Test Beam infrastructure

Outline
1. beam momenta 2.intensities 3.PID 4.Experimental magnet 5.Triggers 6.Detector manipulation and assembly 7.Electronics 8.Gas and HV sytems, DCS (slow control) 9.First comments on cost, manpower, timescale

Choice of beamline

Indicated momentum range: 100MeV/c to 20GeV/c Best match, purely on the base of momentum,would be the T9 beamline at the PS ... but also a large and powerful magnet was desidered, so second-in-the-row is the H8 SPS beam line, located in the Nort Hall. Lets be clear: what follows makes sense if and only if we need to put a detector in a 1.5T B eld

H8 beam line
Secondary beamline of the primary T4 target, capable of delivering 5 GeV/c to 300 GeV/c secondaries In our momentum range, 5 to 20 GeV/c is standard 1 to 5 GeV/c adaptation already studied for the Atlas test-beam. It implies a secondary target and generation of a tertiary beam. To be discussed with experts, feasible. 100 MeV/c to 1 GeV/c might need additional equipment and instrumentation (e.g. slow down particles in absorbers) General rule: the lower the momentum, the lower the intensity

Scale :

200 mm 100 0 10 m

H6 m a be

B1T

B2T

B3T

N BE

D1

H8 beam
450 GeV/c protons

P0 beam

!prod TARGET T4

Figure 2: Plan of target station T4.

and recombination stage consisting of four large aperture dipole magnets and a collimator. At the end of the beam line, a quadrupole doublet will provide the final focusing to the experiment.

Concept of tertiary beam (source: I. Efthymiopoulos notes)

Figure 1: Schematic layout of the VLE beam.

To keep the cost of the project small, existing magnets have to be re-used, which limits the choice to the QPL/QPS family for the quadrupoles and to MBPL for the bends. Their parameters are listed in Appendix A.The design is completed with two important elements:
the dump, needed to absorb the remnant of the secondary high energy and high intensity beam. Note that in order to achieve the required rates, in particular at the very low energy of ~1 GeV/c, the incoming secondary beam might need to be pushed to the maximum allowed intensity, which is close to ~107 particles per spill. Moreover the secondary beam will be accompanied with muons, typically 1% (or ~105) of the pion flux. The dump will help to multiple scatter these muons, therefore reducing their flux/cm2 at the detector.

Possible addtions (t.b.d) ~100 MeV/c

Absorber Momentum (instrumented?) fourth bending magnet in order to measure the analysis beam the spectrometer around the + PID
momentum particle-by-particle. This is required if the experiment wants to go beyond the beam momentum resolution defined by the collimator.

~1 GeV/c

The relative position of the beam elements are defined based on the following considerations: Acceptance
3

Intensity
Indicated statistics: n*10^4 events per setting Need to know more precisely how many settings. How many angles, particles/momenta, detector congurations? My rst guess is 10^7 events. To fulll this in 2 weeks (standard duration of a test-beam) one needs ~10^3 particles per spill. No problem at higher momenta, lower momenta will be slower, but not quantied yet. Time to modify/manipulate the detector not included. This point is important: we have to state how much time we need as primary users of the beam line.

PID
Indicated particle ID at the 10^(-3) level. This is quite challenging Best match I could indicate is the NA56/SPY approach (incidentally, located in H6 - the line closeby H8) Very long instrumented beam line, designed to analyze particle production from 7 to 60 GeV/c (hadron production for the WANF neutrino beam) PID was at the % level. Is this enough? Need studies and simulations if we need anything better.

NA56 / SPY instrumented beam line

horizontal plane

vertical plane

Figure 1: The NA56/SPY experimental set-up: elements of the beam optics in the horizontal and vertical bending planes are also shown. Not to scale, the solid line indicates the excursion of a particle which starts with an angular oset at T4 (1 mrad) and the dotted line shows the trajectories of on-axis particles with a momentum dierent from the nominal one (p/p 1%).

0m T4 - beryllium target T4

100m

200m

300m

400m

500m

hadron calorimeter

Magnet

H8 is equipped with a large (1.6m bore) superconducting dipole, the so-called Morpurgo magnet 1.56T is standard Field maps exist, most recent are likely those of the Atlas test-beam I assume that operational costs (He consumption) are going to be included in some agreement with CERN

Z slice

XY slice at the center

Triggers

I do not expect this to be a problem in an instrumented beam line No cosmic triggers have been requested (... correct?) so no special coverage with large-area scintillator planes Design of coincidences and particle tagging to be done, but not urgent as of now

Detector assembly and manipulation

Each detector type most likely need a specic platform At least one platform for detectors to be inserted into the magnet (plus insertion/extraction rails) Platform for magnetized iron types needs sliding/ tilting mounting plates to accommodate the need for data taking at different angles changing active/passive materials and congurations Crane not a problem (single element weight below maximum at the NH)

Electronics

From considerations about intensities, it follows that the electronics must cope with n*10^3 events per spill - which I assume it is not a problem with the SPS long spills. DAQ has to cope too. Again I do not expect this to be a show stopper. More specic issues not my duty ...

Gas and HV systems, DCS

MIND/ECC/TASD detectors need fairly standard HV and gas systems. I assume these systems can be a common investment together with the other users of the infrastructure Same applies to DCS (slow control) system for detector control and environmental monitoring Exceptions: power supply for magnetized iron coils L-Ar HV and gas system ... ? I also assume that barracks and counting houses will be included in the common infrastructure or negotiated with CERN

Cost
Main items to include in a cost analysis beam line equipment and modications construction of assembly and manipulation equipment for detectors beam line instrumentation Total amount is going to be similar to infrastructure for a small experiment There will for sure be costs for cabling, piping and technicians during installations

Time-scale

Physicists/engineers: 1 DAQ, 1 Electronics, 1 mechanical engineer First activities must be discussion with beam line experts simulation of the beam line mechanical design if time-scale is 2009-2012, these activities should start rather soon.