Detector RD Overview and Opportunities Detector Overview some

Detector R&D: Overview and Opportunities Detector Overview (some old news!). • Present System Conveners • Vertex Detector (SVT)- Rizzo • Drift Chamber (DCH)- Finocchiaro • Particle Identification (PID)- Leith • Electromagnetic Calorimeter (EMC)- Hitlin • Instrumented Flux Return (IFR)- Calabrese • Electronics, Trigger, DAQ- Breton/Dubois-Felsmann • Computing- Rama/Morandin • MDI- Paoloni/Biagini • Integration -WIsniewski • • Towards a TDR • R&D Opportunities • Summary Blair Ratcliff SLAC US R&D Meeting, Sept. 3, 2008 Blair Ratcliff, SLAC

Detector Overview ¡ Current B-Factory detectors have proven to be extremely effective instruments over the very broad physics program accessible at the U(4 S). l l l ¡ ¡ 2 Two (+1) examples: Ba. Bar, Belle (Cleo-II). Serve as “world class prototypes” for Super. B! Optimized differently, but all were (are!) effective physics instruments. Comparisons between them help to define optimal strategies for subsystems in a Super. B detector. CDR detector design based on Ba. Bar (with reoptimization). Super. B machine acceptance limits similar to PEP-II: Ba. Bar’s geometry, field, and portions of several subsystems are rather close to optimal, Re-use of Ba. Bar gives excellent performance and saves money. US R&D Meeting, Sept. 3, 2008 Blair Ratcliff, SLAC

Directions for Detector Optimization ¡ From Machine and Environment: • • o From physics goals, which emphasize rare decays, LFV in t physics, and recoil (n) physics l ¡ ¡ 3 Smaller Boost (7 x 4 Ge. V; bg=0. 28) Smaller radius beam-pipe to retain adequate vertex resolution. Larger barrel acceptance. More particles backward in detector with somewhat softer spectrum forward. Some (though not all) components of machine background components will be substantially larger. Improve detector segmentation Improve detector speed Improve radiation hardness and machine monitoring Would like best possible hermeticity, with good subsystem efficiency and performance. ~x 100 Luminosity Improved trigger, DAQ, & computing (~15 years later) Last, but not least, must replace aging components and technologies. US R&D Meeting, Sept. 3, 2008 Blair Ratcliff, SLAC

CDR Detector Layout – Based on Babar BASELINE New detector elements OPTION 4 US R&D Meeting, Sept. 3, 2008 Blair Ratcliff, SLAC

Detector Evolution-B Factory to Super. B Factory With careful attention machine design and shielding in the IR, the backgrounds at a Super. B should be ~ to those we know (and love? ) at Ba. Bar An excellent Super. B detector is possible with ~ today’s technology o l CDR Baseline based on Ba. Bar. It reuses ¡ ¡ ¡ Some elements have aged and need replacement. Others require moderate improvements to cope with the high luminosity environment, the smaller boost (4 x 7 Ge. V), and the high DAQ rates. l l l l l 5 Fused Silica bars of the DIRC & DCH Support Barrel EMC Cs. I(Tl) crystal and mechanical structure Superconducting coil & flux return (with some redesign). Small beam pipe technology Thin silicon pixel detector for layer 0, and a new 5 layer SVT? New DCH with CF mechanical structure, modified gas, cell size, cluster counting? New Photon detection for DIRC fused silica bars? Forward PID system (TOF in Baseline option) ? New Forward calorimeter crystals (LYSO? ). Backward EMC? Technology? Minos-style extruded scintillator for instrumented flux return Electronics and trigger- x 100 real event rate Computing- to handle massive date volume US R&D Meeting, Sept. 3, 2008 Blair Ratcliff, SLAC

CDR TDR What decisions must be taken before the TDR can be written? • What is the mechanism for reaching those decisions? How can missing information be obtained? • What simulation tools are needed? • What specific R&D is needed? • What detailed design is needed? When can it begin? • What are the time scales for the decisions. If options are open, how can they be resolved and on what time scale? • How many physicists are involved now ? How many are needed? When? • Support for R&D, technical and design personnel? • How does the subgroup interact with the other subgroups and incorporate general detector design considerations • US R&D Meeting, Sept. 3, 2008 Blair Ratcliff, SLAC

Examples of Decisions needed for TDR Internal System versus General Detector Examples Internal: What is the SVT layer 0 technology? How is the beam pipe constructed? What is the technology for the backward EMC? What is the DCH cell configuration? DIRC Barrel SOB? General: Will there be forward PID in Super. B? What is the effect of material on EC EMC? What is the front end data volume? Where is the interaction point? Where do the in-detector electronics reside? Not always a clean separation, but general decisions will usually need an early resolution before the TDR. Some (not too many? ) internal subsystem choices could remain in TDR. US R&D Meeting, Sept. 3, 2008 Blair Ratcliff, SLAC

R&D and TDR areas with (some) US involvement Subsystems Particle Identification (PID)- Cincinnati, SLAC, Hawaii • Electromagnetic Calorimeter (EMC)- Caltech • General Detector Systems Electronics, Trigger, DAQ- SLAC • Detector Optimization and Bench Marking • Computing and Simulation- SLAC, LBL • MDI- SLAC, Ohio State • Integration –SLAC • TDR • General Status: Lots of impressive progress right before Elba especially in the general computing systems areas. (But limited since!) Note the general Detector meetings begin again tomorrow (Thursday, Sept 4 at 8: 30). R&D Manpower available has been limited, especially from US. All existing US R&D areas welcome new people. US R&D Meeting, Sept. 3, 2008 Blair Ratcliff, SLAC

A brief review of Ongoing System R&D • • Vertex Detector (SVT) Drift Chamber (DCH) Particle Identification (PID)-see Jaroslav’s talk Electromagnetic Calorimeter (EMC)- see Dave Hitlin’s talk Instrumented Flux Return (IFR) Computing MDI Integration US R&D Meeting, Sept. 3, 2008 Blair Ratcliff, SLAC

SVT R&D- Italy US R&D Meeting, Sept. 3, 2008 Blair Ratcliff, SLAC

MAPS selected results Basic CMOS MAPS R&D (most challenging 90 Sr electrons option for the Layer 0): ¡ Optimization of the Deep NWell MAPS pixel l ¡ ¡ S/N up to 25 with power consumption reduced (~30 u. W/ch) Fast readout architecture (sparsifycation and timestamp) implemented in a 4 k pixel matrix. Preliminary test encouraging. Noise and threshold dispersion at the same level ~ 65 e. Good sensitivity to e- from Sr 90 and to g from Fe 55 source S/N=23 Landau Noise events Cluster signal (m. V) APSEL 4 D - Fe 55 5. 9 ke. V calibration peak APSEL 4 D - 32 x 128 pixels 50 mm pixel pitch APSEL 4 D – Sr 90 test Fired pixel map with threshold @ ½ MIP Good uniformity (the source was positioned on the left US R&D Meeting, Sept. 3, 2008 side of the matrix Blair Ratcliff, SLAC m. V

Test Beam Starting now at CERN T-1, 2, 3, 4 : reference telescope Striplets-2 modules S T-4, 3 2 S 3 MAPS-1 MAPS-2 Main goals: ¡ DNW MAPS matrix resolution & efficiency ¡ Thin (200 um) striplets module with FSSR 2 T-2, 1 readout chips (baseline option in the CDR) ¡ Demostrate LV 1 beam copability with tracker Striplets-1 S 1 information sent to Associative Memories ¡ New DAQ system developed for data push architecture ¡ All the parts are getting ready: l l US R&D Meeting, Sept. 3, 2008 CMOS MAPS chip with sparsified readout received and tested (G. Rizzo) Beam telescope and striplets module in preparation (L. Vitale) DAQ system under test (M. Villa) Reco Software under development Blair Ratcliff, SLAC (N. Neri)

Update on Thin Mechanics/Cooling R&D for Layer 0 (F. Bosi) Design of a pixel module with integrated cooling and low material (< 1% X 0) ¡ ¡ Crucial for a low material Layer 0 design with both MAPS & Hybrid Pixel options Development of support structures with cooling microchannel integrated in the Carbon Fiber/Ceramics support l l ¡ ¡ The total thickness of the support structure + cooling fluid + peek + glue is: 0. 35 % X 0 Consistent with the requirements Thermal simulation of the prototype module in progress Testbench for thermoidraulic measurements in preparation. Prototype module simulated US R&D Meeting, Sept. 3, 2008 Blair Ratcliff, SLAC