EUSO BALLOON

EUSO BALLOON PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 311 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Download Presentation

EUSO BALLOON

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


1. EUSO BALLOON Sylvie Dagoret-Campagne LAL 1 Torino AFS-FS Meeting (25-29th October 2010) The purpose of this task is to gives the motivation for french groups to propose a balloon flight of the JEM-EUSO prototype before the lauching in space which is foreseen much after year 2015. Such a proposal has been submitted to CNES. I will report their response.The purpose of this task is to gives the motivation for french groups to propose a balloon flight of the JEM-EUSO prototype before the lauching in space which is foreseen much after year 2015. Such a proposal has been submitted to CNES. I will report their response.

2. EUSO-BALLOON with CNES Torino AFS-FS Meeting (25-29th October 2010) 2 Flight a 4-PDM (144 MAPMTs, ~10000 pixels in 2013) 40 km altitude Lense diameter of 50 cm, FOV ~ 20° half angle 1pixel has ±0.2° and see 280 m Short flight (few hours) in Golfe de Gascogne or over Mediterranean See Long flight at Kiruna/Sweden Goals Test of the embarked electronics : PMT + ASIC +FPGA (trigger) Works in hard conditions of temperature, pressure Background measurements ? (nightglow) Signal tests with a Lidar LED calibration tests CNES has facilities to launch high altitude balloons, the so called stratospheric balloons. In fact they can fly at 40 km altitude. Because of the uncontrolled fall, there are two types of regions which can be flied over : the sea and the ice. one can have sort duration fly during the night either above the Golfe de Gascogne, or over the Mediterranean Sean, one can have longer duration fly at Kiruna in Sweden. This kind of fly could be done in 2013. We propose to fly a 4 PDM prototype, making a total of 10000 pixels. Then we have to choose the detector parameters we would like to have. Taking a half angle of 20° for the FOV with a matrix of 100x100 pixels, it gives Pixels viewing with half angle of 0.2° , a ground parcel of 280 m. The main goals are listed here on the right part, mostly technical test but we could do a little bit Some physics.CNES has facilities to launch high altitude balloons, the so called stratospheric balloons. In fact they can fly at 40 km altitude. Because of the uncontrolled fall, there are two types of regions which can be flied over : the sea and the ice. one can have sort duration fly during the night either above the Golfe de Gascogne, or over the Mediterranean Sean, one can have longer duration fly at Kiruna in Sweden. This kind of fly could be done in 2013. We propose to fly a 4 PDM prototype, making a total of 10000 pixels. Then we have to choose the detector parameters we would like to have. Taking a half angle of 20° for the FOV with a matrix of 100x100 pixels, it gives Pixels viewing with half angle of 0.2° , a ground parcel of 280 m. The main goals are listed here on the right part, mostly technical test but we could do a little bit Some physics.

3. Scheme 3 Torino AFS-FS Meeting (25-29th October 2010) The Scheme could be the following. The prototype point to the nadir but has a small tilt angle to of about 15° is possible, in such a way a rotation around an axis could simulate the ISS speed of 7 km per second. To see something, a Lidar similar to JEM-EUSO one could be used to illuminate one pixel.The Scheme could be the following. The prototype point to the nadir but has a small tilt angle to of about 15° is possible, in such a way a rotation around an axis could simulate the ISS speed of 7 km per second. To see something, a Lidar similar to JEM-EUSO one could be used to illuminate one pixel.

4. EUSO Balloon wrt JEM-EUSO Torino AFS-FS Meeting (25-29th October 2010) 4 This table compares the various numbers from JEM-EUSO to that of EUSO Balloon. In the third column it gives the ratio of those numbers. In the last column it gives the usage of the number. The first line gives the altitude of operation. Thus there is about a factor 10 in relation with the full acceptance for the number of showers. The second line gives the collection surface with a factor 25 in favor of JEM-EUSO. There is a small difference in the FOV. But there is a factor ¼ in pixel half angle. Assuming the same zenith angle range with the same solid angle for shower detection, there is a 250 factor difference in the detection surface and the acceptance. Defining the pixel acceptance to the signal as the product of the collection surface time the pixel solid angle, JEM-EUSO is only better by a factor 1.6 in shower sensitivity due to the very narrow pixel FOV. Then considering for the background point of view, the surface covered at ground is larger by a factor 6 but due to the small pixel FOV, JEM-EUSO see less background by a factor near ½. We assume a time factor of 100 for the balloon compared by one year of JEM-EUSO operation. There is no doubt that the total exposure will exceed 10^4 for JEM-EUSO.This table compares the various numbers from JEM-EUSO to that of EUSO Balloon. In the third column it gives the ratio of those numbers. In the last column it gives the usage of the number. The first line gives the altitude of operation. Thus there is about a factor 10 in relation with the full acceptance for the number of showers. The second line gives the collection surface with a factor 25 in favor of JEM-EUSO. There is a small difference in the FOV. But there is a factor ¼ in pixel half angle. Assuming the same zenith angle range with the same solid angle for shower detection, there is a 250 factor difference in the detection surface and the acceptance. Defining the pixel acceptance to the signal as the product of the collection surface time the pixel solid angle, JEM-EUSO is only better by a factor 1.6 in shower sensitivity due to the very narrow pixel FOV. Then considering for the background point of view, the surface covered at ground is larger by a factor 6 but due to the small pixel FOV, JEM-EUSO see less background by a factor near ½. We assume a time factor of 100 for the balloon compared by one year of JEM-EUSO operation. There is no doubt that the total exposure will exceed 10^4 for JEM-EUSO.

5. EUSO Balloon wrt JEM-EUSO Torino AFS-FS Meeting (25-29th October 2010) 5 This table compares the various numbers from JEM-EUSO to that of EUSO Balloon. In the third column it gives the ratio of those numbers. In the last column it gives the usage of the number. The first line gives the altitude of operation. Thus there is about a factor 10 in relation with the full acceptance for the number of showers. The second line gives the collection surface with a factor 25 in favor of JEM-EUSO. There is a small difference in the FOV. But there is a factor ¼ in pixel half angle. Assuming the same zenith angle range with the same solid angle for shower detection, there is a 250 factor difference in the detection surface and the acceptance. Defining the pixel acceptance to the signal as the product of the collection surface time the pixel solid angle, JEM-EUSO is only better by a factor 1.6 in shower sensitivity due to the very narrow pixel FOV. Then considering for the background point of view, the surface covered at ground is larger by a factor 6 but due to the small pixel FOV, JEM-EUSO see less background by a factor near ½. We assume a time factor of 100 for the balloon compared by one year of JEM-EUSO operation. There is no doubt that the total exposure will exceed 10^4 for JEM-EUSO.This table compares the various numbers from JEM-EUSO to that of EUSO Balloon. In the third column it gives the ratio of those numbers. In the last column it gives the usage of the number. The first line gives the altitude of operation. Thus there is about a factor 10 in relation with the full acceptance for the number of showers. The second line gives the collection surface with a factor 25 in favor of JEM-EUSO. There is a small difference in the FOV. But there is a factor ¼ in pixel half angle. Assuming the same zenith angle range with the same solid angle for shower detection, there is a 250 factor difference in the detection surface and the acceptance. Defining the pixel acceptance to the signal as the product of the collection surface time the pixel solid angle, JEM-EUSO is only better by a factor 1.6 in shower sensitivity due to the very narrow pixel FOV. Then considering for the background point of view, the surface covered at ground is larger by a factor 6 but due to the small pixel FOV, JEM-EUSO see less background by a factor near ½. We assume a time factor of 100 for the balloon compared by one year of JEM-EUSO operation. There is no doubt that the total exposure will exceed 10^4 for JEM-EUSO.

6. CR observatory Parameters Projected surface at ground = 666 km2 (~ TA) Solid Angle (assume 20°-80°) = 2.7 sr Acceptance = 1784 km2 sr Exposure/10H flight = 2 km2 sr yr Taking Auger Flux below GZK (ICRC-2009): 6 Torino AFS-FS Meeting (25-29th October 2010)

7. Integrated Spectrum for 10 hours of data 7 Torino AFS-FS Meeting (25-29th October 2010)

8. NightGlow measurement Probably not detectable Torino AFS-FS Meeting (25-29th October 2010) 8

9. Embarked LIDAR 9 Torino AFS-FS Meeting (25-29th October 2010)

10. Trigger Study 10 Torino AFS-FS Meeting (25-29th October 2010)

11. CNES recommandations JEM-EUSO mission on board the International Space Station, is to study cosmic rays of ultra-high energies, from their interaction in the Earth's atmosphere, observed in UV. This proposal seeks to qualify under the balloon system for detecting air showers, in the presence of background noise land and a fraction of the atmospheric noise. The detection system includes multi-anode photomultiplier tubes, their power electronics, ASICs their reading and analysis software triggering and reconstruction. Switching off high voltage automatically, in the presence of an extremely bright source (eg the presence of a city in the field of view of the instrument) will be tested as well. Even if there are still uncertainties regarding the programmatic mission JEM-EUSO, Japanese side in particular, the proposed timetable for the three balloons flights rides the final stages of preparation of the payload in the case of a launch in 2015. It would be highly unlikely that the results of balloon flights can be used as input for the realization of the payload of JEM-EUSO. The astronomy group CNES acknowledges the potential value balloon flight demonstration, but above all, calls on the proponents to explain how this balloon flight program fit JEM-EUSO project as a whole (a message on behalf collaboration JEM-EUSO and stressing the importance of these flights for the project would be desirable). He asked for proponents to explain and quantify the contribution of French as a whole, by including the program presented balloons and assigning a priority over other proposed contributions to the payload of JEM-EUSO. 11 Torino AFS-FS Meeting (25-29th October 2010)

12. Conclusion Physics: Airglow measurement -> probably not Cosmic Rays around the ankle -> perhaps if look at Cerenkov pulse Calibration: LIDAR -> necessary to see something Technics Electronics : ASIC, EC and PDM board could be that of UFFO Trigger tests (special triggers) Reliability of the detector and its electronics (ASIC, EC, FPGA ? ) Analysis Need to simulate that configuration into ESAF Need to specify/produce the required lense(s) Need enforcement from JEM-EUSO collaboration to convince CNES DO JEM-EUSO collaboration need this ? 12 Torino AFS-FS Meeting (25-29th October 2010)

13. 13 Torino AFS-FS Meeting (25-29th October 2010)

  • Login