1
BTeV Status
Collaboration StatusNew Groups
University of Iowa - C. Newsom (Pixels)Institute of High Energy Physics (IHEP - Protvino)
- A. Derevschikov, Y. Goncharenko, V. Khodyrev, A.P. Meschanin, L. V. Nogach, K. E. Shestermanov, L. F. Soloviev and A. N. Vasiliev (EM calorimeter)
New PeopleMinnesota - A. Smith (Simulations)Syracuse - R. Mountain (RICH & EM cal)Syracuse - G. Majumder (EM cal simulations)
S. Stone11/5/99
2
Pixel Test Beam Activities
Pixel tests - Great Results see Joel’s talk
3
Muon Tests
Muon tests tube design robust - no
broken wirestubes are efficient > 95%
on ArCO2, with wide plateaus
noise issues addressedStraw tube tests
planned but not started due to lack of resources
4
Electronics & DAQ Workshop
Organized with Ed Barsotti - Oct. 8-9, 1999
Preliminary front end designs for all BTeV systems
Data flow to L1 buffer specifiedTrigger and readout specifiedHigh Voltage systems discussed with
CAEN on Nov. 4, 1999
5
Schedule: Simulations
Now Working: BTeV GEANT, trigger, Calorimeter code including clustering (needs to be tuned)
Fix detector geometry 12/18Material Budget Studies (No, we don't require
less material, but it would be nice) 1/7Working interface to GEANT or MCFAST 1/1Generate physics backgrounds (over Xmas
holidays)Finish final states requested by PAC: Bo, D*-+,
Bs Ds-K+ 3/1
MCFAST studies of other processes 4/1
6
Oganization for Proposal - Pixels & Tracking
PixelsGroups: CMU, Fermilab, IIT, Iowa, Milano,
Syracuse, WisconsinPlan: Beam Tests of Fpix0, Fpix1 and
path to final BTeV chip; engineering for full system asked for, but not yet provided
Tracking systems (straw tubes and silicon)Groups: Indiana, Milano, Tenn.Plan: Full system design
7
Schedule: Pixels
Beam test runs, finish 1/17Analysis of test runs finish 3/1Sensor delivery 2/15
Initial tests 2/15 – 3/300.25 CMOS, test chip 12/15, results 2/1Pre FPIX2, submission 12/15, results 5/1Bump bonding yield tests 3/1HDI flex cable module test 3/1Mechanical pre prototype 3/1
8
Oganization/schedule - RICH
Groups: SyracusePlan: Full design, aerogel tests, PMT or
HPD choice Some aerogel samples procured, tests to
start soon, finish 3/1Met with Hamamatsu about multi-anode
phototubes, will meet again in Dec. to discuss costs and delivery issues. Finalize design 4/1, full cost estimate 5/1
9
Oganization for Proposal - EM cal hardware
Groups: IHEP, FNAL, Minn., Syracuse, York
Plan: Full design including sizes, simulations, PMT choice, optimum readout (QIE) design IHEP & Minn. Groups in contact with
PbWO4 producers, discussion on crystal sizes, schedules, costs begun; trips soon
Talks held at Syracuse with Hamamatsu about phototubes
10
Phototubes
ConstraintsCrystal size – 26 mm x 26 mm allows standard 1”
tube. For 1 1/8” tube need 30 mm x 30 mm (still tight 1 1/8” = 29 mm)We reject 24.7 mm2 (baseline as too small, can only use ¾”
tube, which KTeV does, but its too expensiveNote 26 mm2 36,000 crystals (both arms) while 30 mm2
gives “only” 27,000Radiation Damage
Expect something like 140 Mrad, 10 year dose in worst place at 2 interactions/crossing
Can be handled with quartz window pm tubes from Hamamatsu. UV glass goes to 1/3 Mrad.
Russian FEU-115 tested to 34 Mrad (may be better) but is 29 mm diameter
11
Phototubes II
High Quantum Efficiency Required We are photon statistics limited E=1.6%/E 0.55%Hamamatsu tubes may have larger light
outputTube must also have good linearity at
high current ~ 30 ma (KTeV ~ 80 ma)Candidate Hamamatsu & FEU tubes
identified. We will visit Hamamatsu in early Dec. to get cost and delivery schedule on 1” and 1 1/8” tubes
12
Schedule: Calorimeter
PbWO4 – Get price and delivery schedules 3/1
Phototubes – Choice and cost estimate of baseline – 2/1
HV, bases, cable costs 3/1
13
Oganization/schedule - Trigger/DAQ
OrganizationGroups: CMU, FNAL, IITPlan: Decide if two-plane trigger can work;
demonstrate that trigger is of adequate speed; show that efficiency and rejection are adequate
ScheduleTrigger hardware timing studies
Level 1 - 2/15Level 2 – 4/1
Level 3 strategy 4/1
14
Schedule: Muons
Groups: Illinois, Pavia, Puerto Rico, VanderbiltBeam Backgrounds using STRUCT and GEANT
(Vandy) 1/1 – 4/15Trigger Development, Simulation, and Studies (PR,
Ill., Vandy) 1/1 – 4/15Complete Assembly and Testing of 2nd generation
"plank" (design changes motivated by beam tests). Needed for accurate system cost estimate. (Vandy, Ill.) 1/15
Prototype work on readout electronics: both front-ends and downstream electronics: needed for accurate system cost estimate (Vandy) 1/15 – 4/15
15
Resources
BTeV R & D IS RESOURCE LIMITEDHave had difficulty with DOE providing funding
for R & D for an experiment that is not approved. Bad Press?
We do not have enough money for all hardware tests, or enough engineering to do as good a job on the proposal as we are capable of doing
We will do our best, given the limited resources available. Some additional hardware funds and engineering resources from the lab would be most helpful
16
1st GEANT – MCFAST Comparison
GEANT MCFAST
17
GEANT