1. R&D for FD, Radio and the layout of an infill array
do we need FD in the North ? Yes, may be one eye only
can we improve the FD telescopes ? probably, but how much ?
is Radio detection a viable option ? may be - let´s try
what R&D is needed for Radio ? still a lot
do we need an infill array for this ? Yes, we do !
a possible layout in the South my simple minded view
H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

2. R&D for the next generation FD systems
improved S/N ? is possible
better resolution ? not needed
extended FOV ? important ?
cost reduction ? may be ?
a new design ?? probably not !
H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

3. MORE COLLECTED LIGHT (S/N) ?
increasing the collected light requires larger aperture diameter a a
problem with Mercedes walls : limited acceptance angle
increasing the aperture only is not a solution
M. Palatka – Feb. 2005

4. H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005
increasing of collected light requires larger aperture diameter and all other construction parameters
all construction parameters of the FD have to be increased linearly – the aperture, corrector ring , mirrors, camera body and the building
 $$$ !
H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

5. which „parameters“ can be improved ?
filters ~ o. k. figure of merit ? range ?
filter layer on PMTs ?
corrector rings ? size ? transmission ( BK 7 )
mirrors o. k. high R, small halo ( CZ )
PMTs ? QE ?, WLS on PMTs ?
window material !
camera layout ~ o. k x 16 pattern ?
resolution ~ o. k. < shower „size“ !
field of view ~ o. k. smaller fov ?
higher (variable) elevation ?
H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

6. shower „size“ ~ 300m ; ~ 10mrad @ 30km
90 %
H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

7. a possible technical solution with small R&D effort
an independent housing for each telescope :
lightweight but stable (steel) construction
light walls with insulation, air condition etc.
aperture system, mirrors, cameras, DAQ unchanged
improved (stable) mechanical mounts for
installation (and calibration) in horizontal position
~ 16 or 45 degree tilt angle for total system
 cheaper infrastructure, very flexible
H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

8. H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005
„tilted telescopes“
16 or 45 deg
easy installation, very flexible !
cost effective ?
H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

9. a possible „test“ layout at Loma Amarilla site
Comms
Tower +
H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

11. EAS detection by radio signals
radio detection works at ~ 1017 eV several experiments : o. k.
signal depends on shower energy ? power law ?
signal (range) depends on zenith angle ? frequency dep. !
signal depends on magnetic field angle ? sin, 1-cos ?
signal depends on weather ! E – field ? ionization ?
calorimetric signal ? curvature radius ?
little information on long. dev. ( X ) „integral“ electron detector !
 a lot more R&D on a larger E-scale is required
H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

12. Monte Carlo, Analytics & Data: Frequency Dependence
data rescaled
spectra depend on shower parameters
spectra steepen
at larger distances
10 MHz :
very coherent
55 MHz :
coherence limited
thin: analytics thick: MC
Ep=1017 eV
centre
rf noise
100 m
250 m
H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

13. EAS detection at larger core distances ?
 = 40±
 = 50±
 = 60±
 = 70±
40 MHz sim.
range important for possible use at PAO sites
mainly useful for the detection of inclined showers
????
MC simulation
estimated sensitivity limit for 4 antennas
H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

14. KASCADE - Grande and LOPES 10 / 30
measurements of air showers in the energy range E0 = 100 TeV - 1 EeV

15. LOPES 10 : Interplay of radio and particle measurements
search for
Event: maximum coherence
= o = o
q = 41.01o = 40.61o
a = 57.91o
Xc = m = m
Yc = m = m
lg(E/eV) = 17.73
ln(A) = 3.16
curvature = 3250 m = 4250 m
Coherence!
Improvement of shower core and arrival direction estimate in Grande by LOPES !

16. electron number and Nµ ( ~ Energy )
radio pulse height divided by the results from
previous fits (alpha, r)
no clear dependence on electron number ( ~ A , Q )
power law fit seems o.k. for radio signal vs. Nmu ( ~ E )

17. LOPES 10 : Analysis of distant events : Results
signal depends on shower parameters Allan‘s formula :
en = 20•( E / 1017eV) • sin a • cos q • exp( - R / R0(n,q) ) [ mV / m MHz ]
scaling with primary energy including geomagnetic field angle, zenith angle, core distance
H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

18. R&D studies for Radio detection of EAS
on site field studies noise level at both sites, find best frequency range
antenna design frequency, polarisation, directional characteristics
front end electronics band width filters, amps, power, costs
trigger data reduction, threshold for self trigger
field tests flying transmitter, array or FD trigger
beam forming shower geometry, angular resolution
external effects day-night, sun, weather dependence
range studies shower energy, zenith angle, magnetic angle
etc. etc. etc. ???
H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

19. Radio signal calibration
response at large zenith angles important for large arrays !
for calibration at least one decade in shower energy necessary !
 high Xmax ( ~ 10 km at – 1019 eV )
 increase vertical f.o.v. for FD telescopes
must study day/night behaviour and weather effects
 compare triggered events with (graded) infill array
array size ? defined by event rates needed : f(E)
H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

20. Longitudinal Shower Development
- Energy Deposit -
average of 100 simulated showers
⇒ same EAS in Ne(X) for all atmospheres

21. FD telescopes : vertical field of view vs. minimal distance
~ Xmax for 60 deg zenith
10.0
viewing angle
Height
a.s.l. [km]
300
7.5
summer
atm.
winter
X ~ 430 g/cm² vertical  ~ 500 g/cm² at 300 zenith angle
5.0
~ 3 km
2.5
~ 9 km
~ eye level
1400 m
distance from eye
[km] 5 10

22. a useful graded infill array for R&D
take 19 regular tanks with their center about 7 km from FD eye
add 24 infill tanks inside this hexagon to form a regular 866m grid array
add 24 tanks more around the center to form a regular 500m grid array
48 tanks  6 km² dense array km² medium dense array
if possible, add more tanks on the 866m grid (towards South)
83 tanks  6 km² km² arrays ~> very good size
 rates and reconstruction quality o. k ( < to ~ 1019 eV )
H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 22, 2005

23. a simple layout for the infill array
1,5 km

24. What else to do with the infill array ?
R&D for SD on the 866m grid ( 3 arrays )
frontend, Comms, trigger, …
test other proposed detectors
AMIGA, UCLA scintillators, …
even CR physics at 1017 to 1019 eV … if you like …
together with 60O FD telescopes
H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 2005

25. H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 2005
Conclusions / Outlook
continue with radio R&D ; test installations on both sites in 2006
develop technical solutions for FD upgrade in 2006
search FD upgrade and radio funding for 2007
in the South:
finish Loma Amarilla in 2006
build and deploy remaining of 1600 tanks in 2006
if problems with land owners persist, put tanks as infill
install FD upgrade in 2007
„full size“ radio antenna array in 2007
finish R&D for Auger North ( FD and SD ) in 2007
H. Klages Lamar R&D Meeting Oct. 2005