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