1 Pad Chamber Simulation Results for Muon Trigger Upgrade 10/13/2003 Muon Trigger Upgrade meeting

2 Pad Chamber in PISA Two Pad Chamber, i.e. pc1/pc2 has been inserted into forward region. All are sandwich of 2 layers of 0.02cm s2 glass and 1,0cm G10 gas. PC1 is a 16 edge polygon with R=110/170cm when in front of /behind station #1. PC2 is a square with edge length 1000cm. The position of PC read from ascii file when running PISA. Note: when move pc1 from muon magnet to the hall, one need to recompile the PISA to change the mother volume into “HALL”. All files has been checked in. The new system is called “MUPC” in the pisa.kumac file. See appendix for all modified or new code. MuPC hits distribution

3 Pad Chamber Momtum Lookup In PISA, multiple-scattering and energy loss is turned on. Muons with mom = 4-10GeV/c is used as input. One can see after 4GeV/c, the correlation between  pc1/pc2) and muon momentum is almost flat. The distribution of  pc1/pc2) shows the sigma value of 2.9 degree for muon with mom>4GeV. In the following, we assume perfect PC resolution and apply different cut on  pc1/pc2) to see the rejection and efficiency. PC1 in front of station #1

4 Rejection and Efficiency with only  pc1/pc2) cut  degree <1<2<3<4<5<6<7<8<9<10 eff 94%97%98%99% rej Note: PC1 is in front of the station #1. Run through 2500 filtered event So the trigger with only the  cut does not work with even perfect PC1/PC2 resolution

5 Rejection and Efficiency with  pc1/pc2) cut and uIDLL1 Fired  degree <1<2<3<4<5<6<7<8<9<10 eff 90%93%94% 95% rej Note: PC1 is in front of the station #1. uIDLL1 rejection factor is: 759 which is smaller than that in previous presentation(about 1000). The file is different and statistic is a factor of 2.5 higher. Run through 2500 filtered event So the trigger with  cut does not improve uIDLL1 too much.

6 LUT between PC1/PC2/Symset Then we do look-up among pc1/pc2/symset. Single muons with mom=4-10GeV/c is passed through PISA. Only multiple-scattering and energy loss are turned on. Here shows only tile size: PC1/10cm, PC2/30cm and PC1 in front of station #1

7 Rejection and Efficiency with  pc1/pc2) cut and PC1/PC2/uIDLL1 LUT (1.LUT is satisfied in EITHER directions)  degree <1<2<3<4<5<6<7<8<9<10 eff 86%90%91% 92% rej (1). PC1 is in front of station #1. Tile size PC1(10cm), PC2(20cm)  degree <1<2<3<4<5<6<7<8<9<10 eff 90%93% 94% rej (2). PC1 is behind station #1. Tile size PC1(10cm), PC2(20cm) Case(2) has less rejection power most likely due to smaller magnetic integral. Less than a factor of two can be achieved

8 Rejection and Efficiency with  pc1/pc2) cut and PC1/PC2/uIDLL1 LUT (1.LUT is satisfied in BOTH directions)  degree <1<2<3<4<5<6<7<8<9<10 eff %90%91% 92% rej (1). PC1 is in front of station #1. Tile size PC1(10cm), PC2(20cm)  degree <1<2<3<4<5<6<7<8<9<10 eff 90%93% 94% rej (2). PC1 is behind station #1. Tile size PC1(10cm), PC2(20cm) Case(2) has less rejection power most likely due to smaller magnetic integral. A factor of 4 ~100 is achieved.