Test Beam: Calorimetric Wishes…

1. Test Beam: Calorimetric Wishes… • Goals for calorimeter test beam • What’s needed for EFA? • Requirements • Facilities • Detector • Software needs • Availability of various facilities • FNAL, BNL, SLAC, JLab, IHEP, KEK • Questions to ourselves • Conclusions Steve Magill, Jose Repond, Andre Turcot, Jae Yu* Jan. 10, 2003

2. Goals for Calorimeter Test Beam • Test of hardware technologies • Feasibilities, properties and performances of various detector technologies; aging, linearity, responses, resolutions, etc • Feasibilities of digital hadron calorimetry • Data for algorithm studies and improvements • Energy Flow Algorithm Development • Track-cluster association • Charged particle energy removal • Neutral particle energy measurement • Tracking through the calorimeter • Determination of optimal cell size • Data for simulation validation and improvements • Data for shower libraries for realistic simulation of jets • Magnetic field dependences CAL Testbeam J. Yu

3. EFA Specific Requirements • Efficient identification and subtraction of charged track energy • Efficient recovery and measurement of neutral particle energy • Verification of photon shower shape in ECAL • Verification of charged hadron transverse and longitudinal shower shape in ECAL and HCAL • Verification of neutral hadron shower shapes • Mixture of neutral and charged particles, mimicking jets CAL Testbeam J. Yu

4. Particle Energies in e++e-ZZ4jets @ 500GeV <Eg>=3.02 GeV <EKL>=11.0 GeV <Ep->=6.28 GeV CAL Testbeam J. Yu

5. TB Facility Requirements • Beam with wide kinematic ranges and sufficient rates • EM particle beams • Electron and photon beams • Charged and neutral hadron beams • Muon beam for calorimeter tracking • Momenta of particles: 1 ~ 100 GeV • Beam instrumentation • Good beam momentum and position measurements • Cerenkov counter for PID • Sufficient Mechanical Infrastructure • Must be available on the right time scale CAL Testbeam J. Yu

6. EM Longitudinal Energy Deposit and Hits 3 GeV e- CAL Testbeam J. Yu

7. Number of Hit Cells vs DR 10 GeV p- Important for Digital HCAL CAL Testbeam J. Yu

8. Energy Weighted Transverse Shower Size 10 GeV p- CAL Testbeam J. Yu

9. Longitudinal Energy Deposit and Hits 80 cm X 80 cm (min.) X 34 layer HCAL 10 GeV p- 15.5,26 Shower Radius (red) Ampl. Fraction (blue) 7.8,12.6 20 cm X 20 cm X 30 layer ECAL Need all 34 layers 3.1,5.2 cm (front,back) HCAL CAL Testbeam J. Yu Layer

10. Detector Requirements • Adequate size for sufficient shower containment • Preliminary studies by SM & SK show • 3 GeV electron shower fully contained in 11 cm x11 cm, 20X0 ECAL • 10 GeV pions: • 94% of the time in 20 cmx20 cm ECAL fully contains EM energy deposit • 1.3 mx1.3 m Hadron calorimeter with ~5~6l can contain 90% of HCAL energy deposit • More detailed studies based on single particles and physics would be necessary • Flexible cell segmentation by changing readout configuration • Number of readout channels • 32k for ECAL at 5 mm x 5mm cell size if read out every 1X0 • 676k for HCAL at 1 cm x 1cm with 40 layer readout • Shower leakage detection (both lateral and longitudinal) CAL Testbeam J. Yu

11. Detector Requirements cont’d • Tracking system for charged track momentum measurement & Energy Flow Algorithm development • Muon system for track association and leakage detection • Magnet with high field strength for in-field behavior • Adjustable absorber thickness for sampling variation • Flexible geometry to support various sensitive gap technology CAL Testbeam J. Yu

12. Software Needs • TB Development • Analysis algorithms and software for TB Geometry studies • Shower size computation • Clustering algorithms • Energy conversion and sampling weight • Easier simulation of TB Geometry • TB Data Taking and Operation • Online Monitoring • Slow control monitoring • Data and code management • Data acquisition and reconstruction • Track reconstruction • Particle ID • Calibration tools • Quick turnaround for faster feedback for faster reflection into TB programs CAL Testbeam J. Yu

13. Test Beam Facility: Fermilab • Meson Testbeam Facility (MTF) • Located at MT6 • Primary: 120GeV p from MI • Particle types: p, K, p, m, e • Particle momentum ranges: 5 ~ 120 GeV • First beam early 2003 • Not high priority but seems to be supported • Need simultaneous slow extraction scheme with `p production • Four available user areas w/ 2 control rooms • Five MOUs of with 3 approved • Seems to be available for TB • Contact: Erik Ramberg • MOU’s Needed CAL Testbeam J. Yu

14. Testbeam Facility: SLAC, JLab, IHEP • SLAC: End Station A at 10Hz Rep rate, running parasitic on PEP • e+: 1 ~ 25 GeV (parasitic on Babar) or 45 GeV with 0.5% momentum byte at the rate of ~1/pulse • g: e+ brem, ~1g/pulse, higher energies could be obtained w/ diamond crystal radiators • Hadrons: e+ momentum tune at 13 GeV for higher proton yield (0.0044 p/pulse) but mostly e+ and p • IHEP, Portvino • Proposal at Prague to use 70 GeV p to produce hadrons, electrons and m in energy range up to ~ 50GeV • Rep. rate ~0.1Hz in 1.8 sec spill time • Hadron energy: 33 - 45 GeV • Electron beam: 1 - 45 GeV • Available in 2004 and beyond • JLab: Not clear but surely not in 2007 ~ 2008 due to energy upgrade • KEK: No TB in 2004 - 2007 CAL Testbeam J. Yu

15. B2 Particle Flux e+ p+ p+ m+ K+ Testbeam Facility: BNL • AGS B2 • Particle types: e, p, K, p, m • Beam momentum can be tuned to 0.3~9 GeV/c • Nominal momentum byte: 5% FWHM • Max flux limited at 2x105/sec for safety • Main issue: Funding • 2003 operation not in presidential budget • Only operates in user contractual agreement with full cost recovery • Forming a consortium for operational budget request CAL Testbeam J. Yu

16. Comparisons of TB Facilities CAL Testbeam J. Yu

17. Questions • How many stages? (I think we need at least two..) • When for stage one? 2005? 2006? • How long? • What program? • At which facility? • Multiple ones, depending on the needs?? • Who wants to participate? • Construction of detector pieces? • When? • Who builds the adjustable absorber plate structure? • How many readout channels with what segmentation? • Details for beam: Energies, rates, instrumentations… • Funds for TB • A separate Test Beam group for a concerted effort CAL Testbeam J. Yu

18. Conclusions • Need more thorough studies to determine both hardware and physics based needs of TB • Detailed studies to determine detector sizes, segmentation and the impact of minimal configurations • Tools are being developed but must be timely and consistent • Need common and easy simulation tools for TB geometry • A few facilities seem to be available in 2005 – 2006 time scale • Time to start organizing toward a concerted TB effort with other detector groups  EFA cannot exist without a tracker • A draft report at hand but needs more inputs before a release to wider audience….  July as the target… CAL Testbeam J. Yu

19. Questions from Gene Fisk for Discussions • Short description of the device to test and objectives of the tests • Real estate required for the tests (beam line space, assembly space, desk space) • Beam conditions wanted/needed (particle types, energies, intensity, spill conditions, etc.)    • Instrumentation, cables and DAQ system that you anticipate using • Contact person    • Dates when beam is needed, dates when you want to be in the beamline • Special requirements?  such as:  Cerenkov counters, beam hodoscopes, momentum measurement wire chamber and magnet system,  e or m identifiers, etc.    • Where you expect to carry out such tests. CAL Testbeam J. Yu