IJCLab IJC=Irène Joliot-Curieias.ust.hk/program/shared_doc/2020/202001hep/... · IJCLab IJC=Irène Joliot-Curie Roman Pöschl Most of the material shown today has been taken from

MDI Workshop at IAS Conference, January 2020 HKUST, Hong Kong

On behalf of the ILD Collaboration

(Selected) MDI Issues of

IJCLab IJC=Irène Joliot-Curie

Roman Pöschl

Most of the material shown today has been taken from ILD IDR (in preparation)

2IAS – MDI Workshop – Jan. 2020

IJCLab The ILC Project

• CM-Energy: 100 - 1000 GeV, 500 GeV baseline in TDR Superconducting cavities• Electron (and positron) polarisation• TDR in 2013 + DBD for detectors• “Rebaselining” in 2017, starting energy is 250 GeV • ILC benefits from construction of European XFEL

• first light on May 3rd 2017

the TDR baseline design

• Towards the ILC?• Strong efforts in Japan to host project • Since 2013: LC went through a detailed review process in Japan

• March 2019: Japanese Government expresses it's interest in the project

• Before and after establishment of contacts at political level (mainly US, France, Germany)

• SCJ will publish Master Plan in Jan.2020• MEXT intervention at ICFA/LCB Meeting in Feb. 2020


IJCLab ILC Physics Program

mZ

ee->ZH

tt-threshold

top-continuum

tth-threshold 1 TeV2xmW

All Standard Model particles within reach of planned e+e- colliders

High precision tests of Standard Model over wide range to detect onset of New Physics

Machine settings can be “tailored” for specific processes• Centre-of-Mass energy• Beam polarisation (straightforward at linear colliders)

Background free searches for BSM through beam polarisation

New Physics

L/1034 cm-2s-1

0.6 0.7 1.0 1.8 3.8


IJCLab Detector Requirements

Track momentum: σ1/p < 5 x 10-5/GeV (1/10 x LEP) ( e.g. Measurement of Z boson mass in Higgs Recoil) Impact parameter: σd0 < [5 ⊕ 10/(p[GeV]sin3/2θ)] μm (1/3 x SLD) (Quark tagging c/b) Jet energy resolution : dE/E = 0.3/(E(GeV))1/2 (1/2 x LEP) (W/Z masses with jets) Hermeticity : θmin = 5 mrad (for events with missing energy e.g. SUSY)

Final state will comprise eventswith a large number of chargedtracks and jets(6+)

• High granularity• Excellent momentum measurement• High separation power for particles

Particle Flow Detectors


IJCLab ILC @ Kitakami

● Candidate site is in North-East Japan● Kitakami ● Iwate and Miyagi Prefectures

● Mountainous region

● Striking advantage ● ILC can be built in a solid granit rock

of about 50km in length ● Little displacement “in one piece” during

Big Eastern Japanese Earthquake in 2011


IJCLab ILC250 – Dimenions and (main) parameters

Main change for new baseline: ● Smaller horizontal emittance: 10 μm -> 5 μm

● => Higher instantaneous luminosity: 0.82 -> 1.35 x 1034 cm-2 s-1

● and higher beamstrahlung: δBS

= 2.62%

Details of beam parameters after rebaselining see backup


IJCLab ILC – Two detectors – Push Pull

● ILC will have one Beam Deliver System● Two detectors ILD and SiD will share the interaction point● Push Pull operation

Total weight15500 t


IJCLab Push Pull and site related infrastructure


IJCLab The ILD Detector

● Relevant for MDI: B-Field of 3.5-4 T and integrated dipole QD0● Integrated dipole moves with detector ● More details in following slides


IJCLab Experimental conditions for ILD

● Instantaneous Luminosity: 1.35 x 1034 cm-2 s-1● Longitudinal polarisation of electron (80%) and positron (30%) beams● Moderate losses from beamstrahlung δ

BS = 2.62%

● Pulsed beam structure with pulse length of ~1ms and repetition rate of 5-10 Hz (more?)● Beam crossing angle of 14mrad at interaction point

Luminosity spectrum @ 250 GeV Luminosity spectrum @ 500 GeV


IJCLab “Large” and “Small” ILD Detector

Different outer TPC radii – Different magnetic field values


IJCLab Interplay of Machine and Detector


IJCLab From machine to detector – The “last step”

● Beams collide under 14mrad crossing angle ● Focusing into the interaction region with final doublet QD0 and QF1

● QD0 is part of detector (ILD) and QF1 is part of the machine● See more details on final focus magnets in talk by B. Parker


IJCLab Modification of forward region

Design of ILD forward region until 2015

● Different focal length L* for ILD (4.4m) and SiD (3.5m)● Machine request for a uniform L* ● Had to save 30cm in ILD● Main option vacuum pump


IJCLab Study of development of vacuum

UNDER STATIC CONDITION QD0 + IP region

IP

Pumps 2*15 l/s

Valves dn40

Valve dn100QD0

Pumps 120 l/S

T=293K T=293KT=10K

Without outgassing valves dn40

Without baking

T=293K

τ (H2) ≈ 5.10-12 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (CO) ≈ 1.10-13 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (H2O) ≈ 2.10-11 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (CO2) ≈ 1.10-13 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

T=10K

τ (all gases) ≈ 0 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

σ (sticking coeff CO, CO2, H2O) = 1

For H2 pumping by holes in beam screen 2% surface

Distance (cm)

Pre

ssio

n (

mb

ar)

Comparison of a Monté-Carlo simulation and analytical simulation for H2O

Simulation Monté-Carlo(Molflow)

After 100h pumping

Comparison ofanalytical calculationand simulationfor validation purposes


IJCLab Vaccum in IP region for different configurations

DP0 + IP Pumps IP 120 l/s Without baking 5,6 nTorr H2O initial

DP0 + IP No pumps IP Without baking 120 nTorr H2O DP0 and IP volumenot separated / Lengthreduction

DP0 + IP Neg coating Baking IP 0,23 nTorr H2/H2O

Length reduction

DP0 + IP Neg satured Baking IP 1,4 nTorr H2O /H2

Length reduction

● Without pump vacuum in IP region around ~20 times worse than with pump● Excellent vacuum could be recovered with NEG coating ● ... at the expense of the need for baking of the beam pipe to activate the NEG

~100h at 180o C


IJCLab Which vacuum can be tolerated?

● Beam gas background much smaller than pair induced background● May live with relatively relaxed vacuum conditions

● Note, so far only static vacuum has been considered. ● What about dynamic vacuum? (Typically not an issue for LC dixit expert)


IJCLab Current design of ILD Forward Region

= 4.1m


IJCLab ILD Magnet

Solenoid with anti-DID

● Solenoidal field of up to 4.5 T● Detector Integrated Dipole to control

Beam background

ILD Magnet Yoke

● Shield the environment from the ILD B-Field● Convention: Stray field has to be as small as 50 Gauss at

● 15m off-axis ● Will allow to use iron tooling for detector in garage position

● See SLAC-PUB-13657


IJCLab ILD Magnet – Field Maps I

Example 4 T Field along z-axis in ILD Large model

4 T


IJCLab ILD Magnet – Field Maps II

ILD Large Model - ILD stray field if magnet operated at 4 T

● Stray field meets requirements ● Story over?

● Iron yoke is cost driver● Reducing the amount of iron?

6 mT


IJCLab ILD Magnet – Thinner Yoke?

60cm iron off

● Cost reduction of about 20%● Stray field at 15m 9.3mT

Reduction to ~2m thickness

● Cost reduction of about 50%● Field ~100mT at 1m ● Requires shielding wall that has to

move with detector● Radiation safety?


IJCLab Anti-DiD and Beam background

0.036 T

Anti-DiD Field

Detailed simulation:Beam background in ILD BeamCal from e+e- pairs provoked by beamstrahlung

w/o anti-DID w/ anti-DID

● Hit spectrum more symmetric with anti-DID● (difficult to see)● ~30% Less energy deposit with anti-DID● More details on beam background, see talk by D. Jeans


IJCLab Power pulsing

Mastering of technology is essential for operation of ILC detectors

● Electronics switched on during > ~1ms of ILC bunch train and data acquisition ● Bias currents shut down between bunch trains

N.B. Final numbers may vary


IJCLab CALICE beam test 2018 - Systematic study of power pulsing

Pedestal variation Variation of MIP response

● Small pedestal variation● About 0.6% of a MIP

● Around 3.4% smaller response to MIP● However, stable MIP response observed● Effect understood and can be corrected for

Analogue hadron calorimeter:Parameters for power pulsing 20-50 Hz repetition rate, 15ms acquisition window, switch on time 150 μs

Work in progress Work in progress


IJCLab ILD - (Estimated) Power consumption

Repartition of underground power consumptionPower consumption

On surface:

Computer Farm – 1000 kWHe Compressors - 800 kWHVAC - 600 kWAir Compressors - 50 kWTotal: 2450 kW

Underground:

Total: 982 kW

Full breakdown of estimated power consumption – See backup


IJCLab Power supply – Example SiEcal

Zoom into ILD Ecal barrel

● Total average power consumption20 kW for a calorimeter system with 108 cells*● Only possible through PP

● The art is to store the power very locally

● Issue for upcoming R&D

*Compare with 140 kW for CMS HGCAL FEE 6x106 cells

.

.

.

PowerSource~52 V

Slab column15x600mA, 36 W

DCDCConverter12V/4VIn SiECAL Hub 2

SiECALPatch panelCurrent ~25A

Power cable trailer <-> SiECAL Patch panel


SiEcal Hub1

SiEcal Hub1Serves one barrel module

x5


IJCLab Cabling scheme


IJCLab Summary and conclusion

● ILD gets ready for ILC approval

● MDI issues play a central role in the concept of ILD● Push pull scheme of ILD detectors is design challenge

● Change of L* triggered redesign of ILD forward region● Removal of vacuum pump

● Interplay between ILD Magnets and beam are under constant scrutiny ● Careful analyses of e.g. stray field to understand impact on second detector in garage position● Magnet return yoke is cost factor, study on material reduction ongoing ● Study of background levels (more in talk by Daniel Jeans)

● Study of services for IDR● Estimation of power needs● Example for SiEcal given today● Power pulsing is key design element for all ILD sub-detectors

● System aspects will be central to future detector R&D● Further aspects are services in terms of gas and cooling water

Backup



UNDER STATIC CONDITION QD0 + IPregion

IP

Pumps 2*15 l/s

Valves dn40

Valve dn100QD0

Pumps 120 l/S

T=293K T=293KT=10K

Without outgassing valves dn40

Without baking

T=293Kτ (H2) ≈ 5.10-12 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (CO) ≈ 1.10-13 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (H2O) ≈ 2.10-11 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (CO2) ≈ 1.10-13 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

T=10K



For H2 pumping by holes in beamscreen 2% surface

Distance (cm)

Pre

ssio

n (

mb

ar)

ΣP = 7,5 10-9 mbar ~ 5,6 nTorr


IJCLab ILC Parameters



IP

Pumps 2*15 l/s forall gases

Valves dn40

Valve dn100

QD0Pumps 120 l/s for all gases

VACUUM DISTRIBUTION ON ILD


H2O

CO2

CO

H2

T=293K T=293KT=10K with bakingT=293K

Between valves dn40 and dn100

τ (H2) ≈ 2.10-13 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (CO) ≈ 2.10-15 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (H2O) ≈ 0 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (CO2) ≈ 5.10-16 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

IP region

Alu or Cu or SS after 100h pumping

Without baking

T=293K τ (H2) ≈ 5.10-12 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (CO) ≈ 1.10-13 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (H2O) ≈ 2.10-11 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (CO2) ≈ 1.10-13 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

T=10K

NEG coating



For H2 pumping by holes in beam screen 2%surface

L=30 cm Ø = 179 mm

sticking coeff σ( CO;CO2)=0,1σ(H2)=0,0005σ(H2O)=0,0005 ??

ΣP = 3 10-10 mbar ~ 0,23 nTorr

Pre

ssio

n (

mb

ar)

Distance (cm)



IP

Pumps 2*15 l/sfor all gases

Valves dn40

Valve dn100QD0

Pumps 120 l/s for allgases

VACUUM DISTRIBUTION ON ILD


H2O

CO2

CO

H2

T=293K T=293KT=10K with bakingT=293K

Between valves dn40 and dn100

IP region

Alu or Cu or SS after 100h pumping

Without baking

NEG coating saturedL=30 cm Ø = 179 mm

sticking coeff σ( CO;CO2)=0σ(H2)=0σ(H2O)=0

ΣP = 1,8 10-9 mbar ~1,4 nTorr

Pre

ssio

n (

mb

ar)

Distance (cm)

τ (H2) ≈ 2.10-13 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (CO) ≈ 2.10-15 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (H2O) ≈ 0 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (CO2) ≈ 5.10-16 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

T=293K τ (H2) ≈ 5.10-12 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (CO) ≈ 1.10-13 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (H2O) ≈ 2.10-11 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

τ (CO2) ≈ 1.10-13 mbar.l.s-1.cm-2

T=10Kσ (sticking coeff CO, CO2, H2O) = 1

For H2 pumping by holes in beam screen 2%surface


IJCLab ILD – Breakdown of power consumption

.

.

.

PowerSource~52 V

Slab column15x600mA, 36 W


SiECALPatch panelCurrent ~25A

Power cable trailer <-> SiECAL Patch panel


SiEcal Hub1

SiEcal Hub1Serves one barrel module

x5

Documents

IJCLab IJC=Irène Joliot-Curieias.ust.hk/program/shared_doc/2020/202001hep/... · IJCLab IJC=Irène Joliot-Curie Roman Pöschl Most of the material shown today has been taken from