Feasibility Study of Forward Calorimeter in ALICE experiment Sanjib Muhuri Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre Kolkata.

Slides:



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

Particle identification in ECAL Alexander Artamonov, Yuri Kharlov IHEP, Protvino CBM collaboration meeting
Proposal for a new design of LumiCal R. Ingbir, P. Ruzicka, V. Vrba October 07 Malá Skála.
LC Calorimeter Testbeam Requirements Sufficient data for Energy Flow algorithm development Provide data for calorimeter tracking algorithms  Help setting.
Quartz Plate Calorimeter Prototype Ugur Akgun The University of Iowa APS April 2006 Meeting Dallas, Texas.
The performance of Strip-Fiber EM Calorimeter response uniformity, spatial resolution The 7th ACFA Workshop on Physics and Detector at Future Linear Collider.
PHENIX Decadal Plan o Midterm upgrades until 2015 o Long term evolution after 2015 Dynamical origins of spin- dependent interactions New probes of longitudinal.
Measurement of charmonia at mid-rapidity at RHIC-PHENIX  c  J/   e + e -  in p+p collisions at √s=200GeV Susumu Oda CNS, University of Tokyo For.
Testbeam Requirements for LC Calorimetry S. R. Magill for the Calorimetry Working Group Physics/Detector Goals for LC Calorimetry E-flow implications for.
Forward Calorimeter Upgrades in PHENIX: Past and Future Richard Hollis for the PHENIX Collaboration University of California, Riverside Winter Workshop.
Rapidity dependency of azimuthal correlations for pp and dAu Xuan Li (BNL&SDU) STAR Collaboration meeting (BNL, Nov 2010) 1Xuan Li.
FMS review, Sep FPD/FMS: calibrations and offline reconstruction Measurements of inclusive  0 production Reconstruction algorithm - clustering.
Development of Particle Flow Calorimetry José Repond Argonne National Laboratory DPF meeting, Providence, RI August 8 – 13, 2011.
Status of Neutral Dijet Analysis on Data from 200GeV Proton Proton Collisions Using the STAR Detector at RHIC B. S. Page for the Collaboration STAR.
Angular resolution study of isolated gamma with GLD detector simulation 2007/Feb/ ACFA ILC Workshop M1 ICEPP, Tokyo Hitoshi HANO collaborated with Acfa-Sim-J.
Irakli Chakaberia Final Examination April 28, 2014.
Beam test results of Tile/fiber EM calorimeter and Simulator construction status 2005/03/05 Detector Niigata University ONO Hiroaki contents.
Jet Studies at CMS and ATLAS 1 Konstantinos Kousouris Fermilab Moriond QCD and High Energy Interactions Wednesday, 18 March 2009 (on behalf of the CMS.
Calibration of the ZEUS calorimeter for electrons Alex Tapper Imperial College, London for the ZEUS Collaboration Workshop on Energy Calibration of the.
STAR Spin Related Future Upgrades STAR Spin Physics Program Current Capabilities Heavy Flavor Physics W Program Transverse Program Upgrades: Plans & Technologies.
PHENIX Local Polarimeter PSTP 2007 at BNL September 11, 2007 Yuji Goto (RIKEN/RBRC)
EMCal in ALICE Norbert Novitzky 1. Outline How Electro-Magnetic Calorimeters works ? Physics motivation – What can we measure with Emcal ? – Advantages.
V.Dzhordzhadze1 Nosecone Calorimeter Simulation Vasily Dzhordzhadze University of Tennessee Muon Physics and Forward Upgrades Workshop Santa Fe, June 22,
Searching for Polarized Glue at Brian Page – Indiana University For the STAR Collaboration June 17, 2014 STAR.
Latifa Elouadrhiri Jefferson Lab Hall B 12 GeV Upgrade Drift Chamber Review Jefferson Lab March 6- 8, 2007 CLAS12 Drift Chambers Simulation and Event Reconstruction.
BES-III Workshop Oct.2001,Beijing The BESIII Luminosity Monitor High Energy Physics Group Dept. of Modern Physics,USTC P.O.Box 4 Hefei,
Apollo Go, NCU Taiwan BES III Luminosity Monitor Apollo Go National Central University, Taiwan September 16, 2002.
Positional and Angular Resolution of the CALICE Pre-Prototype ECAL Hakan Yilmaz.
Oct 6, 2008Amaresh Datta (UMass) 1 Double-Longitudinal Spin Asymmetry in Non-identified Charged Hadron Production at pp Collision at √s = 62.4 GeV at Amaresh.
Calorimeter in front of MUCh Mikhail Prokudin. Overview ► Geometry and acceptance ► Reconstruction procedure  Cluster finder algorithms  Preliminary.
13 July 2005 ACFA8 Gamma Finding procedure for Realistic PFA T.Fujikawa(Tohoku Univ.), M-C. Chang(Tohoku Univ.), K.Fujii(KEK), A.Miyamoto(KEK), S.Yamashita(ICEPP),
HEP Tel Aviv University LumiCal (pads design) Simulation Ronen Ingbir FCAL Simulation meeting, Zeuthen Tel Aviv University HEP experimental Group Collaboration.
11/18/2016 Test beam studies of the W-Si tracking calorimeter for the PHENIX forward upgrade Y. Kwon, Yonsei Univ., PHENIX.
Magnetized hadronic calorimeter and muon veto for the K +   +  experiment L. DiLella, May 25, 2004 Purpose:  Provide pion – muon separation (muon veto)
DIS Conference, Madison WI, 28 th April 2005Jeff Standage, York University Theoretical Motivations DIS Cross Sections and pQCD The Breit Frame Physics.
Longitudinal Spin Asymmetry and Cross Section of Inclusive  0 Production in Polarized p+p Collisions at 200 GeV Outline  Introduction  Experimental.
7/20/07Jiyeon Han (University of Rochester)1 d  /dy Distribution of Drell-Yan Dielectron Pairs at CDF in Run II Jiyeon Han (University of Rochester) For.
CP violation in B decays: prospects for LHCb Werner Ruckstuhl, NIKHEF, 3 July 1998.
1 NCC Task Force Richard Seto NCC Task Force Meeting Jan 8, 2007 BNL.
The Luminosity Calorimeter Iftach Sadeh Tel Aviv University Desy ( On behalf of the FCAL collaboration ) June 11 th 2008.
1 LumiCal Optimization Simulations Iftach Sadeh Tel Aviv University Collaboration High precision design May 6 th 2008.
Calibration of the ZEUS calorimeter for hadrons and jets Alex Tapper Imperial College, London for the ZEUS Collaboration Workshop on Energy Calibration.
Lucia Bortko | Optimisation Studies for the BeamCal Design | | IFJ PAN Krakow | Page 1/16 Optimisation Studies for the BeamCal Design Lucia.
October 2011 David Toback, Texas A&M University Research Topics Seminar1 David Toback Texas A&M University For the CDF Collaboration CIPANP, June 2012.
Forward hard  measurement by a W/Si calorimeter Y. Kwon, J. H. Kang, M. G. Song (Yonsei Univ.) 1.
Search for a Standard Model Higgs Boson in the Diphoton Final State at the CDF Detector Karen Bland [ ] Department of Physics,
Performance Study of Pair-monitor 2009/06/30 Yutaro Sato Tohoku Univ.
A Forward Calorimeter (FoCal) as upgrade for the ALICE experiment at CERN S. Muhuri a, M. Reicher b and T. Tsuji c a Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre,
Simulation and reconstruction of CLAS12 Electromagnetic Calorimeter in GSIM12 S. Stepanyan (JLAB), N. Dashyan (YerPhI) CLAS12 Detector workshop, February.
DESY BT analysis - updates - S. Uozumi Dec-12 th 2011 ScECAL meeting.
Non-Prompt J/ψ Measurements at STAR Zaochen Ye for the STAR Collaboration University of Illinois at Chicago The STAR Collaboration:
Spin Physics Progress with the STAR Detector at RHIC Spin related hardware improvements to STAR Important constraints on  G along the way – jets and 
Feasibility of the detection of D 0 mesons in the NA61/SHINE experiment: Vertex detector for NA61/SHINE P. Staszel and Yasir Ali Jagiellonian University.
by students Rozhkov G.V. Khalikov E.V. scientific adviser Iyudin A.F.
A Forward Calorimeter (FoCal) as upgrade for the ALICE experiment at CERN S. Muhuria , M. Reicherb and T. Tsujic a Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre,
Huagen Xu IKP: T. Randriamalala, J. Ritman and T. Stockmanns
Jet reconstruction in ALICE using the EMCal
Detector Configuration for Simulation (i)
CMS-Bijing weekly meeting
A FOrward CALorimeter for the PHENIX experiment
First physics from the ALICE electromagnetic calorimeters
Simulation study for Forward Calorimeter in LHC-ALICE experiment
Kazuya Aoki For the PHENIX Collaborations. Kyoto Univ. / RIKEN
Wei Luo Lanzhou University 2011 Hall C User Meeting January 14, 2011
Single Particle Geant4 simulation for the sPHENIX PRESHOWER
Michele Faucci Giannelli
Steve Magill Steve Kuhlmann ANL/SLAC Motivation
APS/JPS Second Joint Meeting Sep. 19, 2005
LC Calorimeter Testbeam Requirements
Presentation transcript:

Feasibility Study of Forward Calorimeter in ALICE experiment Sanjib Muhuri Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre Kolkata

Possible position in ALICE PMD PMD position (A-side at z~360cm) is the most ideal location for the Forward Calorimeter – Phase-1. This is just behind the V0 detector and in front of the vacuum flange and its support.

Issues and Limitation of the Calorimeter It is expected to be placed around 360cm away from the interaction point. Eta coverage should be such to accept most of the forward region. (ours is from 2.49 to 4.8 for the detector radius between 6 cm to 60 cm). Full energy deposition should be confirmed for 1GeV to about 200GeV incident particles (photons or electrons). Sampling elements/layers should be large enough to have better energy resolution. Tracking with good position resolution needed to track the shower profiles because of close proximity of the showers and also to get a better estimation on the total energy deposition. Need a smart algorithm to recognize to very closely spaced clusters (for example, two photons are 5mm apart coming from 200GeV Pi0 ).

X-Y Si Strip (2 layers) 0.3 mm thickness Strip size mm x 6 mm W thickness 3.5 mm Si Pad + W(1X 0 ) Si thickness 0.3 mm Si size 1 cm x 1cm W thickness 3.5 mm Only Tungsten (W) W thickness 3.5 mm Forward Calorimeter: Silicon – W Calorimetry 3 layers (W + Si pad) W: 2X = 22 X 0 Particle 12 layers (W + Si pad)

11 layers of W+ Si_Pad 3 layers of W+Si_Pad W+Si_Pixel 6.2 cm Geometry of one small module whose front view is 6.2 cm x 6.2 cm Total no. of Channels for 62mm x 62mm module is (36 x 4) = 984 channels 0 th Layer -> 2Xo W mm Si_Pixel1 st to 3 rd Layers -> 1Xo W mm Si_Pad 4 th Layer -> 1Xo W mm Si_Pixel5 th to 7 th Layers -> 1Xo W mm Si_Pad 8 th Layer -> 1Xo W mm Si_Pixel 9 th to 19 th Layers -> 1Xo W mm Si_Pad

Geant4 geometry of the Prototype of the Present configuration This prototype is of Dimension 24cm*24cm*21Xo

Longitudinal Shower Profile for gamma at different energies (no weighting) We have simulated both longitudinal and transverse shower profile using 'gamma' as indent particles of energy 1GeV to 50GeV. From longitudinal profile it has been found that “the position of shower-max vary from 4Xo to 8Xo depending on the incident energy which theoretically verified. Shower Max tmax = ln(Eo)

Transverse shower Profile for strip layers

Cumulative energy deposition at different (gamma) energies I have studied layer wise Cumulative Edep profile for 1000 events of 'gamma' of energy 1GeV to 50GeV. From cumulative Edep profile it has been found that depending on the incident energy layer wise added Edep get saturated right from 10th layer to 16th layer suggesting full energy deposition by the the incident particle. So 21Xo length of FoCAL is supposed to be enough to minimize longitudinal leakage.

Calibration Curve for photons I have found the calibration of Edep with respect to Eincidence. It shows very good linearity of Edep with Eincidence with E(deposited) = * E(incidence)

Resolution: ~19% resolution To find the energy resolution I have plotted s/Edep (%) Vs Eincidence and fit it with the function f(x) = a + b/sqrt(S) where b = 18.9 % shows reasonably good energy resolution. a = % shows compactness and less defect of the Calorimeter.

Results of Pi0 clustering 0 th Layer (Pixel Layer)

Continued…… 1st Layer (Pad Layer)

Continued…… 4th Layer (Pixel Layer)

Continued….. 5th Layer (Pad Layer)

Continued….. 8th Layer (Pixel Layer)

Continued… … 10th Layer (Pad Layer)

Alpha (asymmetry) parameter and opening angle for10 GeV  0 Left figure shows the asymmetry of decayed photons from Pi0. Though It is supposed to have peak around zero but from reconstructed data we have got it around In the right panel we have plotted separation angle b/w two gammas from Pi0. The angle seems to closely matched with the theoretical prediction

Mass of pi0 obtained

Open angle Vs Incident Energy(for Pi0 decayed to two Photons)

Studying pseudorapidity,  =-ln(tan  /2), dependence of particle production probes parton distributions at different Bjorken x values and involves different admixtures of gg, qg and qq’ subprocesses. Assume: 1.Initial partons are collinear 2.Partonic interaction is elastic  p T,   p T,2  How can Bjorken x values be selected in hard scattering? Deep inelastic scatteringHard scattering hadroproduction Forward Physics - Kinematics Backup Slides 1

Mid-rapidity particle detection:    0 and  0  x q  x g  x T = 2 p T /  s Large-rapidity particle detection:   >>    x q  x T e    x F (Feynman x), and x g  x F e  (      p+p    +X,  s = 200 GeV,  = fraction p T,   (GeV/c) qq qg gg  Large rapidity particle production and correlations involving large rapidity particle probes low-x parton distributions using valence quarks NLO pQCD (Vogelsang) Forward Physics - Kinematics Backup Slides 1