Gas Pixel TRD/Tracker With the support of the TRT collaboration

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
CBM Calorimeter System CBM collaboration meeting, October 2008 I.Korolko(ITEP, Moscow)
Advertisements

A Search for Point Sources of High Energy Neutrinos with AMANDA-B10 Scott Young, for the AMANDA collaboration UC-Irvine PhD Thesis:
PERFORMANCE OF THE MACRO LIMITED STREAMER TUBES IN DRIFT MODE FOR MEASUREMENTS OF MUON ENERGY - Use of the MACRO limited streamer tubes in drift mode -Use.
Tracking at LHCb Introduction: Tracking Performance at LHCb Kalman Filter Technique Speed Optimization Status & Plans.
Study of Charged Hadrons Spectra with the Time Expansion Chamber of the PHENIX Experiment at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider Dmitri Kotchetkov University.
Track extrapolation to TOF with Kalman filter F. Pierella for the TOF-Offline Group INFN & Bologna University PPR Meeting, January 2003.
Tracking, PID and primary vertex reconstruction in the ITS Elisabetta Crescio-INFN Torino.
Tracking in High Density Environment
Positional and Angular Resolution of the CALICE Pre-Prototype ECAL Hakan Yilmaz.
G. BrunoOffline week - February Comparison between test- beam data and the SPD simulations in Aliroot G. Bruno, R. Santoro Outline:  strategy of.
1 Update on Silicon Pixel Readout for a TPC at NIKHEF LCWS08 - Chicago 19 Nov 2008 Jan Timmermans NIKHEF.
3D Event reconstruction in ArgoNeuT Maddalena Antonello and Ornella Palamara 11 gennaio 20161M.Antonello - INFN, LNGS.
Min-DHCAL: Measurements with Pions Benjamin Freund and José Repond Argonne National Laboratory CALICE Collaboration Meeting Max-Planck-Institute, Munich.
A. SarratTPC jamboree, Aachen, 14/03/07 1 Full Monte Carlo of a TPC equipped with Micromegas Antony Sarrat CEA Saclay, Dapnia Motivation Simulation content.
Jonathan BouchetBerkeley School on Collective Dynamics 1 Performance of the Silicon Strip Detector of the STAR Experiment Jonathan Bouchet Subatech STAR.
Particle Identification. Particle identification: an important task for nuclear and particle physics Usually it requires the combination of informations.
Anatoli Romaniouk, 3 March 2009 ACES Track trigger in ATLAS? Track trigger in ATLAS? Anatoli Romaniouk Moscow Physics and Engineering Institute.
00 Cooler CSB Direct or Extra Photons in d+d  0 Andrew Bacher for the CSB Cooler Collaboration ECT Trento, June 2005.
Calice Meeting Argonne Muon identification with the hadron calorimeter Nicola D’Ascenzo.
Christian Lippmann (ALICE TRD), DPG-Tagung Köln Position Resolution, Electron Identification and Transition Radiation Spectra with Prototypes.
meeting, Oct. 1 st 2015 meeting, Oct. 1 st Gas Pixel: TRD + Tracker.
SAS TRD Possible TRD configurations for PID up to the TeVs energies fig.s for this talk taken by: B.Dolgoshein Transition radiation detectors -NIM A326(1993)
1 Giuseppe G. Daquino 26 th January 2005 SoFTware Development for Experiments Group Physics Department, CERN Background radiation studies using Geant4.
First results from SND at VEPP-2000 S. Serednyakov On behalf of SND group VIII International Workshop on e + e - Collisions from Phi to Psi, PHIPSI11,
Villa Olmo, Como October 2001F.Giordano1 SiTRD R & D The Silicon-TRD: Beam Test Results M.Brigida a, C.Favuzzi a, P.Fusco a, F.Gargano a, N.Giglietto.
ATLAS Transition Radiation Tracker End-cap Quality Control and the Characterization of Straw Deformations Michael Kagan University of Michigan Supervisor:
A. SarratILC TPC meeting, DESY, 15/02/06 Simulation Of a TPC For T2K Near Detector Using Geant 4 Antony Sarrat CEA Saclay, Dapnia.
Particle identification by energy loss measurement in the NA61 (SHINE) experiment Magdalena Posiadala University of Warsaw.
10/25/2007Nick Sinev, ALCPG07, FNAL, October Simulation of charge collection in chronopixel device Nick Sinev, University of Oregon.
BESIII offline software group Status of BESIII Event Reconstruction System.
Performances of a GEM-based TPC prototype for the AMADEUS experiment Outline: GEM-TPC in AMADEUS experiment; Prototype design & construction; GEM: principle.
Particle Identification of the ALICE TPC via dE/dx
TPC for ILC and application to Fast Neutron Imaging L. An 2, D. Attié 1, Y. Chen 2, P. Colas 1, M. Riallot 1, H. Shen 2, W. Wang 1,2, X. Wang 2, C. Zhang.
1 straw tube signal simulation A. Rotondi PANDA meeting, Stockolm 15 June 2010.
TPC for 4-th concept S.Popescu IFIN-HH, Bucharest.
IPHC, Strasbourg / GSI, Darmstadt
High Energy Physics experiments.
Straw prototype test beam 2017: first glance at the data
MDT second coordinate readout: status and perspectives
gamma ray polarisation measurement
Activities on straw tube simulation
Elettra Sincrotrone Trieste
Some input to the discussion for the design requirements of the GridPixel Tracker and L1thack trigger. Here are some thoughts about possible detector layout.
M. Brigida, F. de Palma, C. Favuzzi, P. Fusco, F. Gargano, N
The Transition Radiation Detector for the PAMELA Experiment
Status Report Fenfen An
Saikat Biswas, A. Abuhoza, U. Frankenfeld, C. Garabatos,
Tracking results from Au+Au test Beam
CMS muon detectors and muon system performance
GLAST LAT tracker signal simulation and trigger timing study
A novel gaseous X-ray polarimeter: data analysis and simulation
Some results of test beam studies of Transition Radiation Detector prototypes at CERN. V.O.Tikhomirov P.N.Lebedev Physical Institute of the Russian.
STAR Time-Projection Chamber
Integration and alignment of ATLAS SCT
of secondary light ion beams
The Compact Muon Solenoid Detector
Test beam studies of possibilities to separate particles with gamma factors more than 103 with of straw based Transition Radiation Detector. V.O.Tikhomirov.
5% The CMS all silicon tracker simulation
The LHC collider in Geneva
p0 life time analysis: general method, updates and preliminary result
MINOS: a new vertex tracker for in-flight γ-ray spectroscopy
Reddy Pratap Gandrajula (University of Iowa) on behalf of CMS
Study of dE/dx Performance in TPC at CEPC
Search for f-N Bound State in Jefferson Lab Hall-B
Higgs Factory Backgrounds
GEANT Simulations and Track Reconstruction
Pre-installation Tests of the LHCb Muon Chambers
Design of active-target TPC
GasPixel Transition Radiation Tracker
Status of the cross section analysis in e! e
Presentation transcript:

Gas Pixel TRD/Tracker With the support of the TRT collaboration F. Hartjes, M.Fransen, W. Koppert, S.Konovalov, S.Morozov, N. Hessey, A.Romaniouk, M. Rogers, H. van der Graaf. With the support of the TRT collaboration

Motivation. A combination of a pixel chip and a gas chamber opens new opportunities for particle detectors. Pixelization of the information from the particle track offers new possibilities to combine in one detector many features: 1. Precise coordinate measurements (well below diffusion limit). 2. Vector track reconstruction. 3. Very good multi-track resolution. 4. Powerful pattern recognition features. 5. L1 trigger possibilities for stiff tracks. 6. Enhanced Transition Radiation separation 7. dE/dX measurements. TR clusters

What is the GasPixel detector ~ -500 V Pixel chip Mesh Gas volume Drift distance 16 mm 55 mm ~50 mm Track image on the pixel plane

Potential applications: everywhere. Issues important for TRD: But might be interesting for the Inner tracker in the collider experiments. Detector shell occupy the outer radii of the Inner Tracker and contain at least two layers which can be interleaved with TR radiator What is new? A vector tracking ! Precision space points: X ( f-direction) and Y (h – direction) 2. Vector direction f and h 3. Enhanced TR and dE/dx measurement function f Issues important for TRD: Limited space Number of layers 1 or 2 Effective TR radiator needed Minimum drift space (Rate constrains) May not be optimal for TRD Hope to work with each cluster

Particle ID: use TR and dE/dX information Total Cluster counting Relativistic rise vs d-electron energy B. Dolgoshein, NIM A326 (1993) 434 Number of primary Collisions vs gamma Number of primary collisions per cm of Xe Factor of 1.36 ln g MC Number of clusters above ~1 keV Factor of 2 Pions Plato Fremi : Mean 4 Min. ionising: Mean 2.7 Factor of 1.48 Detailed knowledge of the ionisation structure of the track gives more information for the particle ID. Although track the length of the drift volume is the main parameter! dE/dx, arb. units

X-ray absorption probabilities. Something more we may find useful. Particle ID: TR registration: The main issue is to separate dE/dX from TR Use the low: X-ray absorption probabilities. Something more we may find useful. 1+2 == 3 6% 3% 1% TR clusters Still there is dE/dX under the cluster B. Dolgoshein, NIM A326 (1993) 434

First test beam studies: Set-up Exposed to PS 5 GeV particle beam No detailed optimization done. InGrid TimePix detector, 14 x 14 mm2, 256 x 256 pixels (pixel size 55 mm) Two operation modes: time measurements and time-over-threshould measurements (amplitude) Exposed to PS 5 GeV particle beam Xe/CO2 (70/30) mixture. L = 16 mm 0.05 mm V0 V1 L for TR absorption ~ 16 mm TR-Radiator Beam p, el E 25o e- Length - 19 cm PP foils of 15 mm spaced by 200 mm h Pixel plane MC simulations studies were performed and compared with the test beam data using the same analysis tools.

Test beam studies. May 2008 test chamber: Operation parameters For the gas mixture 70%Xe+30%CO2 Total drift time ~ 300 ns Ion signal ~ 80 ns Transverse diffusion sT ~240 mm/cm1/2 Longitudinal diffusion sL ~120 mm/cm1/2 May 2008 test chamber: InGrid technology Drift distance= 16 mm Vdrift = 3800 V Edrift= 2000 V/cm Vamp ~470 V Gas gain ~ 800 – 3500 Protection layer 30 mm Amplification gap - 50 mm Orientation: 25 degree to the beam and horizontal. Gas Mixtures Ar/CO2 Xe/CO2 He/Isobutane DME/CO2 Mesh Si prot. layer Pixels Charge Electronics operating threshold: ~ 800 el. Gas gain range: 800 – 1800 Geometry + induced charge effect Effective threshold > 1600 el. OR > 1 primary electron. Estimated efficiency for 1 primary electron was ~30%

Test beam studies (5 GeV). Comparison EXP data with MC Particle tracking including all interactions + geometry - GEANT3 Ionisation losses - PAI model TR generation - ATLAS TRT code After all only 3 basic parameters were tuned to fit the MC model to the experimental data: Diffusion coefficient - was chosen to match a track widths. Threshold - tuned to satisfy number of fired pixels. Energy scale - scaled using calibration factor. Exp MC

Particle Identification. Time-Over-Threshold representing a signal amplitude was measured for each pixel Exp. data Amplitude (Arb. units Log scale) Pion Electron On the hip map color represents the amplitude or ToT information Amplitude (Arb. units Log scale) Pion Electron

Particle Identification Methods A total energy method The amplitudes of all the pixels on track are summed. 2. Cluster method Sum of the signals projected to the reconstructed track (binning is 55 mm). Exp. data rebin Cluster threshold Cluster energy

Particle Identification: Total energy. Test beam results Particle Identification: Total energy. Electrons Pions Distribution of a total ionization on the particle track for electrons and pions. Comparison MC and Data

Particle Identification: Total energy. Test beam results Particle Identification: Total energy. MC Exp Distribution of a total ionization on the particle track for electrons and pions Electron/pion separation.

Particle Identification: Cluster counting Test beam results. Particle Identification: Cluster counting Electrons Pions No clusters 29/368 – 7.9% No clusters 711/925 - 78% Cluster energy distribution on the particle track for electrons and pions

Particle Identification: Cluster counting Test beam results Particle Identification: Cluster counting Cluster energy distribution on the particle track for electrons and pions Electrons 1 cluster 175 Cluster energy (arb units) Events For PID additional CUT on the cluster energy is applied,. Electrons and pions 1 cluster 177 Electrons 2 clusters Events Only 1% of pions have 2 clusters Maximum cluster energy (arb units)

Particle Identification Rejection factor Pion registration efficiency as a function of electron efficiency. For 90% electron efficiency pion rejection factor is ~7 for the total energy method. Total energy Pion registration efficiency as a function of electron efficiency for the total energy method and Cluster counting method. Cluster counting method has a bit larger rejection power.

Particle Identification Rejection factor with cluster counting method Pion registration efficiency as a function of electron efficiency for 1 and 2 layers of the detector. Cluster counting method. TRD with two detector layers (total thickness ~ 40 cm) allows to achieve rejection factor of ~ 50 for 90% electron efficiency. The radiator is one of the biggest issues for the compact detectors.

TR generation and absorption (test beam set-up). Particle ID. TR generation and absorption (test beam set-up). MC MC Average: 2.5 TR photons. No TR photons: 12.5% Number of photons at the radiator output Number of detected photons in one layer per event (test beam chamber)

TR generation and absorption. Particle ID. TR generation and absorption. MC MC 20 keV Spectrum TR absorbed in 1.6 cm thick chamber Spectrum TR absorbed in 4 cm thick chamber Number of detected photons in inserts. For 4 cm chamber 6% electrons have no TR cluster

TR generation and absorption Particle ID. TR generation and absorption For 1-2 layer detector the biggest problem is the compact radiator which should provide a soft photon spectrum. Be - Li materials? MC Polypropylene radiator Beryllium radiator Number of absorbed photons as a function of the pass in the gas in 1.7 cm chamber (70%Xe + 30% CO2).

TR generation and absorption Particle ID. TR generation and absorption Radiators: 17mm/100mm/9 cm MC Polypropylene Beryllium Spectrum of absorbed TR for different types of radiator. There is a way to get a compact radiator with good TR yield But much more optimisation and test work is required.

Technique used for the tacking property studies. How well we understand the results? The answer is in MC simulations which use the same technique. Reminder: Diffusion coefficient and threshold in MC were chosen to satisfy a track widths and number of fired pixels observed in test beam. Only tack projection to the pixel plane is used (no time information taken into account). Y X « f » MC What we can measure with the beam without reference detector? Represent the chamber as two independent interleaved units and measure parameters of two “tracks” (pseudo-tracks) reconstructed independently! Track 1 Track 2 Chamber 1 Chamber 2 A real resolution is about ½ of the measured one with this method.

Results strongly depend on the gas properties. Tacking. Results strongly depend on the gas properties. DME/CO2 (50/50), 19o incident angle Xe/CO2 (70/30), 19o incident angle Low diffusion gas Electron NO TR Electron with TR Apart of detector geometry a track reconstruction accuracy depends on diffusion, single electron efficiency and also on a presence of the TR clusters.

Test beam results: Tacking. Low diffusion gas. Particle Chip DME/CO2 (50/50), 20 mm drift, Incident angle of 10o. s = 0.6o s = 11.5 mm At 10o incident angle an angle measurement accuracy of 0.6o for the track projection would mean: At B=2 T this corresponds to 15% momentum measurement accuracy for Pt of 40 GeV with one layer of the GasPixel tracker

Test beam results: Tacking. Xe - mixture Xe mixture: Pions, 5 GeV,, 55 mm pixel, 240 mm diffusion. 25o of incident angle Intrinsic special accuracy of the gas pixel detector (MC and EXP). Spatial accuracy MC intrinsic MC based on pseudo tracks EXP Effective electronics threshold (primary electrons) Spatial accuracy (mm) Angular resolution Angular resolution (o) MC based on pseudo tracks MC intrinsic MC: for the diffusion coefficient factor of 2 less EXP Effective electronics threshold (primary electrons) Intrinsic angular resolution of the gas pixel detector. (MC and EXP). 30 mm space accuracy and 0.6 o angular resolution obtained in the experiment for Xe based mixture (without radiator) . It is a bit worse (~55 mm, 0.9o) for electrons with TR clusters but effect still to be studied in details

Conclusions. Gas pixel technology offers new possibilities for the tracking and particle ID detectors Combining these detectors in one will certainly reduce tracking properties for the particles which produce TR but still still very much adequate to the electron tracking. For the High Energy Physics Experiments data flow limitations require some data processing at the Front-End level. This also makes natural the use of these devices as L1 track trigger. Definitely more test–beam and MC studies are needed to understand all the details and accumulate knowledge which would allow to produce a real detector.