Title: Spaghetti calorimeter
1Spaghetti calorimeter
A reminder of the calorimeter design from L.T.s
presentation at CERN on 29/03/03
Readout square (or rectangular) cells connected
to PMT photocatode by light guides shaped as
Winston cones
2Muon vs electron identification
- We have carried out simulation studies in G4MICE
to optimize the m/e separation capabilities by
varying - sampling fraction, i.e. lead layer thickness
0.5-0.2 mm - readout segmentation, i.e. cell size
- 3.75x3.75 cm2, 3.25x3.25 cm2, 2.5x2.5 cm2,
2.5x4.0 cm2
3Momentum
muons
electrons
at production
at calorimeter
at calorimeter (20 lost) (0.5 lt130 MeV/c)
Muons P(MeV/C)
Datacards used ltEkingt120.5 MeV , DE/E0.1
4Lead absorber
Eff. for signalgtthreshold in 3rd or 4th layer
vsmomentum (useful mainly for trigger
purposes) For different absorber thickness and
readout cell sizes
Eff. In Layer 3
Eff. In Layer 4
Eff. In Layer 3
Efficiency on muons improves when less material
is traversed (thinner layers, smaller cells), but
electron contamination increases accordingly
5A much lighter absorber pure polystirene
- The option of a fully active detector
(scintillator) has been suggested - We have considered the option with no absorber
only polystirene fibers - Efficiencies are very optimistic !!!!
- Readout with 3.75cm cells a huge number of PMTs
6e/m separation algorithmsBaricenter coordinate
cells 3.75 cm
electrons
muons
ZB (a.u.)
ZB (a.u.)
cells 2.50 cm
ZB (a.u.)
ZB (a.u.)
7Summary
- Some checks to be done on beam distributions
obtained with G4MICE - Optimization
- 1) for fast signal (threshold cut)
- Better efficiency on muons with thinner lead
layers - No significant gain on low energy muons with
fully active detectors, but much larger
contamination from electrons - 2) e/m identification
- Baricenter coordinate seems to be a very good
separation criterium - Improving with thicker absorber and smaller
redout cells, but to be checked as a function of
muon momentum - Fully active detector provides very poor
identification capabilities