From h8 test beam to muon system commissioning
Download
1 / 24

From H8 Test-beam to Muon System Commissioning - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 315 Views
  • Uploaded on

From H8 Test-beam to Muon System Commissioning. 1 st North American ATLAS Physics Workshop Tucson, AZ - December 20-21, 2004 Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan. Outline. Aim: this is a ‘physics workshop‘, so focus on detector calibration and validation

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 'From H8 Test-beam to Muon System Commissioning' - richard_edik


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
From h8 test beam to muon system commissioning l.jpg

From H8 Test-beam to Muon System Commissioning

1st North American ATLAS Physics Workshop

Tucson, AZ - December 20-21, 2004

Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


Outline l.jpg
Outline

Aim: this is a ‘physics workshop‘, so focus on detector calibration and validation

  • H8 setup description & objectives

  • US contributions to the H8 test beam

  • Review of a few test beam muon results (software/trigger in Moore/Amstrong’s talk)

  • Phase I chamber certification

  • Plans for calibration work in next phases

Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


Slide3 l.jpg

Whole H8 Test

Beam Layout

Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


H8 muon endcap layout l.jpg
H8 Muon Endcap Layout

TGC

EOS/L

EMS/L

Barrel chambers

EIS/L

Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


H8 setup in 2004 l.jpg
H8 setup in 2004

  • 8 Barrel MDT (2 BIL, 2 BML, 2 BOL + 1 BIL + 1 BOS)

    Full FE electronics ( 1 MROD) and alignment system

    1 BILon rotating support for r(t) relations

    1 BOS MDT+RPC for combined test beam and noise test

  • 6 Barrel RPC (4 BML and 2 BOL)

    only ¼ of the 2 towers equipped with New PAD boards

    Total 2880 MDT channels with 8 CSM and 2 MROD

  • 6 Barrel MDT (2 EI, 2 EM and 2 EO)

    • Fully equipped with FE electronics  1 MROD

    • Full (almost “absolute-calibrated”) alignment system

      Total 1920 MDT channels with 6 CSM and 1 MROD

  • 3 TGC (2 doublets, 1 Triplet) + full on chamber electronics

  • CSC and MBPS magnet between EI and EM station

Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


H8 muon system objectives l.jpg
H8 Muon System Objectives

  • Full scale integration of the whole electronics chain (tube  HH  mezz  CSM  MROD  ROS)

  • Readout of the sensors through ELMB/DCS

  • Validation of the whole alignment system

  • First staging of combined muon detectors (MDT, RPC, TGC, CSC)

  • Test of the muon triggers bunch ID efficiency and second coordinate

  • Integration of multiple detector readout into the Data stream.

Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


Us contributions l.jpg
US Contributions

  • ISR Early chambers setup + leak certification and dark current test (by UM)

  • Detector: 4 MDT (Boston and Seattle) + CSC from BNL

  • Electronics: CSMs, Motherboards, Mezzanine cards + support hardware from UM

  • Alignment system from Brandeis

  • Physicists and engineers

  • Software for operational & diagnostic analysis

  • Data analysis

Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


Individual contributions l.jpg
Individual Contributions

My deep apologies to every institution/single who worked hard and not mentioned here

  • UoM: Dan Levin, US H8 coordinator from 2002

  • UoM: J. Chapman, J. Gregory, B. Ball, T. Dai: electronics (CSM-2, Motherboard, software, ...)

  • UoM: R. Avamidrou shifts and on site operations

  • Harvard: J. Oliver Mezzanine test setup station + software

  • Tufts: K. Sliwa, M. Wolfer, S.Tudorovova online logbook and data analysis

  • Seattle: J. Rothberg DB coordinator + CXDB work

Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


A few trigger results l.jpg
A Few Trigger Results

  • Central Trigger Processor latency ~ 5 BC (target 4 BC)

  • Successful MuCTPI in 25 ns runs (Oct)

  • Fast (LVL2) LVL1 trigger with global pattern recognition and better Pt estimation (Look Up Table) within a Region of Interest.

  • TrigMoore (Event Filter) Based on Moore for seeded reconstruction from RoI of either LVL2 or LVL1 and precise Pt determination

Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


H8 analysis tasks l.jpg
H8 Analysis Tasks

  • Evaluation of tube-channel stability, functionality, efficiency, noise, mortality

  • Sagitta resolution

  • Alignment system tests:

    • Temperature induced chamber motions

    • Controlled translations and rotations

    • Absolute alignment

  • Combined detectors system

  • Test reconstruction software (Moore, Muonboy in Athena + Mutrak)

  • Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


    Chamber functionality l.jpg
    Chamber functionality

    2003:

    • 35 dead tubes in 12 chambers

    • ~14 % of both hedgehog cards not working

    • Discovered problem with CSM “pair mode”

    • Many noisy tubes

      2004:

    • 10 dead tubes (9 in barrel chambers)

    • Developed MECCA continuity test

    • CSM “edge mode”  updated CSM & MROD

    • Evaluated common mode noise (G. Blanchot)

    • Replace mezzanine and threshold per ASD

    Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


    Endcap beam profile l.jpg
    Endcap Beam Profile

    • Hit distribution: hodoscope (~flat) 10x10 cm2

    • No dead channels (holes)

    • A few noisy channels (only 1 large spike)

      (S.Todorova &Tufts)

    Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


    Tdc spectrum wire sag l.jpg

    L

    y

    TDC Spectrum & Wire sag

    t0 ± 80 ns/√#ev

    y= wire displacement (m)

    x= distance from center (m)

    L= tube length (m)

    ρ = wire density (g/cm3)

    R = wire radius (μm)

    T= wire tension (g)

    tmax ± 200 ns/√#ev

    Drift time

    Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


    Drift time t0 stability l.jpg

    t0

    Run

    Δt0

    Run

    Drift Time & T0 stability

    Example EIL (Marcin Wolter)

    ML#1

    ML#2

    Channel #

    Mezzanine #

    19 HODO runs; threshold - 40 mV

    Δt0 respect mezzanine average

    Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


    Chamber efficiency l.jpg
    Chamber efficiency

    Example for one EMS chamber

    Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


    Alignment plots l.jpg
    Alignment plots

    • - Very strong

    • T-dependence

    • -Sensors images

    • reproduce the

    • movement

    • 180 images

    • (83 KB/image)

    • per cycle (5’)

    • many GB/day

      DB saves only

      analysis result

    • (J. Rothberg)

    Optical sensor (BCAM)

    1μm

    (Azimuthal EO)

    Temperature

    5 days

    Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


    2003 sagitta l.jpg
    2003 Sagitta

    Baseline

    Measurement

    After ~0.5 mrad rotation

    Aug 6-11: Controlled displacement +

    long term T distortions

    Reconstructed Sagitta

    Corrected Sagitta

    RESULT

    Alignment and

    muon tracks

    give the same

    relative sagitta

    variations in

    10-20 μm

    (D. Levin)

    Resolution

    improved

    by 27 %

    points still

    referenced

    to July 19 !

    Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


    2004 endcap sagitta results l.jpg
    2004 Endcap Sagitta Results

    Track with nominal geometry  sagitta follows T (~ alignment)

    ARAMyS: geometrical corrections:

    large chambers (ex.) 45 parameters

    - Temperature expansion:86 μm/ºC

    - Chamber translations and rotations

    - Deformations: torsion, cross plate sags and elongations (RO &HV) . . .

    All runs : 10x10 cm2, Hodoscope trigger, magnetic field (-600A)

    RMS=15 μm(14 μm @ small trigger acceptance)↔ ARAMyS correction ~ alignment (~10-20 μm)

    Sagitta ~ -157 μm close to absolute alignment precision 120-150 μm

    (D. Pomarède)

    RMS=15 μm

    S = -157 μm

    RMS=104 μm

    ΔS~400 μm

    S = -184 μm

    RMS=21 μm

    S = -159 μm

    RMS=14 μm

    Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


    An example of indirect results l.jpg
    An example of indirect results

    Double peak

    Ramsauer dip in the cross section for E(e-) ~ 0.35-0.60 eV at E=1.6 KV/cm giving a longer mean free path.

    2% water clear the second peak.

    Ar-CO2(93%-7%)

    H2O percentage

    0.5, 1.0,1.52.0

    Ar-CO2 (93-7%)

    3 bar, 1 vol/day

    HV=3080V

    Nitrogen shifts the 2nd

    peak at higher fields

     smaller times.

    Ar(93%)-CO2(7%)

    N2 percentage

    0.5, 1.0,1.5

    2.0, 2.5, 3.0

    Rachel Avramidou

    Using Garfield simulation

    Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


    Wire sag correction l.jpg
    Wire sag correction

    Difference in Drift Times (ns)

    H8 BILR θ=40º 96 μm wire sag

    Double tail fit

    Δ(DT) = 199 μm

    T-max affected by wire sag>150 μm

    Wrong gas Ar-CO2 93-7  93.6-6.6 %

    (method in B184)

    (Ed Diehl, Dan Levin, Ashley Thrall)

    Wire Displacement (μm)

    Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


    Endcap phase i certification l.jpg
    Endcap Phase I Certification

    H8 experience important in pre-commissioning: ex.grounding HV connector

    http://www.atlas.physics.lsa.umich.edu/docushare/dsweb/Get/Document-2295/

    Endcap DB document

    • Mechanical drawings

    • DAQ/tests configuration

    • Data  20 DB tables

    • Web interface

      ~ 5,200 records/MDT

       600K fields/MDT

    CERN DB

    Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


    80 um endcap in phase i l.jpg
    80 UM Endcap in Phase I

    ASD noise

    cut=35ns

    30709 tubes

    + 11 dead (4 in

    B180 accident)

    Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


    Next steps l.jpg
    Next steps

    • Phase II (BW, SW, EIL4):

      DCS, B-sensor & Alignment connectivity/operability.

      • HV off Threshold/All test (mezz ID)

      • HV off Random trigger, @ -50mV, noise test

      • HV on Random trigger, @ -40mV, noise test  DB

      • Measure relative t0 for each channel (Δt0~2 ns)

      • Burn-in: 2 weeks/sector (mortality of components, stability, DB baseline results, monitoring parameters)

    • Phase III:

      • Relative timing with TGC chamber

      • RT functions with and without B-field (single beams)

      • verify the RT function models.

        Needed detailed studies together with trigger system

    Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


    Conclusions l.jpg
    Conclusions

    • Encouraging chamber validation results

    • Castor ~ 3 TB from ~ 6,500 runs: combined analysis still on (H8 workshop in February)

    • Successful test beam shows

      • Stable electronics with low noise

      • Consistent & stable tube parameters (t0,drift time)

      • Working “muon system” calibration

    • Large effort needed for data monitoring already at commissioning stage

    • A lot of work to (re-)organize run log-file and DB (Conditions DB, Phase 1-2-3, AMDB, …)

    Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan


    ad