 October 2009.
HEP Tel Aviv University LumiCal (pads design) Simulation Ronen Ingbir FCAL Simulation meeting, Zeuthen Tel Aviv University HEP experimental Group Collaboration.
Pad design present understanding Tel Aviv University HEP Experimental Group Ronen Ingbir Collaboration High precision design Tel-Aviv Sep.05 1.
16 February 2009CLIC Physics & Detectors Konrad Elsener 1... some issues regarding the forward region... (“picking up” from Lucie Linssen, 29 Sept 2008)
Lucia Bortko | Optimisation Studies for the BeamCal Design | | IFJ PAN Krakow | Page 1/16 Optimisation Studies for the BeamCal Design Lucia.
Polycrystalline CVD Diamonds for the Beam Calorimeter of the ILC C.Grah ILC ECFA 2006 Valencia, 9 th November 2006.
Fast and Precise Luminosity Measurement at the ILC Ch.Grah LCWS 2006 Bangalore.
1 Simulation of Neutron Backgrounds in the ILC Extraction Line Beam Dump Siva Darbha Supervisors: Lewis Keller and Takashi Maruyama.
Beamdiagnostics using BeamCal C.Grah FCAL Workshop, Paris,
Electron Identification Efficiency of the BeamCal (modified SiD02) Jack Gill, Uriel Nauenberg, Gleb Oleinik University of Colorado at Boulder 3 March 2009.
1/24 SiD FCAL Takashi Maruyama Tom Markiewicz SLAC TILC’09, Tskuba, Japan, April 2009 Contributors: SLAC M. BreidenbachFNALW. Cooper G. Haller K.
Mokka simulation studies on the Very Forward Detector components at CLIC and ILC Eliza TEODORESCU (IFIN-HH) FCAL Collaboration Meeting Tel Aviv, October.
September 2007SLAC IR WS Very Forward Instrumentation of the ILC Detector Wolfgang Lohmann, DESY Talks by M. Morse, W. Wierba, myself.
LumiCal background and systematics at CLIC energy I. Smiljanić, Vinča Institute of Nuclear Sciences.
Performance Study of Pair-monitor 2009/06/30 Yutaro Sato Tohoku Univ.
1 LoI FCAL Takashi Maruyama SLAC SiD Workshop, SLAC, March 2-4, 2009 Contributors: SLAC M. BreidenbachFNALW. Cooper G. Haller K. Krempetz T. MarkiewiczBNLW.
Very Forward Instrumentation: BeamCal Ch. Grah FCAL Collaboration ILD Workshop, Zeuthen Tuesday 15/01/2008.
FCAL Takashi Maruyama SLAC SiD Workshop, 15 – 17 November, 2010, Eugene, Oregon.
Initial proposal for the design of the luminosity calorimeter at a 3TeV CLIC Iftach Sadeh Tel Aviv University March 6th 2009
Diamond – Tungsten Calorimeter LCAL-group : K. Afanasiev, V. Drugakov, E. Kouznetsova, W. Lohmann, A. Stahl Workshop on Forward Calorimetry and Luminosity.
BeamCal Simulation for CLIC
FCAL R&D towards a prototype of very compact calorimeter
Effect of L* Changes on Vertex Detector and Forward Calorimeter Performance LCWS 2015 Whistler, BC, Canada November Bruce Schumm UCSC/SCIPP 1.
Layout of Detectors for CLIC
Summary of the FCAL Workshop Cracow, February 12-13
The Optimized Sensor Segmentation for the Very Forward Calorimeter
Maria Person Gulda , Uriel Nauenberg, Gleb Oleinik,
Neutron and Photon Backscattering from the ILC Beam Dump
Radiation Backgrounds in the ATLAS New Small Wheel
Beamdiagnostics by Beamstrahlung Pair Analysis
Study of e+ e- background due to beamstrahlung for different ILC parameter sets Stephan Gronenborn.
Higgs Factory Backgrounds
Simulation of Neutron Backgrounds in the ILC Extraction Line Beam Dump
Backgrounds using v7 Mask in 9 Si Layers at a Muon Higgs Factory
The Very Forward Region of the ILC Detectors
GLD IR optimization and background study
Background Simulations at Fermilab
Presentation transcript:

Doses and bunch by bunch fluctuations in BeamCal at the ILC Eliza Teodorescu FCAL Collaboration Meeting June 29-30, 2009, DESY-Zeuthen, Germany

RiRi RoRo ReRe 30 X 0 Suport tube (Iron) Absorber (W) Electronics Sensor Dead Area R To R i = 20 mm R 0 = 150 mm R e = 50 mm R Ti = 200 mm R To = 250 mm sandwich em. calorimeter : 30 layers of 1 X 0 3.5mm W + 0.3mm sensor ~ channels of ~0.8 R M ~ 20mm < R < 150mm (200 electronics 250 suport tube) each sensor layer divided into 8 sectors BeamCal R Ti

Simulate Collision: Guineapig (nominal parameter set) e+e- pairs ASCII File Simulate detector: BeCaS1.2 ROOT file BeCaS A Geant4 BeamCal simulation (A.Sapronov) Can be configured to run with: OUTPUT full GEANT4 simulation => energy, particle distributions … INPUT OUTPUT The simulation chain different crossing angles (corresponding geometry is chosen): here: 14 mrad magnetic field (solenoid, (Anti) DID, use field map): here: Anti DID

energy deposition vs. calorimeter depth: - the maximum of the shower in the 5 th and 6 th layers, ~30 GeV/bx - Edep < 5 GeV/bx in the first sensor layer and in the second half of BeamCal Electron-positron background 5 BX1 BX

Energy depositions along the sensor’s radius (layer 6) -statistics of 5 bunch-crossings -most of the energy is deposited in the innermost region of the sensor, then gradually decreases toward the outer radii - energy deposition decreases to less than 1% at a radius of about 80 mm - less than 0.1% at 100 mm Electron-positron background 5 BX

the absorbed dose in the sensor layers e+e- DOSE 3x10^11 BX/year 5 BX

The dose at different distances from the beampipe Closest to the beampipe : dose vs. layer number distribution : - the dose rises from 4x10^5 Gy/year (first layer) to 6x10^6 Gy/year (maximum), then slowly decreases to less than 2x10^4 Gy/year in the last layers of BeamCal. e+e- DOSE 4x10 5 Gy/year (front) 6x10 6 Gy/year (max) 2x10 4 Gy/year (back) R = 20 mm-28 mm 5 BX

Increase in the dose toward the final layers of BeamCal e+e- DOSE 2 causes: - natural developement of the shower - backscattered particles (from QD0) The innermost rings of the sensors are most affected R = 150 mm-158 mm R = 100 mm-108 mm The dose at different distances from the beampipe 5 BX

- remove QD0 from simulation: dose slowly decreases e+e- DOSE R = 100 mmR = 150 mm 5 BX

Bunch by bunch fluctuations Christian Grah Energy deposition and standard deviation for the whole calorimeter - one BX -closest to the beampipe – highest energy deposition ( ~10 MeV/pad) - for the outer pads ~keV - there are pads with no energy deposition each pad – independently read -> interesting to see how energy deposition fluctuates from bunch to bunch, in each pad For this: (r,  ) energy distributions First: one BX (comparison with older results provided by Ch. Grah) 1 BX

Bunch by bunch fluctuations 40 BX - Simulate more bunch crossings and find the medium energy deposition - In this case: N=40 BX - Calculate the standard deviation:  Energy deposition: tens of MeV – innermost pads keV – rest of the pads   0.1 MeV – innermost pads KeV – rest of the pads Mean E dep  What happens for more bunches?

Bunch by bunch fluctuations Energy deposition for a single high energetic electron GeV initial energy - hits the first layer of BeamCal

Layer 6 Layer 12 Layer 25 E tot = GeVE tot = 2.9x10-5 GeVE tot = GeV Bunch by bunch fluctuations Shower development throughout the calorimeter – 250 GeV electron

Bunch by bunch fluctuations Superimpose the high energetic electron over the backgroud

Layer 6Layer 12 Bunch by bunch fluctuations All BX  Typical layer of average background with high energetic electron  Typical layer of background standard deviation with high energetic electron

The distribution of the average deposited energy and standard deviation in a pad (layer 12)

Thank you!