tracker simulations n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Tracker Simulations PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Tracker Simulations

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 32

Tracker Simulations - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 122 Views
  • Uploaded on

Tracker Simulations. Michael Hebert UC Irvine January 12, 2005 RSVP Simulations & Backgrounds Review. Requirements – Resolution. The Tracker must provide precise momentum measurements to separate conversion signal events from muon decay in orbit (DIO) in a 1 T field.

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 'Tracker Simulations' - delila


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
tracker simulations

Tracker Simulations

Michael Hebert

UC Irvine

January 12, 2005

RSVP Simulations & Backgrounds Review

requirements resolution
Requirements – Resolution
  • The Tracker must provide precise momentum measurements to separate conversion signal events from muon decay in orbit (DIO) in a 1 T field.
  • The end point energy for DIO electrons coincides with the conversion signal, the end point spectrum falls as the 5th power of E, thus the level of DIO background in the signal region is sensitive to the resolution function; both the central (gaussian) region and high side tails
  • To obtain a signal / noise ratio of 20 for a nominal conversion signal of Rme = 10-16 requires an energy FWHM < 1 MeV

The resolution is dominated by multiple scattering, thus material must be kept to a minimum

Chamber r – f res. of 0.2 mm and z res. of 1.5 mm are adequate and achievable

DIO Background convolved with detector response

Acceptance wrt perfect detector for fixed 20:1 S/N

GEANT conversion signal simulation

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

requirements rate handling efficiency
Requirements – Rate Handling, Efficiency
  • A beam intensity of ~1011 stopped muons / sec implies that the detector must be capable of operating in a high rate environment.
    • This has driven the choice of 5 mm diameter straws and fast gas as the basic detector element. Note that the multiple scattering contribution to the resolution drives us to use thin walled (25 mm) straws
    • The majority of DIO electrons are at low pTrelative to signal events, thus the active elements of the detector are at large radius with respect to the stopping target
  • The detector must have reasonable efficiency to make the most of the sensitivity provided by the intense stopped muon beam. This drives a close packed straw array.
  • Reconstruction efficiency will be discussed in detail later in the talk

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

two geometry options
Two Geometry Options
  • Two geometries under consideration (details follow)
    • “Longitudinal” (or simply “L”) Tracker with straws (nearly) parallel to the DS axis
    • “Transverse” (or “T”) Tracker with straws perpendicular to the DS axis
    • The nature of the event information and the engineering challenges associated with the construction are quite different for each arrangement
  • We have formed a “Tracking Chamber Advisory Committee” to evaluate both variants and recommend a choice to the MECO Executive Committee
  • We do not have an ETA on this decision yet, although (currently) this system is not on the MECO critical path

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

longitudinal tracker
Longitudinal Tracker

Geometry: Octagon with eight vanes – rotated by a few mrad in plane

Straws: 2.6 m length  5mm diameter, 25 mm thickness – 2800 total

Three layers per plane, outer two resistive, inner conducting

Pads: 30 cm  5mm wide cathode strips affixed to outer straws

16640 total pads

Position Resolution: 0.2 mm (r,f)  1.5 mm (z) per hit is goal

Readout Channels: ~20k

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

transverse tracker
Transverse Tracker

Geometry: 18 Modules of three planes each, 30° rotation between successive planes

Straws: 70 – 130 cm length  5mm diameter, 15 or 25 mm thickness

12960 total straws

One layer per plane, all straws are conducting

Position Resolution: 0.2 mm (x,y)

Readout Channels: 13k

136 cm

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

tracker studies
Tracker Studies
  • Existing Efforts
    • L Tracker prototypes at Houston and Osaka using different straw types
    • Front-end electronics work at Houston that is largely applicable to either the L or T variants
    • Simulations of performance in the presence of backgrounds at UCI (L Tracker) and NYU (T Tracker)
  • New Initiatives this year
    • T Tracker mechanical design at Syracuse University
    • Additional front-end electronics at UVA, LBL
    • Simulation software coordination via Berkeley
    • Trigger/DAQ/Back-end electronics design at BU, UMass, NYU

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

l tracker test beam performance
L Tracker Test Beam Performance
  • Cathode Pad Resolution
    • Seamless Straw (4MW/sq) Resolution s = 0.4 mm at 60°
    • Spiral Straw (0.5MW/sq) Resolution s =1.1 mm at 60°
    • Design goal (s = 1.5 mm) is exceeded
  • Seamless Straw Anode Performance
    • Drift Distance Resolution s = 70 mm at 60°
    • Efficiency > 95% except near walls
    • Design goal (s = 0.2 mm) is exceeded

Cathode Pad Resolution

Spiral straw

s(mm)

Seamless straw

Angle (deg.)

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

tracker simulations1
Tracker Simulations
  • Effects Modeled
    • GEANT3 detailed geometries including straw walls, wires, gas, manifolds
    • Noise hits fromg, p, n, at the nominal rate and doubled
    • Resolution – 200 mm per straw for T tracker

200 mm (r-j) 1.5 mm (z) per cluster for L tracker, both with tails out to 2.5 mm at 1%

    • Delta ray effects on rates
    • Energy loss (Landau fluctuations) and Molieré scattering in the stopping target
    • Beginning to work with GEANT4 as well
  • Remaining to be done
    • Hit digitization in the L Tracker, straws and pads
    • L Tracker cluster recognition
    • B field effects on drift performance
    • Support structures

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

l tracker detector rates vs time
L Tracker Detector Rates vs. Time

Rate

[MHz]

Rate

[kHz]

Full time between proton pulses

Detection time interval

25

20

15

10

5

0

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

m-capture protons

beam electrons

m- decay

in flight

0 400 800 1200 700 900 1100 1300

time with respect to proton pulse arrival time [ns]

Very high rate from beam electrons at short times – potential problems with chamber operation

Protons from m capture are very heavily ionizing – potential problems with noise, crosstalk

Rates are similar (not identical) for T tracker, both highly dependent on radial position near inner edge

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

tracker reconstruction
Tracker Reconstruction
  • Codes for reconstructing events in each geometry have been developed independently at different institutions, often with different underlying assumptions
  • We have begun integrating the two approaches, we are still in the early stages. See Yury’s talk for more on this effort.
  • All current tracker reconstruction efforts have been based solely upon drift distance or straw positions. Additional information remains to be exploited:
    • Both trackers:
      • Pulse height to remove protons – for “free” via the use of the Elefant readout chip.
    • L tracker
      • Pulse-height for Compton electron rejection
      • Pulse-height for proton rejection, r-f and z hit correlation
      • Comparison of r-f and z hit timing to match hits in the two views – good to a few ns
      • Straw number correlation with z position for valid helices, i.e. order of r-f hits in each module is correlated with z position due to tilt and to lesser extent to energy loss
      • Use of local (cluster) track angle and timing information in pattern recognition to reduce combinatoric search (improves speed)
      • Some of these implemented in background rejection already (e.g. local track angle to reduce mis-reconstruction background)

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

l tracker pattern recognition fitting
L Tracker Pattern Recognition & Fitting
  • Look for circles in r-f hits
  • Match with z hits – all combinations are tried
  • Hit positions are currently taken from detector crossing points, but these will ultimately be obtained via cluster finding
  • Following application of pre-selection cuts (following slide) raw helix info is passed to a maximum likelihood fitter.

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

l tracker event selection
L Tracker Event Selection
  • The energy of the GEANT primary electron at the entrance of the electron calorimeter is at least 75 MeV.
  • The agreement of the projected entry position at the electron calorimeter for the fitted track is within 20 cm of that given by the GEANT primary electron.
  • The maximum scattering angle at each detector element < 0.1 rad
  • 45 º < pitch angle < 60º
  • The fitting uncertainty is less than 600 MeV.
  • The total number of clusters is at least 6
  • There are no missing clusters on the track where it intercepts any detector element.

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

mis reconstruction
Mis-reconstruction
  • Mis-reconstructed tracks like this one are potentially a source of background from very low energy DIO electrons that reconstruct many s above the actual energy
    • Difficult to study, since orders of magnitude more low energy electrons
    • Technique of increasing rates, then reducing observed background by weighting factor of (rT/rMC)n, where rT and rMC are the true and MC rates, and n is the number of noise signals used in the background event
    • Ovne additional cut: event rejected if a lower momentum track is found

real e- from - decay

fake high p track

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

l tracker resolution
L Tracker Resolution
  • 2  107 reconstructed conversion events
  • The intrinsic resolution is 180 keV

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

l tracker signal vs background
L Tracker Signal vs. Background
  • DIO contribution is known spectrum convolved with “measured” signal resolution function
  • The acceptance is 19% for NBack / Nsignal = 0.05
  • For B(m→e) =10-16 this amounts to 5 conversion events and 0.25 DIO background in the signal region

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

summary of l tracker results
Summary of L Tracker Results
  • Additional studies of straw material thickness, overall detector length, and minimum number of clusters on the candidate track

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

t tracker pattern recognition
T-Tracker Pattern Recognition
  • Single Orientation View
  • To reconstruct helix projection 4 hits are needed
  • Sample event
    • 4 different views (different colors)

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

t tracker pattern recognition 1
T Tracker Pattern Recognition – 1
  • Sample Event
    • 29 Real hits
    • 260 Background hits
  • Compton e rejection
  • Three Tracker hits + Calorimeter centroid
    • Calorimeter s = 15 mm
    • Tracker s = 1.5 mm

1

2

3

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

t tracker pattern recognition 2
T Tracker Pattern Recognition – 2
  • The Same Sample Event
    • 29 Real hits
    • 260 Background hits
  • Four Tracker hit combinations
    • p resolution from helix fit to hit straw centers s = 0.45 MeV/c
  • Restore all Tracker hits, use helix info to add/drop hits

1

4

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

t tracker pattern recognition with drift time
T Tracker Pattern Recognition with Drift Time
  • Deterministic

Annealing Filter

  • Combinatorial

Collapse Filter

Average loss of real hits

 0.8 / event (2.7%)

Average Remaining

bkgd hits  0.4 / event

Overall background rejection

 260 / 0.4 = 650

1

5

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

deterministic annealing filter
Deterministic Annealing Filter
  • Left and Right points are projected on straw center layer using fitted helix
  • Initial prob of points are assumed to be equal
  • Calculate point prob  Gauss(Xi, Mean, Vn)
  • Kalman filter runs on all layers taking weighted mean according to point prob
  • If combined hit prob < Threshold  hit is rejected
  • Combinatorial Collapse Filter (CCF) treats Left-Right problem

keeping a set of best choices

  • The number of collapsed components = 8
  • The maximum number of components = 32
  • Drift radius > 0.25 mm

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

t tracker event selection
T-Tracker Event Selection
  • Calorimeter Energy > 80 MeV
  • Pitch Angle > 45°
  • At least 18 hit straws included in on track after background hit subtraction
  • Track extends to at least 48.25 cm radius, i.e. 10 cm into the active region of the detector
  • Several Kalman filter internal consistency checks, including a cut of 2 < 70 to remove very poor fits

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

t tracker resolution with background
T Tracker Resolution with Background
  • Nominal background and 25 µm
  • Delta-ray and straw inefficiency
  • Kalman filter reconstruction
  • Tracker Resolution

 = 0.19 MeV/c

  • Plot is the difference between

reconstructed input momentum

and actual input momentum

Average straw rate 550 kHz

Straw eff. Overall acceptance

100% 19.2 %

97% 18.7 %

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

t tracker dio reconstruction with background
T Tracker DIO Reconstruction with Background
  • 1M DIO events (> 100 MeV/c)

were generated

 20 times more than expected

Fit by Norm x (Emax - E)5

  • 3 event found

in search range > 103.5 MeV

Background  3 / 20 = 0.2 event

Muon Conversion Signal 

5.5 events expected

for Br = 10-16

Background/Signal Ratio = 0.03

(Same conditions)

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

summary of t tracker results
Summary of T Tracker Results
  • Full pattern recognition and momentum reconstruction based on Kalman filter was performed
  • Results at nominal and doubled (in parenthesis) rates without delta-ray and straw inefficiency
  • Looking at the impact of using 25 mm thickness straw material vs. 15 mm…

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

summary of t tracker results1
Summary of T Tracker Results
  • Results at nominal background rate without and with delta-ray and straw inefficiencies of 3%

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

summary
Summary
  • Simulations of both the L and T Trackers indicate that either design will provide the required precise track momentum measurement in our high rate environment.
  • Although not every detail has yet been implemented in the code, none of what remains to be done is expected to alter the preceding conclusion.
  • We have demonstrated the basic L Tracker operating principles via prototypes tested with cosmics and test beams
  • We are initiating similar studies for the T Tracker
  • Thus we believe that we have two approaches that meet the physics requirements. The prototyping efforts and some engineering design will allow us to choose which approach to implement.

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

slide29
END

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

proton contribution to tracker rates
Proton Contribution to Tracker Rates

Protons are very heavily ionizing – up to 50 times minimum ionizing

Protons below ~18 MeV absorbed in target

Rate hitting tracker reduced by absorbers – further optimization possible

Studies of response of chambers to low energy protons planned at TUNL at Duke University

105

103

10

all generated protons

100

10

1

protons hitting tracker

0 20 40 60 80 100

Proton energy [MeV]

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

kalman filter

k

Kalman Filter
  • State vector x
  • Measured vector m k
  • Multiple scattering and

Energy losses

Progressive procedure

adding more and more

planes

Multi-helix trajectory

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations

event viewer
Event Viewer
  • Sample event

Michael Hebert, UC Irvine Tracker Simulations