Ammosov RPC IHEP

Information about Ammosov RPC IHEP

Published on October 12, 2007

Author: Sudiksha

Source: authorstream.com

Content

Status of RPC R&D for DHCAL in IHEP:  Status of RPC R&D for DHCAL in IHEP Vladimir Ammosov Institute for High Energy Physics Protvino Moscow region, Russia Content:  Content 1. RPC design for DHCAL 2. Tests of RPCs - in avalanche mode - in streamer mode 3. Comparison of operation modes 4. Conclusion RPC design for DHCAL:  RPC design for DHCAL RPC design for DHCAL:  RPC design for DHCAL RPC design for DHCAL:  RPC design for DHCAL Dead zones RPC tests:  RPC tests Set-up at 18T channel 5 GeV/c h+ beam RPC samples - 1.2, 1.6, 2.0 gaps - 1013 cm window glass - 16 pads of 1x1 cm2 - in tight box Trigger S1S2S3S4 for 2x2 cm2 area Di - preamp+disc RPC tests:  RPC tests Gas mixtures RPCs were tested in saturated avalanche and trigger modes For both modes TetraFluoroEthane (TFE) based mixtures were used TFE = freon 134A = C2H2F4 ~ 8 ionizations/mm Saturated avalanche mixtures = TFE/IB/SF6 IB = Iso-C4H10 as quencher, IB fraction = 5% SF6 as streamer suppresor, SF6 fractions = (2-5)% Streamer mixtures = TFE/IB/Ar or N2 IB = Iso-C4H10 as quencher, IB fraction= (5-20)% Ar/N2 as streamer developer, fractions = (2-20)% RPC in avalanche mode:  RPC in avalanche mode 1.2 mm gap RPC eff, <m> vs HV - 2% and 5% of SF6 For 2.2 mV Knee 8.2 kV 8.6 kV V 0.6 kV 0.6 kV Thresholds  - 0.6 mV  - 2.2 mV  - 5.0 mV 2.2 mV is best threshold eff >99% low <m> ~ 1.4 RPC in avalanche mode:  RPC in avalanche mode 1.6 mm gap RPC eff, <m> vs HV - 2% and 5% of SF6 For 2.2 mV Knee 8.8 kV 9.8 kV V 0.8 kV 0.8 kV Thresholds  - 0.6 mV  - 2.2 mV  - 5.0 mV 2.2 mV is best threshold eff >99% low <m> ~ 1.4 RPC in avalanche mode:  RPC in avalanche mode 2.0 mm gap RPC eff, <m> vs HV - 2% and 5% of SF6 For 2.2 mV Knee 10.0 kV 11.4 kV V 0.8 kV 0.6 kV Thresholds  - 0.6 mV  - 2.2 mV  - 5.0 mV 2.2 mV is best threshold eff >99% low <m> ~ 1.4 RPC in avalanche mode:  RPC in avalanche mode Typical Q and m distributions 1.2 mm, 2% SF6, 8.4 kV - working point, 2.2 mV thr Mean 2.8 pC RMS 1.6 pC Mean 1.47 RMS 0.58 Q ~ 107 e 2 adj pads RPC in avalanche mode:  RPC in avalanche mode <Q> and Q behavior, 2% SF6 1.2 mm 1.6 mm 2.0 mm For all gaps Q/<Q> ~ 1    knee RPC in avalanche mode:  RPC in avalanche mode Eff and <m> vs pad spacing No any prominent dependence for 0.3 -1.0 mm spacings RPC in avalanche mode:  RPC in avalanche mode Efficiency as a function of trigger position between two adjucent strips RPC in avalanche mode:  RPC in avalanche mode <m> vs anode thickness Should be as small as possible RPC in avalanche mode:  RPC in avalanche mode Eff and <m> vs beam incident angle No any prominent dependence for 900 - 450 angles RPC in avalanche mode:  RPC in avalanche mode Noise is increased as function of E 1.6 mm - ~0.2 Hz/cm2 1.2 mm - ~0.5 Hz/cm2  - 1.2 mm  - 1.6 mm  - 2.0 mm 1.6 mm knee 1.2 mm 2.0 mm Noise RPC in streamer mode:  RPC in streamer mode 1.2 mm gap, thr > 50 mV efficiency ~95% No 100% avalanche -streamer transition for any gas mixtures with Ar/N2 additions RPC in streamer mode:  RPC in streamer mode 1.2, 1.6, 2.0 mm gaps, thr > 50 mV efficiency ~95% No 100% avalanche -streamer transition for any gas mixtures with Ar/N2 additions Not lucky with streamer  also Q/<Q> ~ 0.6 as for avalanche RPC in streamer mode:  RPC in streamer mode Typical Q distributions on knee 1.2 mm 1.6 mm RPC in streamer mode:  RPC in streamer mode Eff ~95% and <m> ~ 1.4-1.5 for 200 mV thr 1.2 mm gap RPC in streamer mode:  RPC in streamer mode 1.2, 1.6, 2.0 mm gaps, thr > 50 mV Noise ~0.1 Hz/cm2 for 1.2 and 1.6 mm Comparison of avalanche and streamer modes:  Comparison of avalanche and streamer modes Rate capability streamer <4-5 Hz/cm2 avalanche <300 Hz/cm2 It is hard to work in streamer mode even for usual beam conditions Streamer is suitable only for very low rates like e+e- FLC Comparison of avalanche and streamer modes:  Comparison of avalanche and streamer modes As example, for 1.2 mm gap Comparison of avalanche and streamer modes:  Comparison of avalanche and streamer modes Avalanche mode is preferable due to: 1. higher efficiency (>99%) 2. smaller charge deposition (~102) - no observed ageing effects - higher rate capability (~102) R&D plans:  R&D plans 1. RPC samples with 64 ch on board March03 2. 40x25 cm2 RPC plane with 512 ch on board ? April03 3. 1 m3 DHCAL prototype June04 - 40 RPC planes of 1 m2 - 400 000(100 000) channels for 1 m2 (0.25 m2) surface in collaboration with ANL, Dubna, Ecol Pol Conclusion:  Conclusion 1. RPCs in avalanche mode are in favor to be used for TESLA DHCAL 2. Working conditions: -gas gap 1.2 -1.6 mm - gas mixture TFE/IB/SF6 - average induced charge ~2 pC (107 e) - efficiency > 99% - pad multiplicity ~ 1.5 - rate capability < 300 Hz/cm2 - noise 0.2-0.5 Hz/cm2 3. RO electronics (thr>1-2 mV) is challenge ( cost should be at ~0.1 Euro level)

Related presentations


Other presentations created by Sudiksha

3 Theodore Roosevelt
22. 10. 2007
0 views

3 Theodore Roosevelt

ramasetu24june200747 69
30. 09. 2007
0 views

ramasetu24june200747 69

08 Tornado
05. 10. 2007
0 views

08 Tornado

ACEI New Orleans 2004
05. 10. 2007
0 views

ACEI New Orleans 2004

Breaking Bad News May 07 ASA
08. 10. 2007
0 views

Breaking Bad News May 07 ASA

DESIGNING A TEMPERATURE SENSOR
12. 10. 2007
0 views

DESIGNING A TEMPERATURE SENSOR

blackhole
07. 10. 2007
0 views

blackhole

quiz
10. 12. 2007
0 views

quiz

BSRUN
19. 10. 2007
0 views

BSRUN

E consultancy slides march 6th
25. 10. 2007
0 views

E consultancy slides march 6th

breakinggridlock0612 01
30. 10. 2007
0 views

breakinggridlock0612 01

EXPLORERS
01. 11. 2007
0 views

EXPLORERS

Japanl
09. 10. 2007
0 views

Japanl

oct16 gfbiedu
25. 10. 2007
0 views

oct16 gfbiedu

dbirday croft
16. 11. 2007
0 views

dbirday croft

KSA V5
23. 11. 2007
0 views

KSA V5

DavidShipman
04. 10. 2007
0 views

DavidShipman

Significance
25. 10. 2007
0 views

Significance

NASA
03. 01. 2008
0 views

NASA

Day 3 Charlotte DUFOUR TIPS
04. 12. 2007
0 views

Day 3 Charlotte DUFOUR TIPS

colangelo
07. 01. 2008
0 views

colangelo

pisa overview
17. 10. 2007
0 views

pisa overview

NG21A 07 Rundle
30. 10. 2007
0 views

NG21A 07 Rundle

McCarthypix
02. 11. 2007
0 views

McCarthypix

frital
24. 10. 2007
0 views

frital

P4 2 Kawagoe
15. 10. 2007
0 views

P4 2 Kawagoe

PE Minerals
16. 02. 2008
0 views

PE Minerals

Internal Analysis Lecture
24. 02. 2008
0 views

Internal Analysis Lecture

OSHAtop102006
26. 02. 2008
0 views

OSHAtop102006

T E of the Machine Gun
27. 02. 2008
0 views

T E of the Machine Gun

secretcodes tcm4 336597
31. 12. 2007
0 views

secretcodes tcm4 336597

1960s
20. 02. 2008
0 views

1960s

Porteous
12. 03. 2008
0 views

Porteous

AG 2002 11 16
24. 10. 2007
0 views

AG 2002 11 16

Md  Ppt
24. 03. 2008
0 views

Md Ppt

science genetics
03. 10. 2007
0 views

science genetics

Grade 9 Heat
03. 04. 2008
0 views

Grade 9 Heat

Final Prelims 2006
16. 04. 2008
0 views

Final Prelims 2006

FOP01 Franchise Opportunity
17. 04. 2008
0 views

FOP01 Franchise Opportunity

pres4
18. 04. 2008
0 views

pres4

LSE
22. 04. 2008
0 views

LSE

B1
30. 10. 2007
0 views

B1

OPC Notes CT
07. 05. 2008
0 views

OPC Notes CT

chris corrigan pres
30. 04. 2008
0 views

chris corrigan pres

Facility Layout Lecture Notes
02. 05. 2008
0 views

Facility Layout Lecture Notes

Sukal Linger Presentation
08. 10. 2007
0 views

Sukal Linger Presentation

access programme 2004
17. 10. 2007
0 views

access programme 2004

SuperValu Presentation2
02. 10. 2007
0 views

SuperValu Presentation2

Larsen
07. 03. 2008
0 views

Larsen

cbm39 269
14. 04. 2008
0 views

cbm39 269

Cuban
23. 12. 2007
0 views

Cuban

ICN2001 Final Report for web
20. 03. 2008
0 views

ICN2001 Final Report for web

map ftaa windows xp
22. 10. 2007
0 views

map ftaa windows xp

The Motorola Phone Comedy
17. 10. 2007
0 views

The Motorola Phone Comedy

PresSchatanIntrod
22. 10. 2007
0 views

PresSchatanIntrod

ERCIMgridasiaRR
16. 10. 2007
0 views

ERCIMgridasiaRR

bpesp
23. 10. 2007
0 views

bpesp

Florida Congress 6 06
22. 10. 2007
0 views

Florida Congress 6 06

WrinkleInTime
24. 10. 2007
0 views

WrinkleInTime

WNVEnterpriseGIS Chicago
21. 10. 2007
0 views

WNVEnterpriseGIS Chicago

pira ing
04. 10. 2007
0 views

pira ing

SolarHeliosphere
11. 03. 2008
0 views

SolarHeliosphere

04ift tomatosalsaPoster combined
04. 03. 2008
0 views

04ift tomatosalsaPoster combined

InstallingPortlets
05. 10. 2007
0 views

InstallingPortlets