from h8 test beam to muon system commissioning
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
From H8 Test-beam to Muon System Commissioning

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 24

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


  • 320 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

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
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

Whole H8 Test

Beam Layout

Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan

h8 muon endcap layout
H8 Muon Endcap Layout

TGC

EOS/L

EMS/L

Barrel chambers

EIS/L

Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan

h8 setup in 2004
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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

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

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
Chamber efficiency

Example for one EMS chamber

Claudio Ferretti – University of Michigan

alignment plots
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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