Lhcb phase ii precision measurements of cp violation
Download
1 / 25

LHCb Phase II: Precision measurements of CP Violation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 129 Views
  • Uploaded on

LHCb Phase II: Precision measurements of CP Violation. Chris Parkes. LHCb Status Physics Motivation Future scenarios VELO replacement Trigger Strategies. LHCb UK Bristol, Cambridge, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Imperial College, Liverpool Oxford, RAL. PPAP, March 8 th 2005.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' LHCb Phase II: Precision measurements of CP Violation' - holland


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Lhcb phase ii precision measurements of cp violation
LHCb Phase II:Precision measurements of CP Violation

Chris Parkes

  • LHCb Status

  • Physics Motivation

    • Future scenarios

  • VELO replacement

  • Trigger Strategies

LHCb UK

Bristol,

Cambridge,

Edinburgh,

Glasgow,

Imperial College,

Liverpool

Oxford,

RAL

PPAP, March 8th 2005


Construction status

  • LHCb pit

  • Magnet installed

    • operated full current 9th November

  • Calorimeter installation now

  • RICH2 to be installed July 2005

Construction Status

  • RICH

  • VELO

  • Pre-production module tested in beam Nov. ‘04

  • Sensor production underway

  • RICH2

  • mirrors

  • being mounted

  • 1st batch HPDs

  • June 2005

  • Detector

  • Software

  • GRID

  • Trigger

  • Framework

  • Analysis


Uk responsibilities in lhcb
UK Responsibilities in LHCb

The UK plays a major role in the LHCb experiment

  • 15% of the LHCb Collaboration

  • 8Institutes(Bristol, Cambridge, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Imperial College, Liverpool,Oxford, RAL)

  • 50Current Physicists+Engineers + 20 PhD students

  • UK leading roles in Collaboration

    • RICH Project Leader

    • Computing Project Leader

  • UK Detector Responsibilities

    • RICH 1

    • RICH 2

    • VELO

      The UK also contribute significantly to the physics activities, are responsible for the RICH and VELO software projects and are actively involved in the LHCb Computing strategy and Grid project.


Cp violation in 2010

Bs mix

CP Violation in 2010

LHCb: st = 43 fs

  • 3 Years of LHCb data taking

    • 1 day at LHCb = 100d at B Factory !

    • Bs Oscillations measured

      • SM <25 ps-1, CDF

      • LHCb ms reach 68 ps-1

    •  measured

      • Theory error ~1% will be matched by LHCb ~ 5yrs

    •  measured J/ K0

      • Current B factories sin(2) = 0.7260.037 (La Thuile, 2005)

      • theory error < 1%, 1 yr statistical error sin(2) 0.02

      • New physics, need 5% measurements

        • Tree Penguin

    • Also Rare Decays

      • SM 3.5x10-9 , 3.7  after 3 yrs

BELLE


LHCb

etc.

  •  measured to ~3 in 3 yrs

    • But theoretical error only ~ 0.1% !

  • Potential New

  • Physics

  • Contributions

  • Improved vertex

  • Resolution equiv.

  • to more stats

  • Tree only, no NP contribution

  • LHCb Not limited by LHC

    • LHCb lumi 2x1032 cm-2 s-1, ATLAS/CMS 1034

  • Limiting factors on LHCb

    • Not Theoretical for 

    • Vertex Capabilities

      • VELO

    • Statistics

      • Luminosity

      • Trigger


Why upgrade 1 improve trigger
Why Upgrade ? (1) Improve Trigger

  • Increasing Event yield by 3-5 times could reduce statistical uncertainties by factor of 2.

LHCb L0 trigger relies on high-pt e//hadrons

1MHz Output rate, 1.5 s for algorithm

Could this cope ?


Increase luminosity
Increase Luminosity

  • LHCb would have to cope with multiple interactions

High pt muon trigger could cope

4 of 10 benchmark channels have

+- in final state


Trigger strategies
Trigger Strategies

BUT would need improved hadron trigger

  • Improved L0 trigger

  • Massive use of modern optical links and FPGA’s can allow us to make a Vertex trigger in ~2010

    • BTeV assumed they could do this in 2009

  • Need pt information ?

    • Mag. Field in VELO or include TT in L0

Displaced Track Trigger at L0


System configuration outline r projection only

J. Christiansen

LHCb electronics coordinator

System configuration outlineR projection only

Task

8

Clustering &

Triplet finding &

merging

Track

Identification &

filtering

In counting house

4 sectors per half

Track merging

Two halfs

  • 35 processing modules

    • 2 crates

  • 2200 optical links

    • 36 multi ribbon cables (8x8)

  • Vertex identification

    Impact parameter calculation

    Final vertex trigger decision


    Why upgrade 2 replace velo
    Why Upgrade (2) Replace VELO

    • Radiation Tolerance

      • Replacement required at ~4 years

    • Improved Performance

      • Use in L0 trigger

      • Pattern recognition at higher lumi

      • Improve vertexing capabilities

    • Material Budget

      • RF foil

    • Two Options under active consideration:

    • New rad. hard Strip technology

    • Pixel technologies


    Extreme Radiation Environment

    Middle station

    Far station

    • LHCb VELO will be HOT!

    • Maximum Fluence

      • 1.3x 1014 NIEL 1MeV neq/cm2/year at 8mm at 2x1032

      • 3.3x 1014 NIEL 1MeV neq/cm2/year at 5mm at 2x1032

      • 6.6x 1014 NIEL 1MeV neq/cm2/year at 8mm at 1033

    • Strongly non-uniform

      • dependence on 1/r2 and station (z)

    • Maintain a reasonable S/N performance

      • 3-4 years at 300V


    Radiation hard technologies
    Radiation Hard Technologies

    Czochralski

    n-on-p

    Glasgow, CERN

    Liverpool

    • Cz, n-on-p, 3D, or pixel technologies – Active UK R&D

    3D

    Glasgow

    Extreme rad. hard

    For 4.5 x 1014 24 GeV p/cm2

    Depletion voltage = 19V !!!


    Move closer
    Move Closer

    5mm limit from Accelerator

    • Current safe guard ring design 1mm

    • Edgeless technology exits

      • Dope edges

      • 3D, etch, laser cut

    Alternative Guard Rings

    Baseline first strip 8mm

    7.1mm 10% improvement


    Lhcb uk resources
    LHCb UK Resources

    • Total Cost of LHCb 74.48 MCHF

      Committed by FA’s 69.56 MCHF

      Overall Shortfall 4.92 MCHF

    • Cost of Capital Phase to UK (Apr 2001-Mar 2007) SCP4 baseline

      Equipment £ 3.1 M (£2.5M RICH, £0.6M VELO)

      Staff £ 8.3 M (£5.9M University, £2.4M CCLRC)

      Common Fund £ 1.3 M

      Travel £ 0.9 M

      Total £ 13.6 M

    • SCP4 cuts £ 0.7M

    • Bid to PPARC £ 0.9 M (mostly RICH-1 redesign, under discussion)


    Lhcb uk resources1
    LHCb UK Resources

    • Steady State Running Staff

      PPARC funded 31

      RAL PPD 6

      University/Fellows 18

      Students 20

    • Continuation of 9 eScience posts are required in addition to staff requirements during period 2007-2009. (see Tony Doyle PPAP 26/10/04)

    • Steady State Running Non-Staff Costs

      Travel £400k p.a.

      M&O UK £260k p.a.

      M&O CERN £300k p.a.

    • In order to preserve and reinforce the leading role held by the UK in LHCb, we expect to maintain a comparable level of commitment to the future LHCb programme including potential upgrades.

      Upgrade estimates

    • R&D phase Velo,trigger : £500k

    • Rad hard Velo in L0 trigger: O £10M depending on technology


    Conclusions
    Conclusions

    • LHCb can maximise physics opportunities after 2010

      • Reach ultimate sensitivity

      • Increase luminosity Trigger Upgrade with Velo in L0

    • New Radiation tolerant technologies for VELO

      • Velo replacement required

      • 1015 NIEL1 MeV neq/cm2

      • 3D, Cz, n-on-p strips or pixel technologies

      • Exploit UK R&D Investment

    • LHCb UK Workshop on future scenarios

      • 1st April at IC

      • SoI November 2005

    • UK expects to play a leading role in LHCb upgrade



    LHCb UK e-science forward look (Nick Brook)

    • Current RICH & VELO e-science:

    • RICH: UK provide bulk of the RICH s/w team including s/w coordinator ~7 FTEs about 50:50 e-science funding+rolling grant/HEFCE

    • VELO: UK provide bulk of the VELO s/w team including s/w coordinator ~4 FTEs about 50:50 e-science funding+rolling grant/HEFCE

      ALL essential alignment activities for both detectors through e-science funding

      Will move from development to maintenance and operational alignment

      ~3FTEs for alignment in 2007-9

    • Current core activities:

    • GANGA development

    • Provision of DIRAC & production tools

    • Development of conditions DB

    • The production bookkeeping DB

    • Data management & metadata

    • Tracking

    • Data Challenge Production Manager

    • ~10 FTEs mainly GridPP, e-science, studentships with some HEFCE support

      Will move from development to maintenance phase - UK pro rata share of LHCb core computing activities ~5 FTEs

    Need ~9 FTE (core+alignment+UK support) in 2007/9 - continued e-science support


    Material budget rf foil
    Material Budget: RF-foil

    VELO RF-foil 250m

    BTeV

    • BTev - 150m thick wires/foil, 6mm from beam

    • In primary vacuum

    • Cryo panels for absorb outgassing

    • TOTEM

    • 1mm from beam (v. diff optics)

    • 150m foil


    Material budget
    Material Budget

    220m

    (nominal)

    250m

    In brackets - % before first sensitive hit


    CKM triangle status, ICHEP 2004

    Compatibility obtained between all constraints

    2002: first non-trivial compatibility test for CKM triangle


    Bdgp+p-

    No identification

    Purity = 9.5%

    With pion identification

    Purity = 85%, Eff. =90%


    Lhcb uk resources2
    LHCb UK Resources

    • Cost of Capital Phase (Apr 2001-Mar 2007) SCP4 baseline

      Equipment £ 3.1 M (£2.5M RICH, £0.6M VELO)

      Staff £ 8.3 M (£5.9M University, £2.4M CCLRC)

      Common Fund £ 1.3 M

      Travel £ 0.9 M

      Total £ 13.6 M

    • LHCb UK expect to maintain a comparable level of commitment to the future LHCb programme

    • Future Cost Estimate (Apr 2007-Mar 2013)

      Equipment £ ??? M (Spend in 08/09/10)

      Staff £ 9 M

      eScience Staff £ 3 M (9 FTE’s see Tony Doyle PPAP 26/10/04)

      Common Fund, Travel, M&O £ 6 M

      Total £ 18 M + Equipment


    O upgrade costs
    O(Upgrade Costs)

    • Velo

      • Total ~3.5M Capital

      • UK ~0.6M Capital

    • BTeV pixel detector (Joel Butler, Sept ’04)

      • $20.8M inc. FTEs

      • (Total Det 108M capital/180M with FTEs)

      • Potential LHCb involvement of some BTeV collaborators


    Systematics
    Systematics

    • Acceptance

      • ~Cancels in TDCPA

    • Detection efficiency

      • Magnetic field polarity

    • Decay-time resolution for Bs

      • Survey accuracy ~10m, alignment

      • Lifetime measurements

    • Production Asymmetry,Tagging Performance

      • Control channels

    • Trigger Efficiency

      • Multiple channel triggers


    ad