PowerPoint-Pr

1
Cosmic Neutrino Sound in Water ?
?
?
?
?
2
and Antarctic Ice ?
Rolf Nahnhauer DESY Zeuthen
?
?
?
3
Cherenkov Neutrino Telescope Projects
BAIKAL Russia
ANTARES La-Seyne-sur-Mer, France
DUMAND Hawaii (cancelled 1995)
NEMO Catania, Italy
NESTOR Pylos, Greece
AMANDA, South Pole, Antarctica
4
Cherenkov Neutrino Telescopes- Limitations -

• No natural calibration at highest energies
  possible
• Background of atmosphéric muons very large
• Application region limited for higher
  energies detector size,
  saturation of photosensors
• Bad direction information for ?e,??
• Increase only possible with similar density
  of sensors nearly linear prize
  increase installation becomes even more
  difficult
• Application limited to light transparent media

5
Alternative Detection Methods
Acoustic AUTEC, AGAM, MP-10 (military)
SADCO, BAIKAL, Antares, NEMO, IceCube E gt
1016 eV, M ? 10 Giga t Radio RICE, ANITA,
SalSA, GLUE E gt 1016 eV, M ? ? Giga
t EAS-Arrays AGASA, AUGER E gt 1019 eV, M ?
? Satellits OWL, EUSO E gt 1019 eV , M ? 10
Tera t
6
The Thermo-Acoustic Model
Askaryan, G.A. At. Energ., 1957, vol.3, no.8,
p.152 Askaryan, Dolgoshein, Kalinovsky, NIM
164(1979) 267
P (k/cp) (E/R) M M(f2/2) (sinx/x)
fvs/(2d), x(?L/2d)sin ? k vol.
expans. coefficient cp specific heat
signal shape flat disk, width L
d
7
First Proposal DUMAND
calculated signal strength in H2O Learned,
Phys.Rew. D 19(1979) 3293
Beam test with 200 MeV protons Sulak et al. NIM
161(1979) 203
detector hydrophone Ethr ? 21015 eV
!! (for R 8cm) P 0.2 dyn/cm2
E1016eV,R10m,f16kHz P 0.810-3 dyn/cm2
8
20 years later
V.I. Albul et al. Instr. and Exp. Techn. 44
(2001)327
Ethr. ? 1016 eV P dyn 2.310-14 Eb.78 eV
complexe frequency spectrum
signal
beam ITEP Moskau 125MeV, 200 MeV p
target H2Odetector hydrophone
noise
9
The ITEP Baikal Acoustic Setup (1)
-
circular arranged EAS array, (7 scintillators,
darray100 m) hydrophone chain single hydrophones
in water single hydrophones in ice
10
The ITEP Baikal Acoustic Setup (2)
sensitivity -140 dB re 1V/?Pa
Data taking 1 month in 2001-2002-2003 1/3
of all triggers fullfill quality criteria (
367-421-? events )
V.I. Lyashuk on behalf of the joint exp.
ITEP-BAIKAl Investigation of acoustic signals in
the Baikal lake in Proc. of the Conf. Physics of
Fundamental Interactions , Moscow, December
2002
11
Acoustic Noise from Baikal Water
12
Coincidences of Acoustic Signals ?
data development in progress further noise
reduction possible by frequency filtering observe
a few time coincident events
100 ms
10 ms
1 ms
explanation still unclear
13
Water and what else ?
Science Fiction 1983 De Rujula, Glashow,
Wilson, Charpak
THE GENIUS PROJECTGeologicalExploration
byNeutrinoInducedUndergroundSound

• place and time of pulseare known
• measure Vs f(?i,?di)

14
Sound in Solid Materials - Iron
A.Borisov et al. Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 100 (1991)
1121 Detection of acoustic signal from the muon
flux in the U70 neutrino channel A.Borisov et al.
Saratov Preprint (1992) Acoustic calorimetry of
high energy muons
J.Bähr,R.N.,M.Pohl DESY Zeuthen (1996) unpulished
Epot mgh m1g, h10cm, E6 PeV
6 PeV
12 PeV
30 PeV
18 PeV
Detectors own production using piezoelements
15
Sound Sensors for solid materials
piezoelement PXE5 best solution
l 5 mm, d 10 mm g33 -20 10-3
Vm/N C 290 pF assumption U 10 6 V
detectable Q 1800 e P 0.1
dyn/cm2 open question influence of low
temperature? influence of pre-tension?
16
Sound in Solid Materials - Ice
vH2O 1485 m/s
vice(-4º) 3200 m/s vice(-55º)long 3920 m/s
vglass 5000 m/s ice demc ? 10 cm,
k 0.00015/deg, cp 0.5kcal/(kg deg)
Pice(-4º) 0.015(dyn/cm2) (E/PeV)/(R/m)
signal f2 (2d/v) 2 , advantage for
ice vs. H2O important process of energy
deposition in space and time of a charged
particle crossing a material
17
Particle Cascades in Ice
?e N? e- X at 1 TeV (down to 1 MeV)
D 67cm
D 10cm
30 m
events
events
0. 50. 100.
0. 100. 200.
Dem
Dh
parametrization of shower diameter
GEANT
18
Detector Simulation for IceCube Geometry
scut 0.05dyn/cm2
Ecas 1 EeV, ltdcasgt 10cm scut
ltnhitgt ?(nhitgt5) 0.10 10.3
45 0.07 14.3
62 0.05 19.6 82
0.01 115.0 100 scut 0.1
dyn/cm2 possible detector should work
events
0.
80. nhit
scut 0.01dyn/cm2
events
lattice 125 m horizontal 16
m vertical
0.
300. nhit
19
Since March 2002 IceCube RD
ACOUSTIC PARTICLE DETECTION- FEASIBILITY IN
ANTARCTIC ICE -
S. Böser, R. Heller, A. Hallgren, R. Nahnhauer,
M. Pohl, J. Stegmaier, K.-H. Sulanke
Uppsala University ) Diploma Student from
University of Mainz
DESY Zeuthen
20
Zeuthen Labor Setup 2
ICEBLOCK 130x54x25 cm3
DETECTOR PXE5 h5mm, ?10cm pressed
at arbitrary position to 13 glass sphere
LASER wave
length 1056 nm pulse
6ns x 1Hz
energy 10mJ/pulse
61016 eV
21
Laser Excitation

New detector cuts low frequencies filters
background noise signal length 10
msec vsice(10cm) 3000 m/sec !!!
vsice(35cm) 2300 m/sec ??? vsice(70cm)
1700 m/sec ??? ICE QUALITY ???
35 cm
70 cm
22
Acoustic Testrun at a Proton Beam
The Svedberg Laboratory Uppsala 19.-26.1.2003
180 MeV protons
experimental hall
23
Beam - Parameter

• Ep 180 MeV
• ? 2cm , 4 cm, 6cm
• Q 0.005 nC 1.5 nC
• three independent measurements
• ?Q/Q 30
• Etot 5.6 PeV 1.7 EeV

24
Target - Configurations
Ice
LxBxH 130x40x27 cm3
42.5cm 35.1cm
D3
43.5cm 31.1cm
H2O
LxBxH 135x45x27 cm3
25
Signal Shapes
? 2cm, E 110 PeV R 40cm
DAQ oscilloscope
DAQ Uppsala Sound Card
26
Frequency Behaviour
spectrum 110 PeV
? 2cm, R 40cm, Eis
S/dB
S, B
analysis of frequency spectrum allows further
background reduction hardware
filter possible
f/kHz
sonogramme 110 PeV
sonogramme 33 PeV
f/kHz
f/kHz
t/a.u.
t/a.u.
27
H2O vs. Ice - Expectation
H2O() Ice vsm/sec 1480
3100 f kHz 25 50 PmPam/PeV .26
1.5 PIce/PH2O 5.8 () at 20º C
L ? 25cm d ? 3cm
28
Result for H2O
vs 1.50?0.01?0.03 km/sec ? f(43.5cm)
21.5?0.6?? kHz ? f(74.6cm) 24.5?0.6?? kHz ? P
a bE ? P(43.5cm) P(74.6cm)
2.8 ? 0.4
threshold at 1m distance E
min ? 2 1016 eV
29
Result for Ice
vs 2.0?0.1?0.7 km/sec ??? f(42.5cm)
24.0?0.8?? kHz ? f(77.6cm) 18.9?1.1?? kHz ? P
a bE ? P(42.5cm) P(77.6cm)
2.7 ? 0.4
threshold at 1m distance E
min ? 2 1016 eV
30
H2O vs. Ice - Measurement
PIce/PH2O 0.27 ? 0.04 about 20 times
smaller than expected ltlt 1.5
f2(Ice)/f2(H2O)
Possible explanations ? Different reflections
(amplitudes) ? Different interference pattern
(signal shape) ? Difficult to identify start
of signal (velocity) ? Longitudinal vs.
transversal waves (velocity) ? ?????????
31
Problem Ice Quality
Not easy to produce large blocks of clear ice in
laboratory Any crack is source of reflections and
later interferences May at least partly explain
testrun results What is quality of Southpole ice
in 2000m depth ? Further studies necessary
CRACK
amplitude
time







v 3500 m/s v 2500 m/s







distance
distance
32
New RD on acoustic particle detection in
Mediteranian water
G. Anton, K.Graf, J. Hößl, A. Kappes, T. Karg U.
Katz, S. Kuch, P. Kollmannsberger, R. Ostasch, C.
Richardt University of Erlangen
Test of commercial hydrophones Development of new
sensors Development of calibrated
transducers Simulation and reconstruction software
120x60x60 cm3
33
Commercial Hydrophones
sensitivity -156dB re V/?Pa vH2O
ok see geometry of aquarium by reflections price
800
34
Selfmade Hydrophones
Follow same idea as IceCube press piezo-ceramic
to glass sphere detector PZT5A h5mm, ?15mm
Sth -198dB re V/?Pa
Piezo-ceramics embedded in Polyurethan with
integrated preamplifier (price 25.-Euro)
35
Signal shapes
measured sensitivity -142dB re V/?Pa
about same signal strength for naked and dressed
detectors S/N ? 10 preamplifier still
to be optimized longer ringing from glass
36
Transducer Development
Problem difficult to simulate
experimentally the energy
deposit of high energy
particle cascades Idea use local heating
of wire due to strong current
pulse
Signal as measured by a shielded commercial
hydrophone Mechanism of sound production still to
be understood
l 8 cm, ? 80 ?m, R 9 ?
37
Real Data Taking
data available from underwater test array near
ANTARES location (V. Bertin et al., CPPM) used 6
out of 48 hydrophones installed in depth of
1400 m 2500 m allows to study noise conditions
in deep sea next data taking with improved
boundary conditions foreseen still for this year
38
ILIAS - JRA 5 - RADAC
Joint European Research Activity 2004 - 2006
Integrated Large Infrastructures for
Astroparticle Science
Radio and Acoustic Particle Detection Techniques
for Ultra-High Energy Cosmic Rays and Neutrinos

WP 2.1 acoustic sensors DESY Zeuthen WP
2.2 calibrated acoustic transmitters
Erlangen WP 2.3 acoustic test setup
Catania WP 2.4 acoustic software
package Erlangen, Uppsala
39
A Test Area for Europe
Catania NEMO underwater test area
after 2004use for tests by other european
groups in a Joint Research Activity possible
40
Summary I
Astroparticle physics has promising capabilities
to deliver new informations about the
universe In the near future km3 Cherenkov
Neutrino Telescopeswill contribute to that with
important results The use of acoustic sensors is
one possible alternative to build even larger
detectors All big underwater neutrino experiments
study thistechnique by using hydrophones
41
Summary II
Based on piezo-elements new acoustic sensors have
been developed which have comparable sensitivity
to commercial hydrophonesThe use of such
detectors parallel to optical sensors inkm3
experiments seems to make sense already
todayFurther improvements of signal detection
are possibleAn advantage of the new sensors is
their applicabilityto many solid materials and
liquids tooFurthermore these sensors are at
least an order of magnitude cheaper than present
good hydrophones