Small X and Diffraction 2003
Download
1 / 33

K. sterberg High Energy Physics Division, Department of Physical Sciences, University of Helsinki Helsinki Institute o - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 125 Views
  • Uploaded on

Small X and Diffraction 2003 at Fermilab 17-20.9.2003. The TOTEM Experiment. K . Österberg High Energy Physics Division, Department of Physical Sciences, University of Helsinki & Helsinki Institute of Physics on behalf of the TOTEM Collaboration http://totem.web.cern.ch/Totem/.

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 'K. sterberg High Energy Physics Division, Department of Physical Sciences, University of Helsinki Helsinki Institute o' - mindy


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

Small X and Diffraction 2003

at Fermilab

17-20.9.2003

The TOTEM Experiment

K. Österberg

High Energy Physics Division, Department of Physical Sciences, University of Helsinki & Helsinki Institute of Physics

on behalf of the

TOTEM Collaboration

http://totem.web.cern.ch/Totem/



The measurement of stot

  • Historical: CERN tradition (PS-ISR-SPS)

  • Dispersion relation (logs),   2.0

  • Current model predictions: 100-130 mb (at s = 14 TeV)

  • Aim of TOTEM: ~1% accuracy

  • Using the luminosity independent method

  • Absolute determination of luminosity

Optical Theorem:


  • Roman Pot detectors to measure leading protons - T1 and T2 detectors to measure inelastic events

~150m

~215m


vx(1100)

vx(1540)

vy(1540)

vy(1100)

Special LHC optics for the measurement of leading protons

  • Measuring elastic protons with t  10–3 GeV2  scattering angles of a few rad

  • At the IP : small beam divergence

  • [sq=(e / b*)1/2]  large b* (b* O(km))

  • At the detector stations:

  • y = Leff,yqy* + vy y*

  • x = Leff,xqx*+vx x*+Dx x

  • Optimal conditions:

  • parallel to point focusing planes (v = 0) 

  • unique position – scattering angle relation

  • large Leff scattered proton at sizeable

  • distance from the beam center (~ 1 mm)

  • lowest possible beam emittance (  1 m . rad)

  • Luminosity :  1028 cm-2 s-1

  • Two alternative optics (b*= 1100 m and 1540m) are under careful study:

  • - With b*= 1540 m parallel to point focusing planes in x and y simultaneously at ~220 m

High * optics: lattice functions


b* = 1100 m

Elastic scattering

acceptance

* = 1100 m

* = 1540 m

Large t (1-10 GeV2) elastic scattering will be measured using injection optics (* = 18 m)


Elastic rate at t = 0: statistical and systematical uncertainties

L = 1028 cm-2 s-1

run time = 4 . 104 s

10 m detector position uncertainty

Total systematical uncertainty < 0.5 %

Systematical uncertainties: beam angular divergence and crossing angle, optical functions, beam position, detector position and resolution, pot alignment, effect of backgrounds (beam halo, double Pomeron exchange).


t uncertaintiesacceptance and t resolution

50 % t acceptance vs detector position w.r.t. the beam center

uncertainty on t acceptance vs uncertainty of detector position

(%)

t=0.004 GeV2 A=44%

t=0.01 GeV2 A=67%

 = 1100 m

t=0.004 GeV2 A=64%

t=0.01 GeV2 A=78%

= 1550 m

 (t)/t (1 arm) vs detector resolution

  • smallest possible t measured when distance between sensitive edge of detector and bottom of pot is as short as possible

  • detector resolution of  20 m sufficient

  • detector position w.r.t. the beam center should be known to better than 20 m

total

without beam

divergence


Leading proton detectors

CMS Hybrid uncertainties

~3cm

Leading proton detectors

  • High and stable efficiency near the edge facing the beam, edge sharpness < 10 m  try to do detectors with thinner guard rings than present LHC technology  0.5 mm

  • Detector size is  3  4 cm2

  • Spatial resolution  20 m

  • Moderate radiation tolerance ( 1014 1 MeV neutron / cm2 equivalent)

  • Currently four different silicon based options are actively pursued:

  • cut planar strip detectors operated at cryogenic temperatures (“cold silicon”)

  • development of cut planar strip detectors (for operation at higher temperatures)

  • 3D-detectors with active edges

  • planar strip detectors with active edges


p+ uncertainties

C

p+

D

B

A

B

A

n+

n+

Cut edge reconstruction(2002)

Cold silicon

Planar strip detectors without guards rings operated at cryogenic temperatures (~ 130 K).

Efficiency

  • low bias voltage

  • radiation hard

Z. Li et al, "Electrical and TCT characterization of edgeless Si detector diced with different methods", IEEE NSS Proc., San Diego, Nov. 2001

Edge at: 0+20micron

Development of planar technology

cut edge

cut edge

Idea: additional n+ or p+ ring to prevent current C

Goal: increase the operation temperature


3D detectors with active edges uncertainties

Brunel, Hawaii, Stanford

  • CERN Courier, Vol 43, Number 1, Jan 2003

  • fast charge collection

  • low bias voltage

  • radiation hard

signal a.u.

edge sensitivity 5-20 m

position [mm]

Planar strip detectors with active edges

Brunel, Hawaii, Stanford

TRADITIONAL PLANAR DETECTOR

+ DEEP ETCHED EDGE FILLED

WITH POLYSILICON

E-field

p + Al

signal a.u.

n + Al

position [mm]

edge sensitivity 20 m

n + Al


Design of a roman pot
Design of a Roman Pot uncertainties

first prototype ready by end 2003

  • Mechanical design of a thin window

  • Secondary vacuum: outgassing and RF shielding; radiation hardness

  • Integration of detectors inside the pot - mounting, cooling, routing

  • High mechanical precision ( 20 m) and reproducibility

QRL (LHC Cryogenic Line)

Roman Pot station design

and tunnel integration

4m


Microstation – an option to Roman Pots uncertainties

  • A compact and light but still a robust and reliable system

  • Integrated with the beam vacuum chamber

  • Geometry and materials compatible with machine requirements

  • Detector movement with m accuracy

Emergency actuator

Development in

cooperation with LHC

machine groups

Inch worm motor

6cm

Space for cables and cooling link

Inner tube for rf fitting

Detector

Space for encoder

Note: A secondary vacuum is an option.

M. Ryynänen, R. Orava. /Helsinki group


Forward inelastic detectors T1 & T2 uncertainties

  • T1: 5 planes of CSC chambers/side

  • coverage: 3.1 <  < 4.7 & full azimuthal

  • spatial resolution better than 0.5 mm

  • T2: 5 planes of silicon detectors/side

  • coverage: 5.3 <  < 6.7 & full azimuthal

  • spatial resolution better than 20 m

IP

7.5 m

3.0 m

T1 detector

HF

Castor

 IP

13.6 m

0.4 m

T2 detector


TOTEM+CMS+ uncertainties

CASTOR

Measurement of the inelastic rate

  • T1, T2 and the forward leading proton detectors allow fully inclusive trigger:

  • DD, MB -- double arm inelastic trigger

  • SD -- single arm inelastic + single arm leading proton

  • Elastics, DPE -- double arm leading proton trigger

  • Vertex reconstruction necessary for disentangling beam-beam events from background

Event loss < 2%

Uncertainty < 1%

Diffraction

Combining TOTEM and CMS makes a large acceptance detector.

90 % of all diffractive protons detected (high )

Diffractive measurements at LHC energies important for the understanding of cosmic ray events.


p uncertainties1

p’1

p

M2=x1x2s

p

p2

p’2

CMS/TOTEM collaboration for high luminosity (* = 0.5 m)diffraction

150 m

215 m

308 m

420 m

338 m

e.g. Double Pomeron Exchange (DPE)

M (GeV)

x1= x2

x=Dp/p proton momentum loss

Trigger via Roman pots x > 2.5%

Trigger via rapidity gap/central system x < 2.5%


Exclusive DPE – proton acceptance and mass resolution ( uncertainties* = 0.5 m)

Event fraction with both protons within acceptance vs central system mass

Mass resolution of central system

1

pp p + X + p

0.03

pp p + X + p

all

all

215 m

 (mass)/mass

308 m

0.02

420 m

accepted fraction

0.01

0

100

300

500

700

mass of system X (GeV)

0.5

0.04

all

308 m

420 m

0.03

 (mass)/mass

0.02

0.01

0

0

140

60

100

180

60

100

140

180

mass of system X (GeV)

mass of system X (GeV)

At 120 GeV mass for central system: 50 % proton efficiency and 2 % resolution


Running scenario uncertainties

  • Total Cross Section and Elastic Scattering

  • Several 1 day runs with high b*

  • Several 1 day runs with b* = 18 m for large-t elastic scattering

  • Diffraction

  • Runs with CMS with high b* for L =1028cm-2 s-1

  • Runs with CMS with b* = 0.5 m for L < 1033cm-2 s-1

Plans

  • Test of silicon detectors (2003-04)

  • Roman pot prototype by end 2003

  • Technical Design Report by end 2003

  • CMS/TOTEM collaboration for high luminosity diffraction


Backup Slides uncertainties


Elastic scattering uncertainties

Coplanarity test, background rejection: azimuthal angle resolution

Detector resolution = 20 mm


Total TOTEM/CMS acceptance ( uncertainties* = 1540 m)

RPs


log(- uncertaintiest) (GeV2)

Elastic and total TOTEM/CMS acceptance (* = 18 m)

b = 18 m

b = 1540 m

RPs

RPs


Radiation fluence in the rp silicon detectors n mokhov i rakhno fermilab conf 03 086
Radiation fluence in the RP silicon detectors uncertainties(N.Mokhov,I. Rakhno,Fermilab-Conf-03/086)

Maximum fluence (1014 cm-2) for charged hadrons

(E>100 KeV , L= 1033 cm-2 s-1, t=107s):

RP4 (215 m)  Vertical: 0.58, Horizontal: 6.7

Dose (104 Gy/yr)

RP4 (215 m)  Vertical: 0.37 (max: 1.9), Horizontal:1.2 (max:55)

Main source of background: pp collisions

Tails from collimators and beam-gas scattering ~ 0.1-1%

Radiation level manageable


Forward inelastic detector T1 uncertainties

RAILS ARE ASSEMBLED ON A TRUSS STRUCTURE, TO WITHSTAND THE FLEXURAL LOAD

THE TRUSS IS COMPLETELY RESTRAINED ON THE OUTERMOST SPACER RING

PUSH/PULL RODS AT THE END TIE THE 2 TRUSSES AND LIMITS THE TORSION

BASIC SOLUTION: STEEL MADE, ONE TRUSS WEIGHS ROUGHLY 120 Kg

PUSH ROD: COULD BE MADE OF ALUMINIUM OR FIBERGLASS (BETTER PARTICLE TRANSPARENCY) AND/OR ARC-SHAPED

PUSH/PULL RODS

TRUSS

(In agreement with CMS)


Forward inelastic detector T2 uncertainties

Lightweight Structure

Space for services

 470 mm

Bellow

Weight estimation:

~30 Kg

Thermal Insulation

400 mm


Trigger and event rates uncertainties

Event rates at L = 1028 cm-2 s-1 :

Elastic (~ 30 mb) ~ 300 Hz

Inelastic (~ 80 mb)  100 Hz (suitably prescaled)

Running time per high-b run ~ 2·104 s (10 hours, 50% efficiency):

~ 6 ·106 elastic events

~ 2 · 106 inelastic events

  • Statistics (large-t elastic) :

    • t ~ 0.5 GeV2 : ~ 200 evts/bin (0.02 GeV2 bins)

    • t ~1.5 GeV2 : ~ 80 evts/bin (0.05 GeV2 bins)

b* = 18 m 2800 bunches

L ~ 1032 cm-2 s-1 for 2·104 s (10 hours, 50% efficiency)

  • t ~ 6 GeV2 : ~ 25 evts/bin (0.1 GeV2 bins)


x=0.06 uncertainties

x=0.01

x<10-3

Diffraction at high 

-t=10-2

-t=10-1

log(-t) (GeV2)

90% of all diffractive protons

are seen in the Roman Pots


Dispersion function for lhc low optics cms ir
Dispersion function for LHC low uncertainties* optics (CMS IR)

horizontal offset x=Dx

For a diffractive proton with a 5  10-3 momentum loss to give an offset in the horizontal plane of (at least) 5 mm  dispersion in x  1 m  need proton detectors located > 400 m from interaction point.

Dx

x

y

Optical function  in x andy(m)

Dispersion in horizontal plane(m)

CMS


Acceptance vs mass of central system
Acceptance vs mass of central system uncertainties

pp p + X + p

  • Combined acceptance of

  • all locations (dotted)

  • 420 m + 215 m (dashed)

  • 215 m alone (solid)

  • 420 m alone (dash-dotted)

  • 308/338 m location brings 10-15 % more acceptance

1

fraction of events with both protons within acceptence

0

400

800

0

0

mass of system X (GeV)



Case study l1 trigger for diffractive higgs based on decay products
Case study: L1 trigger for diffractive Higgs based on decay products

  • Start from diffractive Higgs sample with auxiliary conditions

  • Both protons within acceptance of leading proton detectors

  • Both b-jets within Silicon Tracker acceptance (||<2.5) since b-tag will anyhow have to be required to reduce gg background.

Use 2 most energetic jets in ||<3. diffractive Higgs characteristics: back-to-back in azimuthal, small forward ET (3<||<5) and ET sum  MH.

diff. Higgs

diff. Higgs

forward ET (3<||<5)

azimuthal angle correlation

L = 1033 cm-2 s-1

MH = 120 GeV

inelastic

inelastic


Case study l1 trigger for diffractive higgs based on decay products1
Case study: L1 trigger for diffractive Higgs based on decay products

Combining 2 jet azimuthal angle sum, ET sum,  sum and difference + forward ET

0

diffractive Higgs

inelastic bkg

-0.7

log10(efficiency)

Preliminary !!

MH = 120 GeV

log10(Higgs efficiency)

-0.8

-2

L = 1033 cm-2 s-1

-0.9

-1

-4

3

4

2

cut on combined likelihood

log10(background rate(Hz))

If allowed additional L1 rate from a diffractive Higgs trigger is 250 Hz    12 % (includes L1 trigger efficiency, protons and b jets within resp. detector acceptance)

In addition signal is affected by Br (H  bb), tagging efficiency of b-jets and HLT efficiency.


ad