A year of ATLAS preparation. Steve Snow New Year 2006 The resolution of tracks reconstructed in ATLAS ID should be: Good enough for some physics from the.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Preparation for ATLAS SCT/ID Endcap Completion at CERN Jo Pater Manchester, 4 January 2006.
Advertisements

E.K.Stefanides March 07, The Muon Spectrometer of the ATLAS detector: progress report on construction and physics studies at the University of Athens.
Results of the ATLAS Solenoid Magnetic Field Map
Beam energy calibration: systematic uncertainties M. Koratzinos FCC-ee (TLEP) Physics Workshop (TLEP8) 28 October 2014.
Stephen Gibson, ATLAS Offline Alignment, 2 nd July Incorporating FSI with the Offline Alignment Overview ATLAS Group, University of Oxford Stephen.
S. M. Gibson, IWAA7 November ATLAS Group, University of Oxford, UK S. M. Gibson, P. A. Coe, A. Mitra, D. F. Howell, R. B. Nickerson Geodetic Grids.
CM-18 June The Measurement and Monitoring of the Field from the MICE Magnets Michael A Green Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, USA Frank Filthaut.
X-Ray Survey of The ATLAS SCT. The ATLAS Semi-Conductor Tracker.
Status of the MICE SciFi Simulation Edward McKigney Imperial College London.
Sci Fi Simulation Status Malcolm Ellis MICE Meeting Osaka, 2 nd August 2004.
Atlas SemiConductor Tracker Andrée Robichaud-Véronneau.
Realistic Model of the Solenoid Magnetic Field Paul S Miyagawa, Steve Snow University of Manchester Objectives Closed-loop model Field calculation corrections.
S. M. Gibson, P. A. Coe, Photon02, 5 th September Coordinate Measurement in 2-D and 3-D Geometries using FSI Overview ATLAS Group, University of.
X-Ray Survey of The ATLAS SCT. The ATLAS Semi-Conductor Tracker.
S. Gibson FSI Offline Analysis 9 th October FSI Alignment: Offline Analysis Overview ATLAS Group, University of Oxford Stephen Gibson, Danny Hindson,
Solenoid Magnetic Field Mapping Paul S Miyagawa University of Manchester Objectives Mapper machine Mapper software Simulation Corrections Fitting Future.
Solenoid Magnetic Field Mapping Paul S Miyagawa University of Manchester Introduction Mapper machine Mapper software - Simulation - Corrections - Fitting.
Coil Manufacture, Assembly and Magnetic Calibration Facility for Warm and Cold Magnetic Measurements of LHC Superconducting Magnets CERN AT-MTM 1 / 21.
Page 1 Christian Grefe, DESY FLC Status of PCMAG fieldmapping analysis Annual EUDET Meeting Paris, Status of PCMAG fieldmapping analysis Christian.
ATLAS: SCT detector alignment and B field map. Steve Snow New Year 2005 This title describes work that has been growing from low priority at the start.
Offline Data Analysis Software Steve Snow, Paul S Miyagawa (University of Manchester) John Hart (Rutherford Appleton Laboratory) Objectives + requirements.
Offline Data Analysis Software Steve Snow, Paul S Miyagawa (University of Manchester) John Hart (Rutherford Appleton Laboratory) Objectives + requirements.
Alignment Strategy for ATLAS: Detector Description and Database Issues
ATLAS Pixel Detector Discussion of Tolerances November 12, 1998 Pixel Mechanics D. Bintinger, LBNL E. Anderssen, LBNL/CERN.
SCT Endcap Module Initial Alignments Using Survey Data Paul S Miyagawa University of Manchester.
Calibration of the ZEUS calorimeter for electrons Alex Tapper Imperial College, London for the ZEUS Collaboration Workshop on Energy Calibration of the.
ATLAS Inner Detector Magnetic Field I am responsible for providing the magnetic field map for the ATLAS Inner Detector.  6m long x 2m diameter cylindrical.
5 September 2006 John Hart RAL ATLAS physics meeting 1 Preliminary Report on Solenoid Mapping Field mapping completed in first week of August Aim to measure.
Optimising Cuts for HLT George Talbot Supervisor: Stewart Martin-Haugh.
Quantitative Optimisation Studies of the Muon Front-End for a Neutrino Factory S. J. Brooks, RAL, Chilton, Oxfordshire, U.K. Tracking Code Non-linearised.
Marco Delmastro 23/02/2006 Status of LAr EM performance andmeasurements fro CTB1 Status of LAr EM performance and measurements for CTB Overview Data -
SCT Week 2 Oct 2002N.P. Hessey NIKHEF1 Status ATLAS SCT 2002 NIKHEF Contributions to ATLAS: Magnets – discussed by Frank Trigger DCS Muon MDT and alignment.
Muon-raying the ATLAS Detector
1 ATLAS SCT Endcap C Efficiency Measurement Nicholas Austin IoP Conference April 2009.
NIKHEF B-field monitors Paul Balm November 11 th, 1999.
Results from particle beam tests of the ATLAS liquid argon endcap calorimeters Beam test setup Signal reconstruction Response to electrons  Electromagnetic.
1 A first look at the KEK tracker data with G4MICE Malcolm Ellis 2 nd December 2005.
FSC Status and Plans Pavel Semenov IHEP, Protvino on behalf of the IHEP PANDA group PANDA Russia workshop, ITEP 27 April 2010.
WP3 The LiCAS Laser Straightness Monitor (LSM) Greg Moss.
1 Calorimeters LED control LHCb CALO meeting Anatoli Konoplyannikov /ITEP/ Status of the calorimeters LV power supply and ECS control Status of.
3.The residual B r on the cylindrical surface is represented by multipole terms The results from the combined geometrical + general Maxwell fit show that.
CMS Tracker: Detector Control Units & Tracker Monitoring My Summer Student project (A contribution to:) Fatima Kajout 11 th of August 2003Student Session.
(Some thoughts/reminders on) Calibration/alignment scenarios for ILD/ILC Jan Timmermans – NIKHEF Amsterdam 07 Sep 2014ILD meeting Oshu1.
McSiM Barrel Strips upgrade geometry Steve McMahon RAL.
The Detector Performance Study for the Barrel Section of the ATLAS Semiconductor Tracker (SCT) with Cosmic Rays Yoshikazu Nagai (Univ. of Tsukuba) For.
3.The residual B r on the cylindrical surface is represented by multipole terms The results from the combined geometrical + general Maxwell fit show that.
Printing: This poster is 48” wide by 36” high. It’s designed to be printed on a large-format printer. Customizing the Content: The placeholders in this.
An electron/positron energy monitor based on synchrotron radiation. I.Meshkov, T. Mamedov, E. Syresin, An electron/positron energy monitor based on synchrotron.
2 July 2002Realistic Fields for a Ring Cooler Magnet System -- S.Kahn Page 1 Realistic Fields for a Ring Cooler Steve Kahn 2 July 2002 NuFact’02 Meeting.
Calibration of the ZEUS calorimeter for hadrons and jets Alex Tapper Imperial College, London for the ZEUS Collaboration Workshop on Energy Calibration.
Mapping the Magnetic Field of the ATLAS Solenoid Paul S Miyagawa University of Manchester ATLAS experiment + solenoid Objectives Field mapping machine.
Context of the Neutrino Factory Neutrino factory (2018) –4MW proton driver –p +   +   +  e + e  Linear e + e − collider (2014/5) –Leptons at 0.4.
NUMI NUMI/MINOS Status J. Musser for the MINOS Collatoration 2002 FNAL Users Meeting.
9th October 2003Danny Hindson, Oxford University1 Inner Detector Silicon Alignment Simple approach -Align in stages + rely on iteration Barrel to Barrel.
1 ATLAS Muon Spectrometer Alignment LHC Days in Split, 5-9 Oct J.Krstic, M.Milosavljevic Institute of Physics, Belgrade D.Fassouliotis,C.Kourkoumelis,
A New Inner-Layer Silicon Micro- Strip Detector for D0 Alice Bean for the D0 Collaboration University of Kansas CIPANP Puerto Rico.
Physics requirements  mapping spec’s Strategy: analyze measurements to get field Mapping plan: where/how to map Engineering design: sensor, fixtures,
Physics Requirements Sensitivity to Manufacturing Imperfections Strategy  where to map field  measure deviation from ideal model  fit to error tables.
Status of physics analysis Fabrizio Cei On Behalf of the Physics Analysis Group PSI BVR presentation, February 9, /02/2015Fabrizio Cei1.
Final Results for the Solenoid Magnetic Field Map CERN mapping project team Martin Aleksa, Felix Bergsma, Laurent Chevalier, Pierre-Ange Giudici, Antoine.
Iterative local  2 alignment algorithm for the ATLAS Pixel detector Tobias Göttfert IMPRS young scientists workshop 17 th July 2006.
Overview Preparatory work at the MML BBA to define the reference orbit
Re-mapping the Residual B-Field in NA62
Tracking detectors/2 F.Riggi.
J. Musser for the MINOS Collatoration 2002 FNAL Users Meeting
Why do we need to know the fields / map the magnets?
Beam Gas Vertex – Beam monitor
Integration and alignment of ATLAS SCT
Feed forward orbit corrections for the CLIC RTML
Quarkonium production, offline monitoring, alignment & calibration
Presentation transcript:

A year of ATLAS preparation. Steve Snow New Year 2006 The resolution of tracks reconstructed in ATLAS ID should be: Good enough for some physics from the first collisions Rapidly improved by using track-based alignment tools Eventually good enough that track systematic errors do not dominate the measurement m W to ~15 MeV Inner detector magnetic field map fit. SCT detector alignment. NMR probe preparation. Write/edit endcap module paper SCT status paper at PSD7. Organise seminars SuperNEMO tracker. CALICE thermal simulation. What I did last year My ATLAS aims

Field map objectives A useful test of the Standard Model would be measurement of W mass with uncertainty of 25 MeV per lepton type per experiment. W mass derived from the position of the falling edge of the transverse mass distribution. Momentum scale will be dominant uncertainty in W mass measurement: –Need to keep uncertainty in momentum down to ~15 MeV. Measure isolated muon tracks with p T ~ 40 GeV over large range of η: –Uncertainty in energy loss negligible. –Concentrate on alignment and B-field. Momentum accuracy depends on ∫ r(r max - r)B z dr : –Field at intermediate radii, as measured by the sagitta, is most important. Typical sagitta will be ~1 mm and target accuracy would be 0.02%, implying a systematic error on sagitta of 0.02 μm: –Technically impossible! –Will need to use Z mass, which is nearby and very well known. In reality, the limit on silicon alignment, even with infinite statistics and ideal algorithms, will be ~1 μm. We target an accuracy of 0.05% on sagitta to ensure that B-field measurement is not the limiting factor on momentum accuracy. This and following slides copied from Paul Miyagawa's talk at the 2nd ATLAS magnetic field workshop

Field shape. The field is very non-uniform at the ends of the coil; the Z component drops off and the R component rises sharply at z=2.65 m. Also plotted is the bending power per unit of radial travel for straight tracks coming from the origin.

Mapper Survey Requirements At first workshop, survey requirements of mapper machine relative to Inner Detector were reported as ~1 mm and ~0.2 mrad. Reinvestigated these requirements. 1 mm survey error in x (or y) significant for high η tracks. 1 mm survey error in z significant for endcap tracks. 0.1 mrad rotation around x (or y) axis significant for high η tracks. Conclusions remain unchanged.

Field Mapping Simulation Field model sampled on a grid of 90 z- positions × 8  -angles (defined by encoder values of machine). 4 calibration points (2 near centre, 2 near one end) visited after every 25 measurements. Used current design of machine to determine positions of 48 Hall + 1 NMR probes. At each map point, wrote the following data to file: –Time stamp –Solenoid current –z and  encoder values –Field modulus measured by 5 NMR probes (1 moving + 4 fixed) –3 field components measured by 48 Hall probes

Simulated Errors Six cumulative levels of error added to simulated data: 1.No errors. 2.Random errors in each measurement of: Solenoid current, 1 A NMR B-field modulus, 0.1 G Each component of Hall probe B-field, 3 G 3.Drifts by random walk process in each measurement of: Solenoid current, 1 A Each component of Hall probe B-field, 0.1 G 4.Random calibration scale and alignment errors, which are constant for each run: Each component of Hall probe B-field, 0.05% scale Rotation about 3 axes of each Hall probe triplet, 1 mrad 5.Symmetry axis of field model displaced and rotated relative to the mapper machine axis. These misalignments are assumed to be measured perfectly by the surveyors. 6.Each Hall probe triplet has a systematic rotation of 1 mrad about the axis which mixes the B r and B z components.

Correction for Current Drift Average B-field of 4 NMR probes used to calculate “ actual ” solenoid current. Scale all measurements to a reference current (7600 A). Effect of drift in current removed Calibration capable of coping with any sort of drift.

Correction for Hall Probe Drift Mapping machine regularly returns to fixed calibration positions –Near coil centre to calibrate B z –Near coil end for B r –No special calibration point for B  Each channel is calibrated to a reference time (beginning of run) Offsets from calibration points used to determine offsets for measurements between calibrations

Fit Quality with Expected Performance Expected mapper performance corresponds to error level 5. Both fits accurate within target level of 5×10 -4.

Probe normalisation and alignment corrections Hall probe triplets are accurately perpendicular to each other, but their mounting on mapper can have ~1 mrad errors. Hall probe calibration will probably be good to 0.1% but we can improve it by taking normalisation from the NMR probe at Z=R=0. We get best results by calculating PNA corrections with a variant of the Fourier- Bessel fit and using the corrected values in the geometrical fit :

Field fitting conclusions With no simulated errors, both fits have excellent technical accuracy. With realistic simulated errors, both fits give results within target of 5× Fourier-Bessel fit more sensitive to random measurement errors: –Due to more free parameters. –F-B fit designed for any solenoid-like field, whereas geometrical fit is specifically for the ATLAS solenoid. Probe normalisation & alignment correction from F-B fit helps significantly. Require survey of mapper machine relative to Inner Detector to be accurate to ~1 mm.

Initial SCT Alignment I have been promoting the idea making an initial SCT alignment based on conventional surveys. This is a backup / alternative to the Oxford plan for an X-ray survey combined with FSI monitoring. The accuracy of the SCT endcap as built, and as surveyed is now becoming clear Intrinsic resolution of SCT detector; 22  m (just under pitch/  12). Detector positions in module; build 4  m, survey 1  m (Joe's talk). Location holes in module; build 10  m, survey 3  m. Module mounting pins on disc; build 100  m, survey 10  m. Discs in support cylinder; build 200  m, survey 100  m. Hole to pin clearance; <10  m. Stability of mounting pins on disc;  m. (temperature, moisture,bending ) X-ray survey now cancelled Modified copy of slide from last year 7 microns random + 50 microns systematic (proportional to distance)

SCT endcap alignment from surveys Module internal alignment Relative positions of the four detectors and two mounting holes. Corrections of ~5  m known to ~1  m. Pin alignment Relative positions of the module mounting pins on discs. Corrections of ~100 um known to ~10 um. Disc alignment Relative positions of the 9 discs in each endcap Corrections of ~200 um known to ~100 um. Module production database Completed July 05 Understand and correct for small (1-2 um) systematic differences between surveys done at different sites. Joe Foster. In progress. Corrected final module data. Joe Foster. Expected Jan 06 Tables associating module serial number with position mounted on disc. Joe Foster. Endcap C complete. Endcap A expected December 05. Tables of pin position offsets from nominal in each disc. Collecting data from surveys done at Liverpool (Peter Sutcliffe) and NIKHEF (Patrick Werneke). Steve Snow. Endcap C complete, endcap A discs 9,8,7,6,5,4 done. Detector/module offsets from nominal in each disc. Steve Snow, Joe Foster. Expected March 06. Survey reports of disc alignment in each endcap. First few reports available from endcap C. Surveys should be repeated when the endcaps reach CERN. Steve Snow. In progress. combine Detector/module offsets from nominal in each endcap. Steve Snow, Joe Foster. Expected May 06. Learn how to load data into, and use data from, the conditions database. Upload this ? or this ? data Paul Miyagawa. Expected July 06.

Disc surveys Survey of module mounting pins on all endcap C (UK) discs is complete. Actual phi overlap between neighbouring modules will always be within 120 microns of the design value, and typically within 50 microns. Strip pitch is 80 microns, design overlap is 5,8,18 strips. (I,M,O rings) There will always be a small but useful overlap between modules to use for alignment with tracks.

NMR system Purpose and description of the NMR Overview of system Parts of the system Software for:Noise tests Signal tests Installation and Commissioning Configuration during field mapping Steve Snow 26/10/05 Technical support in Manchester: Julian Freestone, Mike Perry CERN contact: Pippa Wells

Overview Aim is to measure the magnetic field strength in the Inner Detector. NMR requires a very uniform field (<250 ppm/cm) so we must place the probes at z=0. Extrapolation to other parts of the Inner Detector relies increasingly on the field map as one moves towards the end-caps. NMR is intrinsically accurate; it it works at all we get a result accurate within a few x 10 ppm. Based on a system supplied by Metrolab, with modifications to improve radiation hardness of the probe and cables. Operating at/beyond the limits of some specifications: expected field gradient is 310 ppm/cm probe-amp cable length is 15m, Metrolab standard is 7m amp-readout cable length is 125m, standard is up to 100m Metrolab say their specifications are conservative and this should be no problem.

NMR system Standard Metrolab system with the addition of Pico 2-channel digitiser and PC to monitor noise, pickup, signal size, etc. Grounded only at ID ground point. Readout using LabVIEW on PC. Interface to DCS not yet defined.

Parts of the system Probe Probe in clamp on cryostat wall Amplifier Readout Cables All of the hardware is ready. Some software still being developed.

Noise Tests In lab, pickup depends strongly on layout of cables ; as soon as cables are laid in Atlas we want to measure noise and check it is not excessive. Maybe an opportunity to immediately re-route or bundle cables more tightly together. Final test is the ability to lock onto the NMR resonance - not possible until much later, when solenoid is turned on. Noise test results in good conditions: r.m.s. ~ 20 mV, peaks < 100 mV mains pickup < random noise The only thing likely to prevent the NMR system from working is noise pickup. NoiseTest.VI - automates all the NMR tests we can do in absence of field.

Signal Tests When the Teslameter is locked on the NMR resonance, as well as reading out the field value we monitor peak height, peak asymmetry and noise (between peaks). SignalTest.VI

Mapping time scale Latest ATLAS schedule shows mapping in April/May. We will prepare for that date but I would be surprised if it does not slip by 2 or 3 months.

Looking forward My changing priorities in the next year.

Seminars Not yet fixed: Martin Erdmann - Auger,Dino Jaroszynski - plasma acceleration.