MAP 2014 Spring Workshop Fermilab May, 2014

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Plastic Scintillator Option for DB a simulation study by Maxim Gonchar, Yury Gornushkin and Dmitry Naumov JINR, Dubna, Russia Collaboration Meeting January.
Advertisements

Electron Backscattering Jeff Martin University of Winnipeg Outline: Motivation Experimental Setup Results and Comparisons See also: nucl-ex/ Phys.
MARS15 Simulations of the MERIT Mercury Target Experiment Fermilab March 18, Neutrino Factory and Muon Collider Collaboration meeting Sergei.
Hall D Photon Beam Simulation and Rates Part 1: photon beam line Part 2: tagger Richard Jones, University of Connecticut Hall D Beam Line and Tagger Review.
Pion yield studies for proton drive beams of 2-8 GeV kinetic energy for stopped muon and low-energy muon decay experiments Sergei Striganov Fermilab Workshop.
Impact of LHCf on BRAN and beam monitoring Y.Itow, H.Menjo (Nagoya University) The 1 st TAN integration workshop Mar10, 2006.
Super-B Factory Workshop April 20-23, 2005 Super-B IR design M. Sullivan 1 Status on an IR Design for a Super-B Factory M. Sullivan for the Super-B Factory.
Pair backgrounds for different crossing angles Machine-Detector Interface at the ILC SLAC 6th January 2005 Karsten Büßer.
MARS flux simulations - update Sergei Striganov Fermilab June 3, 2009.
NuMI Offaxis Near Detector and Backgrounds Stanley Wojcicki Stanford University Cambridge Offaxis workshop January 12, 2004.
MARS flux simulations - update Sergei Striganov Fermilab August 12, 2009.
Particle flux simulations Sergei Striganov Fermilab June 11, 2008.
GLAST LAT Project Test Beam Meeting, June 6, 2006 S. Funk 1/6 PS Positron Simulations Stefan Funk June 6, 2006.
30 Ge & Si Crystals Arranged in verticals stacks of 6 called “towers” Shielding composed of lead, poly, and a muon veto not described. 7.6 cm diameter.
RF background, analysis of MTA data & implications for MICE Rikard Sandström, Geneva University MICE Collaboration Meeting – Analysis session, October.
Photon reconstruction and calorimeter software Mikhail Prokudin.
Simulation of RPC avalanche signal for a Digital Hadron Calorimeter (DHCAL) Lei Xia ANL - HEP.
Charmonium feasibility study F. Guber, E. Karpechev, A.Kurepin, A. Maevskaia Institute for Nuclear Research RAS, Moscow CBM collaboration meeting 11 February.
5th July 00PSI SEU Studies1 Preliminary PSI SEU Studies Study SEU effects by measuring the BER of the link in  /p beams at PSI. Measure the SEU rate as.
Munich-Centre for Advanced Photonics A pixel detector system for laser-accelerated ion detection Sabine Reinhardt Fakultät für Physik, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität.
Impact parameter resolution study for ILC detector Tomoaki Fujikawa (Tohoku university) ACFA Workshop in Taipei Nov
Status of straw-tube tracker V.Peshekhonov, D.Peshekhonov, A.Zinchenko JINR, Dubna V.Tikhomirov P.N.Lebedev Physics Institute, Moscow Presented on the.
Hadronic Interaction Studies for LHCb Nigel Watson/Birmingham [Thanks to Silvia M., Jeroen v T.]
Shielding Measurements For A Proton Therapy Facility S. Avery, K. P. Risolo, M. Bartels, C. Ainsley, J McDonough, R. L. Maughan University of Pennsylvania.
1 Background radiation studies in LHCb with GAUSS/Geant4 Giuseppe G. Daquino PH/SFT.
G. BrunoOffline week - February Comparison between test- beam data and the SPD simulations in Aliroot G. Bruno, R. Santoro Outline:  strategy of.
PNPI, R&D MUCH related activity ● Segmentation ● Simulation of the neutral background influence ● R&D of the detectors for MUCH ● Preparation to the beam.
Impact parameter resolutions for ILC detector Tomoaki Fujikawa (Tohoku university) ACFA Workshop in Taipei Nov
Bangalore, India1 Performance of GLD Detector Bangalore March 9 th -13 th, 2006 T.Yoshioka (ICEPP) on behalf of the.
SIGNAL AND BACKGROUND SIMULATION AT THE RECOMBINATION CHAMBER Vadim TALANOV CERN and IHEP, Protvino Joint LHC Machine-Experiments Workshop on Very Forward.
Recent Studies on ILC BDS and MERIT S. Striganov APD meeting, January 24.
D 0 reconstruction: 15 AGeV – 25 AGeV – 35 AGeV M.Deveaux, C.Dritsa, F.Rami IPHC Strasbourg / GSI Darmstadt Outline Motivation Simulation Tools Results.
Andrei Nomerotski, University of Oxford ILC VD Workshop, Menaggio 22 April 2008 SiD Vertex Detector.
Radiation study of the TPC electronics Georgios Tsiledakis, GSI.
1 Giuseppe G. Daquino 26 th January 2005 SoFTware Development for Experiments Group Physics Department, CERN Background radiation studies using Geant4.
ILC IP SR and PEP-II M. Sullivan for the ILC IR engineering workshop IRENG07 Sept 17-21, 2007.
A. SarratILC TPC meeting, DESY, 15/02/06 Simulation Of a TPC For T2K Near Detector Using Geant 4 Antony Sarrat CEA Saclay, Dapnia.
Performance Study of Pair-monitor 2009/06/30 Yutaro Sato Tohoku Univ.
Geant4 Simulation for KM3 Georgios Stavropoulos NESTOR Institute WP2 meeting, Paris December 2008.
Photon & e+e- Hits in Muon Higgs Factory T. Markiewicz T. Maruyama SLAC MAP Collaboration Meeting. Fermilab 29 May 2014.
FP-CCD GLD VERTEX GROUP Presenting by Tadashi Nagamine Tohoku University ILC VTX Ringberg Castle, May 2006.
Mitglied der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft Hit Reconstruction for the Luminosity Monitor March 3 rd 2009 | T. Randriamalala, J. Ritman and T. Stockmanns.
Characterization of muon beam in T2K with emulsion detectors A. Ariga, T. Ariga, C. Pistillo AEC-LHEP University of Bern 1.
IPHC, Strasbourg / GSI, Darmstadt
R.W. Assmann, V. Boccone, F. Cerutti, M. Huhtinen, A. Mereghetti
M. Sullivan Apr 27, 2017 MDI meeting
X. Ding, UCLA MAP Spring 2014 Meeting May 2014 Fermilab
Huagen Xu IKP: T. Randriamalala, J. Ritman and T. Stockmanns
Integration and alignment of ATLAS SCT
Final Focus Synchrotron Radiation
The SuperB Silicon Vertex Tracker
Update on GEp GEM Background Rates
Monte Carlo studies of the configuration of the charge identifier
PARTICLE FLUX CALCULATION-III
Wavelet Analysis for Sources Detection
GEMC simulations Virtual detector placed just beyond aperture of third ion final focus quad 1 um downstream of aperture, 17 cm radius All physics processes.
Radiation Backgrounds in the ATLAS New Small Wheel
Higgs Factory Backgrounds
GEANT Simulations and Track Reconstruction
Estimation of Sensitivity to Gamma Ray point Sources above 30TeV
Mini Tower Preliminary Results
Backgrounds using v7 Mask in 9 Si Layers at a Muon Higgs Factory
T. Markiewicz / SLAC MAP at SLAC Working Meeting 2 July 2014
NKS2 Meeting with Bydzovsky NKS2 Experiment / Analysis Status
CALET-CALによる ガンマ線観測初期解析
GLD IR optimization and background study
Studies of the Time over Threshold
Understanding of the E391a Detector using KL decay
Converted Photon Hits in Muon Higgs Factory
Background Simulations at Fermilab
Presentation transcript:

MAP 2014 Spring Workshop Fermilab 27-31 May, 2014 Accelerator Physics Center Computational Issues Sergei Striganov Fermilab MAP 2014 Spring Workshop Fermilab 27-31 May, 2014

Outline MARS-EGS Occupancy estimates Conclusion

MARS vs MARS-EGS5 Background energy spectra Background entrance into detector

Gamma flux: entrance to detector vs entrance to nozzle Gamma flux: entrance to detector vs entrance to nozzle. Beam pipe – 5 cm radius, nozzle minimal radius – 2 cm vertical coordinate horizontal coordinate Maximum at positive (negative) entrance to nozzle and negative (positive) entrance to detector – backscattering from nozzle jaws!

Electron flux: entrance to detector vs entrance to nozzle Electron flux: entrance to detector vs entrance to nozzle. Beam pipe – 5 cm radius, nozzle minimal radius – 2 cm vertical coordinate horizontal coordinate Maximum at positive (negative) entrance to nozzle and negative (positive) entrance to detector – backscattering from nozzle jaws!

Nozzle geometry – 2 vertex setups Maximum at entrance to nozzle = 2 cm, entrance to detector = -5cm Maximum at positive (negative) entrance to nozzle and negative (positive) entrance to detector – backscattering from nozzle jaws! Simulation of backscattering very sensitive to details!

Hit calculations Hit definition: charged track left sensitive volume + charged track is stopped in sensitive volume. To estimate occupancy we need to perform simulation for chosen pixel size. Appropriate electron transport threshold should be determined as function of pixel size. Electron/positron from background files produced only 3% of background in vertex and tracker detectors. Above difference between MARS-EGS5 and MARS electron/positron simulation does not important for Higgs factory backgrounds calculation. In MARS minimal energy of produced δ-electron Ed= electron transport threshold. Number of produced δ-electron ~ 1/Ed .

Simple estimate of occupancy Simulations were performed with MARS background files in EGS5 mode with 3, 10, 20, 30 keV thresholds. Number of charged tracks leaving detector weakly depends on Ed , number of stopped tracks is proportional ~ 1/Ed . Low energy δ-electron are produced with large angle to δ-electron direction. Part of them is stopped in same pixel as track going from this pixel. To avoid double counting we need to choose adequate electron transport threshold. Electron ranges in silicon: 3 keV – 0.14 μm, 10 keV – 1.5 μm, 20 keV – 5 μm, 30 keV – 10 μm. Probability to stop in neighbor pixel: energy < 10 keV energy < 3 keV 5 μm 30% 2.8% 10 μm 15% 1.4% 20 μm 8% 0.7% 10 keV is close to estimated from above 20 kev is minimal estimate for 5 μm 30 kev is minimal estimate for 10 μm 10 keV estimate is only 30% large than 30 keV estimate in simulation. .

Occupancy in vertex detector (3 keV threshold) name hit/cm2 5x5 μm, % 10x10 μm,% 20x20 μm,% Barrel 1 2.3 104 1.2 4.8 19.2 Barrel 2 2.2 103 0.11 0.44 1.8 Barrel 3 542 0.43 Barrel 4 559 0.45 Endcup 1 8.9 103 0.2 0.8 3.6 Endcup 2 5.7 103 0.57 2.26 Endcup 3 3.6 103 0.36 1.45 Endcup 4 1.2 103 0.5

Occupancy in vertex detector (10 keV threshold) name hit/cm2 5x5 μm, % 10x10 μm,% 20x20 μm,% Barrel 1 1.3 104 0.66 2.64 11 Barrel 2 1.3 103 0.06 0.24 9.6 Barrel 3 300 Barrel 4 142 0.1 Endcup 1 4.9 103 0.49 1.96 Endcup 2 3.1 103 0.31 1.64 Endcup 3 1.9 103 0.20 0.80 Endcup 4 662 0.26

Occupancy in vertex detector (30 keV threshold) name hit/cm2 5x5 μm, % 10x10 μm,% 20x20 μm,% Barrel 1 1.1 104 0.53 2.12 8.48 Barrel 2 1.1 103 0.05 0.2 0.8 Barrel 3 234 0.19 Barrel 4 111 0.09 Endcup 1 3.9 103 0.39 1.56 Endcup 2 2.3 103 0.24 0.94 Endcup 3 1.5 103 0.15 0.60 Endcup 4 581 0.23

Summary There are significant differences in energy spectra and entrance point distribution of background electrons/positrons calculated using MARS-EGS and MARS. Most of electrons coming to detector through beryllium beam pipe are produced by backscattering of high energy electron on nozzle jaws. Simulation of backscattering is very delicate procedure and should be checked. MARS-EGS and MARS results for gammas are in satisfactory agreement. About 97% of hits in vertex&tracker are produced by neutrals (gamma and neutrons), so problem with electron simulation does not important for this application. Precise calculation of occupancy calculation impossible without detail simulation of detector. But it is possible to make estimate with about 30-50% accuracy.

Backup