1. Shielding EMCal-KL planes D.Orestano on behalf of L.Tortora MICE CM 8/10/06

2. D0 measurements D0 note 3593 (1999): V.Bezzubov et al. “Magnetic shielding studies for FEU115M phototube of the FAMUS pixel counters” 2 layers of magnetic shield surrounding the 90mm long PM –Inner layer:  metal, 1.2mm thick, outer Ø 33.4 mm, 116mm long –Outer layer: soft steel, 6mm thick, outer Ø 42 mm, 118mm long OR Ø 48 mm (and presumably 9mm thick)

3. D0 measurements Ø 42 mm 6mm thick soft steel Ø 48 mm No effect from transverse field observed up to 700 G Longitudinal field effect reduced increasing the thickness of the soft steel shield longitudinal

4. D0 measurements (slide added on 9/10/06)

6. KL  metal cylinders 34 mm Ø 70 mm thick Fe C40 with 34 mm Ø holes 13mm thick shield

7. Old drawing: PMs are now 21 in groups of 3

9. Towards a constructive design of EMcal D.Orestano on behalf of L.Tortora MICE CM 8/10/06

10. Towards a constructive design of EMcal ( mostly cut & paste from Rikard and Jean-Sebastien on transversal sizes, placing & shielding and fee readout ) Calorimeter design has been tailored for special MICE conditions ( KL layer & SW planes option)  KL : 80 x 80 cm 2 is a suitable size  KL : 90 x 90 cm 2 is a fail safe size Calorimeter close to TOF2 = better PID KL should capture any muons which are hitting TOF2  the “split design” option of EMcal should easily allow it; a sandwich made of TOF2A & KL can stay in a 10-12 cm gap between 1 st and 2 nd iron shield  important by products :  minimum material in front of KL  straight off work on mechanical support and B shielding  drawback : larger SW ?  may be not … it stays anyway after 2 nd iron shield

11. Iron shield holes  larger hole = less effective shielding  larger TOF2 (48x48  64x64) cm 2 = less B T field at PMT position  but marginally effective on B R  but, mainly, worse time resolution due to scintillators length; TOF2A & KL to be evaluated wrt TOF2A & TOF2B Readout  various options have been carefully examined and presented by JSG: commercial flash ADC and TDC seem to be the preferred one;  to finalize the complete readout chain, lab test are needed first;  problems which have to be matter of dedicated technical discussion :  HA 2624-11 voltage divider requires impedance adapter which causes undershoot of shaped signal to be sampled by FADC;  anode capacitor which worsens the rise time of the output signal;  remove adapter (and splitter) to improve time resolution ?  “ad hoc” RC-shaper ?  change voltage dividers ?  all other choices (discriminator type, ADC type, TDC) do not show specific technical problems but the fund availability