“HF UPGRADE PHASE II ISSUES” Yasar Onel

“HF UPGRADE PHASE II ISSUES”Yasar OnelHF Upgrade Group:

Iowa, Baylor, Fairfield, Fermilab, FIU, Maryland, Mississippi

Extended US Group for HCAL Upgrades:Boston, Minnesota, Princeton, Virginia

Trieste, ItalyBogazici U. Istanbul,TurkeyCukurova U, Adana, Turkey

ITU, Istanbul, TurkeyMETU,Ankara, Turkey

Rio-CBPF,BrazilRio-UERJ,Brazil

Sao Paulo-Unicamp,Brazil

One good reason to go SLHC….

- Missing Et - Forward Jet Tagging

3000 fb-1 (SLHC)

[HF - inspired]

HF is essential for tagging jets

3

4

Jets in HF range

• HE and HF overlap ends at η=3.

A. Moeller et.al.

Total Jet Pairs

At Least one Jet with |η|>3 (% of total)

10 GeV cut (g) 41785 32571 (78%)

20 GeV cut (r) 22252 16143 (73%)

30 GeV cut (b) 11858 7992 (67%)

Fiber Radiation Damage

5

HF MAPS of fluence/dose

Fluence of hadrons (E>10 keV) in cm-2 s-1 (upper plot)

Radiation dose in Gy (lowerplot) in the HF and itssurroundings.

(Values for 5 105 pb-1)

RBX

RBX

6

References:

“Conceptual design and performance of the CMS forward shielding”, CMS Internal Note 2000/051

“Shielding of the HF photomultipliers ”, CMS Internal Note 2002/007

“Optimization of the CMS forward shielding”, CMS NOTE 2000/068

Expected HF Fiber Exposure and Scenario

Luminosity Ring 1-5 Ring 6-9 Ring 10-13

LHC (at 1034) 1 Mrad/year 10 Mrad/year 100 Mrad/year

Phase I (1.5 *1034) 1.5 Mrad/year 15 Mrad/year 150 Mrad/year

Phase II (3 *1034) 3 Mrad/year 30 Mrad/year 300 Mrad/year

SLHC (1035) 10 Mrad/year 100 Mrad/year 1 Grad/year

• These numbers are without recovery of fibers. We expect the fiber to recover at least 20% at each shutdown.

• QP Fibers cannot survive beyond 1 Grad. They’ll need to be replaced with QQ fibers after 10 years of LHC run (or equivalent dose).

• The PMTs have sensitivity range nicely fitting with Fiber “sweet range” of 380 nm-580 nm).

PMT HV adjustment can easily make up for lost light intensity due to radiation.

“Radiation Hardness Measurements of High OH Content Quartz Fibers Irradiated with 24 GeV Protons” , NIM A 585 (2008). 7

HF Upgrade Phase II SLHCOPTION A

• If manipulation of activated components, for fiber extraction and stuffing, turns out to be prohibitive, replacement of the absorber matrix could be considered, possibly including finer-grained configuration, for instance to provide smaller trigger tower size, if useful. The price tag in year 2000 of original steel wedges with grooved plates and diffusion welding assembly was ≤ 1 MCHF.

• A replacement of (at least fraction of) QPF with QQF and PMTs may be feasible, provided safe procedures for manipulation of the HF activated parts are implemented.

HF Upgrade Phase II SLHCOPTION B

• Rebuild the absorber as 11-12 lambda

• Include a tail catcher

• Increase the fiber amount by a factor two

• Use the same QP fibers everywhere except QQ fibers tower 10-13

HF Upgrade Phase II SLHCOPTION C

• Rad-Hard detectors

• GeAs [A. Penzo]

• CVD Diamond [A. Penzo]

• Gas Ionization (PPAC) [Y.Onel, E. Norbeck]

• Secondary emission [Y.Onel, D.Winn]

• Disposable active media:

– Liquid Č Radiator / Scintillator [E. Norbeck]

HF Upgrade Phase II SLHCOPTION D

… Now, something totally different:

Digital Calorimetry and Particle Flow

with RPCs and GEMs •CALICE Analysis Notes: CAN-030, CAN-031, CAN-032.•Q. Zhang et.al., “Environmental dependence of the performance of resistive plate chambers”, JINST 5 P02007, 2010.•B. Bilki et.al., “Hadron showers in a digital hadron calorimeter”, JINST 4 P10008, 2009.•B. Bilki et.al., “Measurement of the rate capability of Resistive Plate Chambers”, JINST 4 P06003, 2009.•B. Bilki et.al., “Measurement of positron showers with a digital hadron calorimeter”, JINST 4 P04006, 2009.•B. Bilki et.al., “Calibration of a digital hadron calorimeter with muons”, JINST 3 P05001, 2008.

Needs development of a low resistance glass with the optimum resistivity to allow larger counting rates but still have the desirable RPC performance.

HF Upgrade Phase II SLHCOPTION D

Conclusion• QP fibers will be fine for LHC (up to 1 Grad)• For SLHC (1035) all QP fibers should be replaced with QQ in towers

10 - 13.• With recovery during shutdowns QQ fiber will work for SLHC.• HF PMTs will not have any radiation problem during LHC due to

neutrons.• Starting from lower HV values will help to compensate fiber and

PMT signal degradation with HV increase. • However, there are other options with different active medium

and readout implementations (e.g. Digital Calorimetry with RPCs/GEMs)

13

Forward Lepton-Photon SystemCMS Example

Replace:Passive Poly Shield w/ PreRadiator/e-m CalorimeterPassive Collar/Rot. Shield w/Muon Toroids and Chambers

Polyethylene Shield in front of Forward Calorimeter (HF)Collar, Rotating Shield behind HFareCOMPLETELY PASSIVE!

IP

Forward Lepton-Photon System

3m Muon SuperFe Toroidsreplace Rot. Shield/Collar

Stub Tracker, Pre-radiator, e-m Cal-replaces inert poly shield

Muon Chambers

Forward 3<<5 Lepton-Photon Physics

• Triggering & Acceptance: µ & e; ’s vs leading o in jets• Refinement of Forward Jets – tighter E//Calibration• Hermeticity of detector-MET: ~1 TeV muon, =3: ET~100 GeV!

• “Standard” model processes– Z/W production: Forward/Backward Asymmetries- SuSY: F/B lepton asymmetries; e, µ acceptance; MET– PDF’s at low x – consistency; calibrations– Resonance production: low pT acceptance of J/Ψ, Υ…– F2(x1, x2,..xn): multiple Drell-Yan, Z/W – Correlation Fn’s

– Higgs: Acceptance + VBF of high mass objects• Exotica

– Heavy resonance/Z’/W’; heavy stable charged: precision timingSee contributions by A.de Roeck, J.Mans, many others

Forward Upgrade: e-m front, µ back

REPLACE 30cm passive Poly Shield w/ Stub Tracker/Preradiator/EM Cal - 1 Lint – Protects HF and reduces punch thru to HF PMT/Fiber Bundles - Improves Jet ID/Def, angular resolution & energy resolution - Isolated e gamma and muon ID if high segmention - - Adds separation of real & induced backgrounds.

E-M Calorimeter/Preshower/Stub Tracker Options

• Liquid Scintillator Sampling: Organic or LXe• Quartz Plates coated with 1-5 µm ZnO:Ga, pTP• Quartz fibers• Lscint WLS Liquid Core Fibers• ZnO:Ga or YAP-coated WLS/SciFi Fibers• Gaseous-Based pixels• ………• Secondary Emission Modules

Secondary EmissionIonization Calorimetry

Ugur Akgun2, Burak Bilki2, Warren Clarida2, Lucien Cremaldi3, Grekim Jennings1, Rob Kroeger3, Alexi Mestvirishvilli2, John Neuhaus2, Yasar Onel2, Victor Podrasky1, Rahmat Rahmat3, Chris Sanzeni1, Ianos Schmidt2, David R Winn,PI1, Taylan Yetkin2

Fairfield1/Iowa2/Mississippi3

SE Calorimeter R&D Secondary Emission Sensors for Calorimeters

• Basic Idea: Dynode Stack:High Gain Radiation Sensor ~0.1-0.15 SEe/mip/SE Surface; Signal g >104/SEe Eem/Eem ~few %/√E(GeV) for practical devices- Rad-Hard (PMT dynodes>100 GRads)- Uber-Fast: signal cotemporal w/shower ~ PMT impulse- Compact (dynodes <1mm thick/stage)- Rugged/Structural Element/Non-Crit./NoActivation Assy- Arbitrary Shapes/Integrate into large calorimeters- Minimal Dead Areas or Services needed.- Up to 1.2 T operation• 25 Lrad Forward e-m Calorimeter: - 25 layers x (1 Lrad W + SEe g=106 Sensor module) about 30 cm to beam

• Muon MIPs: ~25 SEe/Muon • E-M Showers: E / E ~ 2.5%/√E

• Tracking: ~5 mm ok- Energy-Flow Calorimeter (e+e-, µC, SLHC,….)- Forward HiRad HiRate Calorimeters- Quasi-Compensation

20

Dn-Dn+1: 0.9 mm C-C mesh: 13 µm Wire diameter: 5 µm

MESH DYNODE VARIANTS

SEe Detector OptionsMetal Screen Dynodes: 15D+: g~105, Bz~2 T

21

Shower particle in Gaps Yield:Highly Linear

Quasi-Homogeneous-EM Calorimeter M.C.Fine Grained 50 micron Cu mesh, 50 micron gap

• 9k shower e±/GeV (~signal! X5 if 10µm )

• Assume conservative yields: 1,200 SEe( ~1.15)E/E ~ 2.9%/√E

• 10 µm gaps: <1%/√E!

22

23

Test Calorimeter: Use Mesh Dynode from PMT

Test Calorimeter- 3x3 Array of Mesh PMT’s mounted on PC board.- Kathode operated at +5-10 V so p.e. can’t escape.- D1 = Ground- Anode = +HV- 12 PC Boards – alternate spaced by ½ cell- 1 Lrad Pb Sheets between boards

Summer 2011 Beam Tests of SE Mesh PMT Used as SE Sensor are highly suggestive:Response similar to MC. Mip Muon Efficiency in single 19D stack: 75-80% Therefore we are now assembling in Test Beam:

24

SEe Calorimeter Sensor Assemblies- Mesh Dynode PMT 3x3 Arrays in Boxes- Dynode Stack only- PhotoCathode Blackened; +10V.- Boxes interspersed with Absorber plates- Boxes offset ½ cell layer-to-layer

Back-up

25

Radiation damage in irradiated quartz fibre [1][2]

26

1] I.Dumanoglu et al., NIM A 490 (2002) 444-455[2] K. Cankocak et al., NIM A 585 (2008) 20-27

27

Damage Recovery parameters

28

Damage and recovery of irradiated quartz fibres [1][2]

I(,D)/I(,0) = exp[– A(,D).L/4.343]

A(,D) = [D/Ds]

A in dB/m, D en Mrad, L en m

. Recovery (Increase of transm. signal)

• Radiation damage (Decrease of signal)

))(343.4/)(,(exp),(

),(

tt

tLDA

DI

tI

irr

D