1 / 6

ECAL plan for construction PEBS meeting on 10 th of January 2011 EPFL, Lausanne

ECAL plan for construction PEBS meeting on 10 th of January 2011 EPFL, Lausanne. Tatsuya NAKADA. Boundary conditions. Funding from the ESA PRODEX programme through Swiss space office partnership with industry , already during the R&D phase 50% or more funding has to go directly to industry

xandra-hamilton
Download Presentation

ECAL plan for construction PEBS meeting on 10 th of January 2011 EPFL, Lausanne

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ECAL plan for constructionPEBS meeting on 10th of January 2011EPFL, Lausanne Tatsuya NAKADA

  2. Boundary conditions • Funding from the ESA PRODEX programmethrough Swiss space office • partnership with industry, already during the R&D phase • 50% or more funding has to go directly to industry • Following steps needed • Specification us • Conceptual design mainly by us • Engineering design by industry with our input • Call for tender by PRODEX • Construction mainly by industry • Assembly us or industry • Testing us Proposal submission to PRODEX

  3. For RPODEX submission • Contact with three companies • APCO can do only mechanics • RUAG can do both mechanics and electronics • ALMATEC more like an engineering office • Plan to discuss with RUAG and ALMATEC to converge to a technical design, starting with mechanics first • Specification needs to be finalised soon • PRODEX submission in Spring 2011

  4. Specification • Current specification: • Active area = 873 × 873 mm2 • Converter 3mm thick Ti • Scintillator bar = 7.75 × 873 × 3 mm3 • 108 bars/layer • 3 layers/superlayer and 7 (x-y-…) superlayers • Total thickness = (3+3) × 21 =126 mm and 17.3 X0 • Weight = 120 kg/superlayer, total of 840 kg • Readout unit = 12 bars × 3 layers = 36 channels • Total number of channel = 2268

  5. Specification • Specification is driven by • Active area ← acceptance match to the rest • Total thickness ← required energy reach i.e. energy measurement up to multi TeV needed+ payload limitation • Converter thickness, scintillator bar width ← e-p separation i.e. ~104 + total number of channels limited by the power • Readout unit depends on the FE-chip, i.e. 32 or 36 channels • Superlayer configuration ← readout unit configuration + weight portable by two people

  6. Specification • Specification is driven by • Active area basically fixed: ~90×90 cm2 • Total thickness basically fixed to >~15 X0? • Converter thickness: could still be optimized? • Scintillator bar width: could still be optimized? • FE-chip: if VATA Chip, 32 channels → Superlayer = 2 or 4 layers unless lose some channels, if the converter thickness >~ 3 mm, 4 layers too heavy unless split • Some more simulation studies planned: e-p separation vs converter thickness by the end of Januarye-p separation vs scintillator bar width by the middle of February

More Related