SuperB LNF meeting March 21st 2012 Marcello Piccolo

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
PID Detector Size & Acceptance Chris Rogers Analysis PC
Advertisements

The performance of Strip-Fiber EM Calorimeter response uniformity, spatial resolution The 7th ACFA Workshop on Physics and Detector at Future Linear Collider.
CMS week mar 051 Results of the Analysis of 2004 DT Test Beam C. Battilana and S. Marcellini – INFN Bologna Trigger Performance: -Single Muons -Di-Muons.
The Tesla muon detector an update Marcello Piccolo St. Malo April 2002.
Off-axis Simulations Peter Litchfield, Minnesota  What has been simulated?  Will the experiment work?  Can we choose a technology based on simulations?
Cluster Threshold Optimization from TIF data David Stuart, UC Santa Barbara July 26, 2007.
1 KEK Beam Test Analysis Hideyuki Sakamoto 15 th MICE Collaboration Meeting 10 st June,2006.
1 G4MICE Analysis of KEK Test Beam Aron Fish Malcolm Ellis CM15 10th June 2006.
An offline look at TIF data David Stuart UC Santa Barbara May 2, 2007.
Forward Detectors and Measurement of Proton-Antiproton Collision Rates by Zachary Einzig, Mentor Michele Gallinaro INTRODUCTION THE DETECTORS EXPERIMENTAL.
Rate and Gain Measurements of the 1-m long GEM detector Aiwu Zhang EIC tracking R&D weekly meeting.
The Transverse detector is made of an array of 256 scintillating fibers coupled to Avalanche PhotoDiodes (APD). The small size of the fibers (5X5mm) results.
Tests with JT0623 & JT0947 at Indiana University Nagoya PMT database test results for JT0623 at 3220V: This tube has somewhat higher than usual gain. 5×10.
14/02/2007 Paolo Walter Cattaneo 1 1.Trigger analysis 2.Muon rate 3.Q distribution 4.Baseline 5.Pulse shape 6.Z measurement 7.Att measurement OUTLINE.
Monte Carlo Comparison of RPCs and Liquid Scintillator R. Ray 5/14/04  RPCs with 1-dimensional readout (generated by RR) and liquid scintillator with.
Updates on GEMs characterization with APV electronics K. Gnanvo, N. Liyanage, K. Saenboonruang.
Target material and thickness considerations Alain Blondel, with thanks to Dean Adams and Dan Kaplan Priority for rebuild is to have a target mechanism.
Linear collider muon detector: Marcello Piccolo Amsterdam, April 2003.
Preliminary results of a detailed study on the discharge probability for a triple-GEM detector at PSI G. Bencivenni, A. Cardini, P. de Simone, F. Murtas.
Neutron detection in LHe ( HMI run 2004) R.Golub, E. Korobkina, J. Zou M. Hayden, G. Archibold J. Boissevain, W.S.Wilburn C. Gould.
Charge Sharing & Hit Identification & Cluster Information.
1 Performance of a Magnetised Scintillating Detector for a Neutrino Factory Scoping Study Meeting Rutherford Appleton Lab Tuesday 25 th April 2006 M. Ellis.
1 A first look at the KEK tracker data with G4MICE Malcolm Ellis 2 nd December 2005.
Kelli Hardy Compton Study from Experimental Data.
Some remarks on (mis)identification: separation of pions from electrons Answer the question of the feasibility of p_bar p  e + e - Answer the question.
Cedar and pre-Daikon Validation ● CC PID parameter based CC sample selections with Birch, Cedar, Carrot and pre-Daikon. ● Cedar validation for use with.
3D Event reconstruction in ArgoNeuT Maddalena Antonello and Ornella Palamara 11 gennaio 20161M.Antonello - INFN, LNGS.
2/4/2001Ludovico Pontecorvo INFN Roma1 Plans for the H8 system test: 2001/2002 Goals for the 2001/2002 Test beam Beam layout Chamber Supports 2001 Schedule.
May 17-19, 2005D. Zaborov, ARENA workshop1 Dmitry Zaborov for the ITEP group Berlin, May 2005 Analysis methods of ITEP Baikal data.
FNAL Beam test results A. Zhang, V. Bhopatkar, M. Phipps, J. Twigger, M. Hohlmann HEP Group A, Florida Tech 2013/11/18.
Nantes — 2008, July Analysis of results from EmCal beam test at CERN PS (and SPS) energies P. La Rocca & F. Riggi University & INFN Catania University.
1 Performance of a Magnetised Scintillating Detector for a Neutrino Factory Scoping Study Meeting U.C. Irvine Monday 21 st August 2006 M. Ellis & A. Bross.
G. Eigen, Paris, Introduction The SiPM response is non-linear and depends on operating voltage (V-V bd ) and temperature  SiPMs need monitoring.
Comparison of MC and data Abelardo Moralejo Padova.
Testbeam analysis Lesya Shchutska. 2 beam telescope ECAL trigger  Prototype: short bars (3×7.35×114 mm 3 ), W absorber, 21 layer, 18 X 0  Readout: Signal.
Calibration algorithm and detector monitoring - TPC Marian Ivanov.
10/25/2007Nick Sinev, ALCPG07, FNAL, October Simulation of charge collection in chronopixel device Nick Sinev, University of Oregon.
HCAL1 Status 2004 Oleg Gavrishchuk, JINR, Dubna 1. HCAL1 performance in 2004 General design High Voltage system LED monitoring 2. Stability in 2003 Led.
TRIUMF laboratory studies Christopher Hearty University of British Columbia/IPP 27-Sep-2010.
Beam Diagnostics Seminar, Nov.05, 2009 Das Tune-Meßverfahren für das neue POSI am SIS-18 U. Rauch GSI - Strahldiagnose.
ArgonneResult_ ppt1 Results of PoGO Argonne Beam Test PoGO Collaboration meeting at SLAC, February 7, 2004 Tsunefumi Mizuno
A. Calcaterra, R. de Sangro, G. Felici, G. Finocchiaro, P. Patteri, M. Piccolo INFN LNF XIV SuperB General Meeting DCH-I parallel session LNF, 27 September.
A. Calcaterra, R. de Sangro, G. Felici, G. Finocchiaro, P. Patteri, M. Piccolo INFN LNF XIII SuperB General Meeting DCH-I parallel session Elba, 30 May.
1 Methods of PSD energy calibration. 2 Dependence of energy resolution on many factors Constant term is essential only for energy measurement of single.
2 pion photoproduction from G11A E. Golovach MSU Analysis Status for.
Beam Line Data Analysis of the PMT and Quartz Coupling Zak Arcara.
Forward Tagger Calorimeter Prototype tests at Jlab: report CLAS12 Workshop February 22, 2012 A. Celentano.
Feb C.Smith UVA EC energy calibration – g13 pass0 For pass0 data were cooked with CALDB calibration constants reset to nominal 10 channels / MeV.
Time-zero evaluation using TOF, T0 and vertex detectors
Analysis of LumiCal data from the 2010 testbeam
High Energy Physics experiments.
Fabio, Francesco, Francesco and Nicola INFN and University Bari
gamma ray polarisation measurement
EZDC spectra reconstruction and calibration
Ultra fast SF57 based SAC M. Raggi Sapienza Università di Roma
Status Report Fenfen An
CluTim Algorithm for Drift Chambers Readout Electronics
Tracking results from Au+Au test Beam
Analysis of FADC single-crystal data
HARPO Analysis.
Pulse Shape Fitting Beam Test September, October CERN
Status of the TOF Detector
LNF - Beam Test Facility Sept. 29 – Oct. 04
© 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved.
NanoBPM Status and Multibunch Mark Slater, Cambridge University
Study of dE/dx Performance in TPC at CEPC
Soft X-Ray pulse length measurement
High Rate Photon Irradiation Test with an 8-Plane TRT Sector Prototype
西村美紀(東大) 他 MEGIIコラボレーション 日本物理学会 第73回年次大会(2018年) 東京理科大学(野田キャンパス)
Clustering-based Studies on the upgraded ITS of the Alice Experiment
Presentation transcript:

SuperB LNF meeting March 21st 2012 Marcello Piccolo Proto-2 an update SuperB LNF meeting March 21st 2012 Marcello Piccolo Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF The menu Cosmic data Results on cosmic on truncated averages and ncl. BTF data Cosmic BTF comparison Energy loss comparison BaBar mix vs. 90_10 Conclusions and outlook Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF Cosmic data As a reminder , and also to compare with the BTF data I’ll show later, here are few plots coming from cosmic. In the cosmic data, we have an external tracker to point into proto-2 . Data written on disk are selected requiring a given number of SCA channels away from zero, when a scintillation counter trigger goes off: the trigger itself implies a momentum cut of 130 MeV/c (by means of a Lead absorber). Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Energy loss and clusters Fractional resolution for trunc. dE/dx and # of clusters vs. # of averaging SCA channels. Profile histo for pulse height and # of cluster vs. first cluster time. Moderate indications of Saturation/packing losses Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Total # of cluster and cluster charge As mentioned at last meeting, one can evaluate the total # of cluster from total charge and the single electron cluster charge. Single electron clusters are found integrating currents of found clusters during times consistent with the preamp expected pulse shape for a d-type of excitation, requiring, in turn, that the baseline r.m.s before and after the spike is consistent with the expected null noise. Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Cosmic single cluster plots From the ratio of the most probable value of the single cluster charge to the most probable value of the total amplitude we evaluate a total number of electron of ~ 40. Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Cluster counting efficiency From the amplitude ratio mentioned in the previous slide, on can then evaluate the experimental cluster counting efficiency for any given algorithm used to count cluster. On our setup for cosmic data such an efficiency turns out to be around 50%. Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Conclusion from cosmic m With 90/10 mix (He/Isob) one obtains in the Proto-2 cells around 20 ionization clusters in a time window of ~800 nsec. The overall cluster detection efficiency ( at 15.0 mV thres.) is 50%. Fractional resolution in energy loss is 15% with the traditional method of truncated mean, somewhat better then/around 10% with cluster counting. Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Now for the BTF beam test Giuseppe has already shown the main features of the BTF and the database collected there. I will mainly show analyses similar to the ones I reported for cosmic and produce cosmic/BTF comparisons. I did not implement Proto-2 tracking in my analysis of the electron data, but a straight cut on the # of SCA active channels acts, with reasonable efficiency , as a track finder…. Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF Electron data We just repeated the cosmic analyses on the electron data: here are a couple of energy loss and number of cluster distribution, requiring a single (500 MeV/c) electron going through the Proto-2 Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF A surprise.. Looking at the amplitude for relativistic electrons we found that it was sizably less than the one for cosmic. This would imply either a bigger energy loss for cosmic m or some kind of instability of the setup. In the plot, data from electrons are black squares , cosmic are grey triangles. On the horizontal axis is the cell number On purpose I did not apply any calibration To the data: difference from cell to cell (max excursion ~20%) are due to electronic gain differences. Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Does it come from real energy loss? We took a hard look to differences in operating conditions ( temps, gas-mixes etc.) But apart from a possible temperature effect we could not finger anything. So we went back and look to single electron amplitude. We realized that even for monitoring purposes recording the waveform is relevant. Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Single electron comparison So we look at the single electron charge spectra for cosmic and electrons: Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

The amplitude difference Here are the spectra for cell 9 for cosmic and single electron. Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF So… it seems real Given the single electron charge spectra it seems that the apparatus is stable and that electrons loose less than cosmic. So we see a moderate improvement here too, but smaller then what has been measured on cosmic Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Amplitude and # of cluster vs. time Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Typical # cluster and pulse height for cell 23 # of cluster and pulse height; center # of cluster and pulse height; H.V. side # of cluster and pulse height; elec side

Here are the figures Cell # Ratio cluster HV side Ratio amplitude Ratio cluster Elec side Ratio amplitude Elec side 2 1.22 1.11 0.67 0.88 6 1.42 1.08 0.78 0.92 9 1.39 0.84 13 1.32 1.06 0.82 0.97 16 1.34 1.05 0.81 20 1.45 1.07 0.89 23 1.23 0.90 0.94 27 1.37 1.12

Track length behavior Looking at run 175 and 177 one can infer the behavior of the # of cluster and pulse height as a function of track length. The proto was rotated by 45 deg. So that the track length was increased of about 40%.

Ratio for 90/45 deg inc. angle Cell # 177/175 # cluster 177/175 pulse height 2 1.53 1.77 6 1.55 1.84 9 1.49 1.90 13 1.47 1.68 16 1.59 1.83 20 1.56 23 1.73 27 1.52 1.70 A reminder: the ratios should be around 1.41 , the values obtained would imply a substantial amount of saturation especially in the pulse height compartment.

Few words for the BaBar mix Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Single electron evaluation BTF. The total number of single electrons for 90/10 and 80/20 from BTF data. Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF Time spectra The 80/20 mix is some 10% faster than the 90/10. This ,in turn, reflects in an average cluster time distance smaller for the more quenched mix. Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF

Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF Conclusions The data collected at the BTF do hold quite a number of answers to our questions: e.g. The gain coming from cluster counting for the 80/20 mix. is nil (at least with the front end electronics we are using) The cluster finding efficiency is about 50% both for cosmic and BTF electrons. The main gain we measure in (low momentum) cosmic m’s is reduced substantially for BTF electrons. We clearly need to explore a bigger part of the (momentum) phase space. We obviously plan to analyze in detail the complete BTF data-base and eventually collect more cosmic data at different momentum bites. Marcello Piccolo SuperB Meeting LNF