Electromagnetic Calorimeter for HADES at SIS100: MAMI and CERN test results Lead-glass modules Tests -  beam at MAMI energy resolution -  - /e - beam.

Slides:



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

Bulk Micromegas Our Micromegas detectors are fabricated using the Bulk technology The fabrication consists in the lamination of a steel woven mesh and.
Directional Detectors and Digital Calorimeters Ed Norbeck and Yasar Onel University of Iowa For the 25 th Winter Workshop on Nuclear Dynamics Big Sky,
1 KEK Beam Test Analysis Hideyuki Sakamoto 15 th MICE Collaboration Meeting 10 st June,2006.
1 EMCal design MICE collaboration meeting Fermilab Rikard Sandström.
The Time-of-Flight system of the PAMELA experiment: in-flight performances. Rita Carbone INFN and University of Napoli RICAP ’07, Rome,
K1.8 meeting Report from E05 group Toshiyuki Gogami 26 Dec 2014.
Shashlik type calorimeter for SHIP experiment
HARP for MiniBooNE Linda R. Coney Columbia University DPF 2004.
New particle ID detector for Crystal Ball at MAMI-C Daniel Watts, University of Edinburgh John Annand 1, B. Briscoe 3, A. Clarkson 2, Evie Downie 1, D.
Ondřej Svoboda for the ECAL group HADES collaboration meeting XXV, 19 – 23 November 2012 GSI.
D ATA ANALYSIS FROM THE CERN TEST EXPERIMENT ABOUT THE HADES ELECTROMAGNETIC CALORIMETER By : Tazio Torrieri Supervisor : Vladimir Wagner.
MICE Beam-line and Detectors Status Report 16 th October 2009 Chris Booth The University of Sheffield.
CALORIMETER system for the CBM detector Ivan Korolko (ITEP Moscow) CBM Collaboration meeting, October 2004.
The Scintillator ECAL Beam Test at FNAL K. Kotera, Shinshu-u, 1st October 2009 CALICE Scintillator ECAL group; Kobe University, Kyungpook University, the.
Muon Detector Jiawen ZHANG Introduction The Detector Choices Simulation The structure and detector design The Expected performance Schedule.
E.Kistenev Large area Electromagnetic Calorimeter for ALICE What EMC can bring to ALICE Physics and engineering constrains One particular implementation.
Julien Bettane, Giulia Hull, Silvia Niccolai, Daria Sokhan 31/1/2012 Status and commissioning plan for the Central Neutron Detector.
1 Lead glass simulations Eliane Epple, TU Munich Kirill Lapidus, INR Moscow Collaboration Meeting XXI March 2010 GSI.
Shashlyk FE-DAQ requirements Pavel Semenov IHEP, Protvino on behalf of the IHEP PANDA group PANDA FE-DAQ workshop, Bodenmais April 2009.
Feb. 7, 2007First GLAST symposium1 Measuring the PSF and the energy resolution with the GLAST-LAT Calibration Unit Ph. Bruel on behalf of the beam test.
It is proposed to replace the HADES Pre-Shower detector, located at forward angles (18º< Θ< 45º), with an electromagnetic calorimeter. The electromagnetic.
1 Performance of a Magnetised Scintillating Detector for a Neutrino Factory Scoping Study Meeting Rutherford Appleton Lab Tuesday 25 th April 2006 M. Ellis.
Upgrade of HADES and Electromagnetic Calorimeter CENAP board, January 15, 2010 P. Tlustý NPI Řež group, Czech Republic for the HADES Collaboration HADES.
ECAL PID1 Particle identification in ECAL Yuri Kharlov, Alexander Artamonov IHEP, Protvino CBM collaboration meeting
RPC upgrade for the HADES Tracking: MDC e -,e + identification with RICH- TOF/PreShower  0.4 GeV/c TOF is not sufficient- Pre-Shower p,  identification.
First experiments after HADES upgrade CENAP board, September 24, 2010 P. Filip, A. Kugler, O. Svoboda, Y. Sobolev, P. Tlustý, V. Wagner NPI Řež group,
Hadron production in C+C at 1 and 2 A GeV analysis of data from experiments NOV02 and AUG04 for high resolution tracking (Runge-Kutta tracks) Pavel Tlustý,
M. Muniruzzaman University of California Riverside For PHENIX Collaboration Reconstruction of  Mesons in K + K - Channel for Au-Au Collisions at  s NN.
FIT (Fast Interaction Trigger) detector development for ALICE experiment at LHC (CREN) Institute for Nuclear Research (INR RAS) National Research Nuclear.
Instrumentation and Simulations for Target Test MICE Collaboration Meeting 22 October Bill Murray 1, Paul Soler 1,2, Kenny Walaron 1,2 1 Rutherford.
KEK Test Beam Phase I (May 2005) Makoto Yoshida Osaka Univ. MICE-FT Daresbury Aug 30th, 2005.
The experimental setup of Test Beam HE EE ES BEAM  A slice of the CMS calorimter was tested during summer of 2007 at the H2 test beam area at CERN with.
FSC Status and Plans Pavel Semenov IHEP, Protvino on behalf of the IHEP PANDA group PANDA Russia workshop, ITEP 27 April 2010.
Magnetized hadronic calorimeter and muon veto for the K +   +  experiment L. DiLella, May 25, 2004 Purpose:  Provide pion – muon separation (muon veto)
Test of Electromagnetic Calorimeter modules for HADES, Mainz Sep.2009 A.Krása, F. Křížek, J. Pietraszko, Y. Sobolev, J. Stanislav, A. Reshetin, P. Tlustý.
5-9 June 2006Erika Garutti - CALOR CALICE scintillator HCAL commissioning experience and test beam program Erika Garutti On behalf of the CALICE.
Aerogel Cherenkov Counters for the ALICE Detector G. Paić Instituto de Ciencias Nucleares UNAM For the ALICE VHMPID group.
LAV status report for the NA62 LAV working group Preliminary test beam results Future activities Progress on simulation A. Antonelli INFN-LNF SPSC meeting.
LHCf Detectors Sampling Calorimeter W 44 r.l, 1.6λ I Scintilator x 16 Layers Position Detector Scifi x 4 (Arm#1) Scilicon Tracker x 4(Arm#2) Detector size.
Christian Lippmann (ALICE TRD), DPG-Tagung Köln Position Resolution, Electron Identification and Transition Radiation Spectra with Prototypes.
Hadron production in C+C at 1 and 2 A GeV analysis of data from experiments NOV02 and AUG04 for high resolution tracking (Runge-Kutta tracks) Pavel Tlustý,
Electromagnetic Calorimeter for HADES at SIS100 Pavel Tlustý, NPI Řež Motivation Plans Current status Tests Outlook HADES Collaboration Meeting, Sesimbra,
DHCAL Jan Blaha R&D is in framework of the CALICE collaboration CLIC08 Workshop CERN, 14 – 17 October 2008.
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.
1/28 VISITS TO COMPASS / NA58 Seminar for guides 9 March 2005 Susanne Koblitz Gerhard Mallot.
Hadron production in C+C at 2 A GeV measured by the HADES spectrometer Nov02 gen3 analysis and results for spline tracks (shown in Dubna) changes - removing.
52th International Winter Meeting on Nuclear Physics, January 28, 2014, Bormio Andrej Kugler for the HADES collaboration.
Prototypes photon veto detectors for NA62 experiment CERN M. Raggi - INFN/Frascati for the NA62 Photon Veto Working Group LNF, RM1, NA, PI, SOFIA First.
1 Projectile Spectator Detector: Status and Plans A.Ivashkin (INR, Moscow) PSD performance in Be run. Problems and drawbacks. Future steps.
Study of the MPPC for the GLD Calorimeter Readout Satoru Uozumi (Shinshu University) for the GLD Calorimeter Group Kobe Introduction Performance.
SHIP calorimeters at test beam I. KorolkoFebruary 2016.
Beam detectors in Au+Au run and future developments - Results of Aug 2012 Au+Au test – radiation damage - scCVD diamond detector with strip metalization.
1 The Scintillation Tile Hodoscope (SciTil) ● Motivation ● Event timing/ event building/ software trigger ● Conversion detection ● Charged particle TOF.
An update on ECAL simulations
The Transition Radiation Detector for the PAMELA Experiment
“Performance test of a lead glass
Resolution Studies of the CMS ECAL in the 2003 Test Beam
The Beam Test at Fermilab:
Panagiotis Kokkas Univ. of Ioannina
Detection of muons at 150 GeV/c with a CMS Preshower Prototype
Jin Huang Los Alamos National Lab
Testbeam comparisons arXiv:
Dual-Readout Calorimeter: DREAM
Chris Smith California Institute of Technology EPS Conference 2003
Sergey Abrahamyan Yerevan Physics Institute APEX collaboration
Deng Ziyan Jan 10-12, 2006 BESIII Collaboration Meeting
Particle ID Diagnostics in the MICE Beamline
Electron PID & trigger using EMCal
Presentation transcript:

Electromagnetic Calorimeter for HADES at SIS100: MAMI and CERN test results Lead-glass modules Tests -  beam at MAMI energy resolution -  - /e - beam at MAMI particle separation Outlook HADES ECAL Workshop, Frankfurt a.M., October 14-15, 2010 A. Krása, F. Křížek, A. Kugler, J. Pietraszko, Y. Sobolev, J. Stanislav, P. Tlustý, T. Torrieri (NPI Řež), M. Golubeva, F. Guber, A. Ivashkin, K. Lapidus, A. Reshetin (INP Moscow), J. Pietraszko (IKF Frankfurt)

Detector modules Our proposal is to use lead glass modules from OPAL end cap calorimeter. ~ 900 modules needed, at present 1080 modules moved to GSI. Energy resolution ~ 5%/sqrt(E), E in GeV Module dimensions: 42 x 9.2 x 9.2 cm Signal Read-out PMT - EMI 9903KB (1.5'') from MIRAC (WA98 hadron calorimeter) ~720 PMT's diameter – 38 mm (1.5'') diameter of photocathode – 34 mm Front-end readout – ADC ADD-ON (Shower)+ TRB

Detector modules numberlightguide, wrapping glass wrappingPMT 1lead glass, mylarmylarEMI9903KB 2lead glass, paperpaperEMI9903KB 3NOmylarEMI9903KB 4NOpaperEMI9903KB 5NOmylarHAMAMATSU1949 EMI9903KB: 1.5” tube from MIRAC (WA98) H1949: 2.5” tube from HADES Tofino Lead glass dimensions: 9.2 x 9.2 x 42 cm

Tests – cosmic muons Source – cosmics muons: energy ≈ 2 GeV, energy deposit in module ≈ 200 MeV, Cerenkov light output corresponds to ≈577 MeV electrons count rate ≈ 20 particles / hour Measurement of pulse height (ADC) spectra – check of energy resolution various PMTs, configuration with/without lightguide July test of 5 modules before the MAMI test November test of 5 modules after the MAMI test December test of one module with PMTs (same type) with various gains, various wrappings March 2010 – now test of modules produced for one LG HADES sector

cosmics - module No.4 July 2009 Nov  = 5.4 ± 0.2 %  = 5.3 ± 0.2 %

Cosmic tests - results numberlightguide, wrapping glass wrapping PMTmean (channel) resolution (%) 1lead glass, mylar mylarEMI ± 0.3 2lead glass, paper paperEMI ± 0.5 3NOmylarEMI ± 0.4 4NOpaperEMI ± 0.2 5NOmylarH ± 0.3 Cherenkov light from cosmics muons is equivalent to 577 MeV electrons resolution 6.5% on cosmics corresponds to 5% for electrons at 1000 MeV assuming 5%/sqrt(E), E in GeV

 beam test conditions 2 days of measurement: 1)E e- = 855 MeV, I  = 25 kHz 2) E e- = 1508 MeV, I  = 5 kHz Beam: - detectors were positioned in the secondary gamma beam with continuous energy distribution from 0 to primary electron beam energy, with intensity exponentially falling with increasing energy - unless stated otherwise, the detectors were hit in the centre of their front side, and the beam proceeded along their longitudinal axis - beam diameter at detector position – 6 mm diameter Trigger: OR of signals from 8 selected scintillators in electron tagger – giving events with 8 known gamma energies in range from 0 to energy of the electron beam Purpose: to measure the module energy resolution as a function of  energy

MAMI test setup Trigger: OR of signals from 8 selected scintillators in electron tagger – giving events with 8 known gamma energies in range from 0 to energy of the electron beam Beam: detectors were positioned in the secondary gamma beam with continuous energy (intensity exponentially falling with increasing energy)

MAMI test setup Left up: test setup Left down: crew Right: detail with detectors, movable table and beam halo (looking in beam direction)

Measured  spectra ALLE= 1399MeVE= 1210MeV E= 1021MeVE= 831MeVE= 676MeV E= 261MeVE= 452MeVE= 72.1MeV E e =1508 MeV,  energy spread <= 1%, det. module No.1 ADC channel

Energy calibration E e = 1508 MeV

Resolution vs. Energy E e = 855 MeV resolution ~ k. 1/sqrt(E)

Resolution vs. Energy E e = 1508 MeV resolution ~ k. 1/sqrt(E)

Resolution vs. Energy Module No.1 resolution ~ k. 1/sqrt(E) LE: E e = 855 MeV HE: E e = 1508 MeV cosmics: cosmics muons

Resolution vs. Energy Module No.4 LE: E e = 855 MeV HE: E e = 1508 MeV cosmics: cosmics muons resolution ~ k. 1/sqrt(E)

Beam and cosmic tests - results No.lightguide wrapping glass wrapping PMTcosmics resolution (%) beam E=579MeV resolution (%) beam E=1000MeV resolution (%) 1lead glass, mylar mylarEMI6.6 ± ± lead glass, paper paperEMI8.8 ± ± NOmylarEMI7.0 ± ± NOpaperEMI5.4 ± ± NOmylarH ± ±

Resolution vs. HV E e = 1508 MeV, module No.1 resolution ~ k. 1/sqrt(E)

Resolution vs. beam position reading only module No.1 reading modules No.1+2 E e = 855 MeV, module No.1 No.1 No

CERN  - /e - beam test conditions Momentum settings: GeV/c Beam: - the T10 test beam line of the CERN PS synchrotron was used - pi- with momenta 0.4 – 6 GeV/c with admixture of electrons (increasing at lower momenta) - detectors were positioned in the pion beam - the detectors were hit in the centre of their front side, and the beam proceeded along their longitudinal axis - beam diameter at detector position – 4x4 cm defined by a trigger scintillator - triggered beam intensity: particles/ bunch, 1 bunch per 45 sec. ID: 2 m long gas Cherenkov in beam, placed 120 cm in front of lead glass, efficiency for electrons 98% Purpose: to measure the electron/pion separation as a function of momentum to measure the lead glass module time resolution, 5 identical modules tested (glass+optical grease+EMI) Trigger: OR of signals from 2 scintillators 4x4 cm

Test of lead glass - CERN May2010 Test setup on T10 CERN PS beam line Beam – pi- with momenta MeV/c with admixture of electrons

CERN test setup Right: T10 beam line Left: details with detectors

Measured e/p spectra – CERN May2010 Red – electrons green – pi- separation via gas Cherenkov ADC channel Electron peaks look worse than gamma peaks at MAMI The electron peak has long energy tail due to energy loss of electrons in air (~15m) and other detectors in T10 area.

Measured e/p spectra – CERN May2010 Same as before, but e/pi- spectra normalized to the same yield ADC channel

e  separation 2 sigma cut set on the electron peak Ratio of pions outside the cut to all pions is plotted For “RPC” the time-of-flight is used with assumed resolution of 100 ps (sigma) SHOWER

Energy resolution – CERN May2010 Looks a little worse than for gamma beam test – The electron peak has long energy tail due to energy loss of electrons in air (~15m) and other detectors in T10 area. E e [MeV]

Time resolution – CERN May2010 START signal – quarz detector, resolution < 100 ps TDC gain – 50 ps / channel e MeV

Summary  detector prototypes tested by cosmic muons gamma beam pion/electron beam  results optimal detector configuration found detector energy resolution close to 5% at 1 GeV e/p separation better than the SHOWER detector, in combination with RPC excellent separation detector time resolution 215 ps (sigma)

Design Number of modules 150x6=900 Mass of one module of lead-glass 14 kg Total mass of cal kg E. Lisowski, TU Krakow

Cosmic test setup lead glass module trigger detectors count rate: ~ 20 particles / hour

σ/N mean = 5.4 % our data Cosmic muon ADC spectra K. Gollwitzer, PhD thesis, University of California at Irvine, 1993 Fermilab E760 Central Calorimeter σ/N mean ≈ 7 % OPAL e - 1 GeV N p.e. ≈ 1800  ≈ 5% E760 e - 1 GeV N p.e. ≈ 4250  ≈ 5% E760  ≈ 2 GeV N p.e. ≈ 2082  ≈ 7% module length 50 cm

PMT Tests PMT EMI 9903KB (1.5'') ~720 PMTs available 500 PMTs tested HV dependence of PMT response: PMT alone at HV=1500 and 1700 V, PMT with a gamma-source 22 Na at HV=1200, 1500, and 1700 V; The results for HV=1500 V: <500 mV 79 pieces of PMTs 16% 500 mV < U < 1500 mV 120 pieces of PMTs 1500 mV < U < 2700 mV 191 pieces of PMTs >2700 mV 110 pieces of PMTs

Energy resolution and hadron rejection of the OPAL end cap calorimeter Energy resolution of the OPAL lead glass modules is 5%/sqrt(E), E in GeV) Hadron rejection below 10 GeV was not measured.

Simulated e  spectra K. Lapidus