Upload
lynette-gordon
View
223
Download
4
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
STS detector layout STS geometry: 8 double-sided micro-strip silicon stations composed of sectors with thickness of 300 m Support structure made of carbon boxes Cables are represented as capton boxes with thickness of 200 m Readout: thick layers of silicon and aluminium 11 th CBM Collaboration Meeting, GSI D. Bertini, R.Karabowicz Feb 27 th, 2008
Citation preview
STS Radiation Environment
11th CBM Collaboration MeetingGSI, February 2008
Radoslaw KarabowiczGSI
Outline
1.Cave geometry and STS layout
2.Fluka results on cave radiation environment
3.Fluka results on STS radiation environment
4.Geant3 results on STS radiation environment
5.Conclusion
11th CBM Collaboration Meeting, GSI D. Bertini, R.Karabowicz Feb 27 th, 2008
STS detector layoutSTS geometry:
8 double-sided micro-strip silicon stations composedof sectors with thickness of 300m
Support structure made of carbon boxes
Cables are represented as capton boxes with thickness of 200m
Readout: thick layers of silicon and aluminium
11th CBM Collaboration Meeting, GSI D. Bertini, R.Karabowicz Feb 27 th, 2008
STS Radiation
Environment(Geant3)
Particle energy loss in central Au+Au collisions at 25 AGeV on different STS stations.
11th CBM Collaboration Meeting, GSI D. Bertini, R.Karabowicz Feb 27 th, 2008
STS Radiation
Environment(Geant3)
Particle energy loss in mbias Au+Au collisions at 25 AGeV on different STS stations.
11th CBM Collaboration Meeting, GSI D. Bertini, R.Karabowicz Feb 27 th, 2008
STS Radiation
Environment(Geant3)
Comparison between energy loss in mbias collisions and central collisions
11th CBM Collaboration Meeting, GSI D. Bertini, R.Karabowicz Feb 27 th, 2008
STS Radiation
Environment(Geant3)
Comparison between energy loss WITH and WITHOUT Much system
11th CBM Collaboration Meeting, GSI D. Bertini, R.Karabowicz Feb 27 th, 2008
STS Radiation
Environment(Geant3 vs
Fluka)
Comparison between energy loss produced in Geant and that produced in Fluka.
11th CBM Collaboration Meeting, GSI D. Bertini, R.Karabowicz Feb 27 th, 2008
OccupancySensors’ occupancy in one Au+Au central 25 AGeV collision
11th CBM Collaboration Meeting, GSI D. Bertini, R.Karabowicz Feb 27 th, 2008
Station 1, z =30cm
Work in progress – realistic response
Sector view:Front strips in blueBack strips in greenMC points in circlesReconstructed hits: stars
Size of plot [cm]Position in STS:XYZ
Front strips’ ADC distributionBack strips’ ADC distribution
Simple Event Display
11th CBM Collaboration Meeting, GSI R.Karabowicz Feb 27 th, 2008
Hit sharing multiply factor: ~3 (guestimated)In other experiment: 1.4
Radiation levelsRadiation doses in megarads on the STS silicon stations as calculated by Geant during 6 years* of CBM running.
*1 year = 2 months at full intensity (107 interactions/s)
11th CBM Collaboration Meeting, GSI D. Bertini, R.Karabowicz Feb 27 th, 2008
Station 8, z =100cm
Station 4, z =50cmStation 1, z =30cm
Conclusions-Difference between minimum bias and central collisions or with/without the MUCH system is rather straight forward
-Comparison between Fluka and Geant is not easily to be understood, but was not a surprise for Fluka/Geant experts
-Radiation dose on STS is tough, but still tolerable (up to 20MRads in 6 years)
-Occupancy reaches 5.7%, but assuming hit sharing of ~1.4 it would rise to almost 10%