DUNE Muon Monitor Update Kerrie Dochen and Max Weiner University - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

DUNE Muon Monitor Update

Kerrie Dochen and Max Weiner University of Colorado Boulder 6-9-2016

Overview

• Gas Cherenkov and diamond longterm data

○ 2015 ○ 2016 ○ April 2016

• Gas Cherenkov and diamond short term data

○ April 6-7

• Gas Cherenkov

○ Pitch and Yaw ○ Future Goals

• Diamonds

○ Turn on data ○ Future Goals

2

2015

Long Term Data

3

Horn Scans Horn Off

2015

Long Term Data

4

Horn Scan

Horn Scans

Horn Off

Horn Off

Pressure increasing to 70 psi Pressure at 30 psi Pressure at 17 psi Pitch and Yaw near 0% Pressure Scan Pressure + Pitch and Yaw Scan Pressure at 45 psi

2016

Longterm Data

5

April 6 Beam Off April 7 Pitch and Yaw Scans April 6 beam off

*Pitch and Yaw are set to a different value after scan

6

April 7 Pitch and Yaw Scans April 23 Fire April 6 Beam Off April 6 Beam Off April 23 Fire April 22 Kicker Out Beam half intensity Beam half intensity April 22 Kicker Out

April 2016

Longterm Data *Pitch and Yaw are set to a different value after scan

April 6-7, 2016

• Beam was off April 6

7

Gas Cherenkov Detector

• Located in Alcove 2 and filled with argon
• Pitch and Yaw controlled by actuators
• Roughly at same height as beam line

8

Gas Cherenkov Pitch and Yaw Scans

• Pitch and Yaw scan on April 7, 2016 at ~16 psi
• Measured integrated signal per proton on target versus pitch/yaw (% extension)
• Yaw/Pitch angles were roughly measured to vary between:

○ Yaw: -6.064° to 4.695° (12 inch actuator) ○ Pitch: 0.828° to 6.011° (5 inch actuator) ○ These ranges assume perfect beam alignment and need to be corrected using real data

9

Gas Cherenkov Pitch and Yaw Scans

This is the shape we expect to see at this pressure

10

Center = 32.56 ± 0.03% Center = 69.560 ± 0.008%

Gas Cherenkov Pitch and Yaw Scans

• Our data was fitted to the sum of two Gaussian functions which share the

same mean:

Yaw: P1 = 15.4 ± 0.2 P2 = 69.560 ± 0.008% P3 = 39.4 ± 0.4 P4 = -41.8 ± 0.2 P5 = 145.4 ± 0.4

NDF = 31

χ2 = 14,097

Pitch: P1 = 151 ± 5 P2 = 32.56 ± 0.03% P3 = 353 ± 2 P4 = -178 ± 5 P5 = 437 ± 2

NDF = 12

χ2 = 591

Key: P1 = Maximum 1 P2 = Center (or Mean) P3 = Width 1 P4 = Maximum 2 P5 = Width 2

NDF = Number of Degrees of Freedom

χ2 = Chi Squared

11

Gas Cherenkov Angle Conversions

• A = Actuator Length
• x = Percent Extension
• Axsin(φ) = Height of Block

12

Next Steps

• Convert percent extension for yaw into an angle
• Pressure Scans coupled with Pitch and Yaw Scans

○ These were performed on June 7, 2016

• Do we obtain the same results if instead of angling the detector, we angle the

muon’s incident angle

13

Diamond Signal Rise Studies

• Picked 10.5 day period immediately after diamonds were turned on

○ Diamonds had been off for multiple months in each case ○ Beam had been running

14

2015 2016

Diamond Signal Rise Studies

15

2015 2016

Ae(x-t)B + C

A = 3422 ± 12.8 B = -1.114e-6 ± 1.353e-8 C = -122e3 ± 15.6 % Rise = 3.6% A = 5252 ± 5.3 B = -1.333e-6 ± 5.021e-9 C = -119.4e3 ± 6.871 % Rise = 5.5%

Next Steps

• Consider turning the diamonds off

○ Few days ○ Few months

• Currently comparing diamonds to NuMI muon monitors

○ Need corrected muon monitor data

16

Additional Slides

17

2015

Longterm Data with scatter plots

18

Horn Scans Horn Scans Horn Off Horn Off

2016

Longterm Data with scatter plots

19

April 6 beam off April 7 Pitch and Yaw Scan April 6 beam off

April 2016

With scatter plots

20

April 7 Pitch and Yaw Scan April 23 Fire April 6 Shutdown April 6 Shutdown April 23 Fire April 23 Kicker Out Beam half intensity Beam half intensity April 23 Kicker Out

Diamond 1 vs. MM2

21

*Note: This is preliminary because we need to make sure we are using all muon monitor corrections

Diamond 1 vs. MM2

22

*Note: This is preliminary because we need to make sure we are using all muon monitor corrections

Diamond 1 vs. MM2

23

*Note: This is preliminary because we need to make sure we are using all muon monitor corrections The diamond detector appears to have a more stable signal than the second muon monitor over this 10-day period. The muon monitor has a smaller distribution (signal varying only about 1%), possibly because it consists of an array of many detectors, opposed to the single diamond.