CERN restrict meeting, November 26th 2013Luca Stanco for the NESSiE Collaboration
(Neutrino Experiment with SpectrometerS in Europe)
Currently the following Institutions are members of NESSiE:
-6 italian groups: Bari, Bologna,Frascati, Lecce, Padova, Roma1-2 russian groups: SINP-MSU, Lebedev-LPI-1 Zagreb (Croatia)
Around 65 physicists plus engineers and technicians
Observers:-Strasbourg (France)-Hamburg (Germany)-Napoli (Itay)
Collaboration
All these groups have long experience in Neutrino Physics and Hardware(Chorus, Macro, Nomad, Opera, T2K …)
2
On the quest for the BLACK SWANs
Taleb Nassim, “The Black Swan”, 2007Ex-statistician, now a very rich person,
by applying his theory of Risk Analysis to Financial World
if you did not see ever any black swan, does it mean that they do not exist ?
3
In Neutrino Physics we may face a more complicate version:
in case they exist, is there more than one species ?
And our community own several opinions:-Only one type of Black Swan exists-Looking for more is equivalent to suspect that Flying Donkeysexist even if anybody never saw-How to look for them ?
with this ? or like that ?
4
In any case, everybody knows that Risk-Analysis is a touchy and subtle operation.
or
Pay attention to avoid this situation
Looking in the wrong direction Looking all in the same direction
Some facts:
1. Leptonic Flavor investigation should be a MUST for the HEP future2. CPV is “in our hands” given the ”large” value of 13
3. It may be a long shot, and it might be difficult to have more than ONE Big Project4. Contemporary R&D and even other Physics programs are mandatory5. An SBL program may be a good possibility, with measurements of
- e/ appearance/disappearance and neutrino cross-sections6. Under Gran Sasso there are equipments 10 M€ valued to be perfectly usable,
with a relative modest investment, for Spectrometers
Spectrometers at a neutrino beam. Extended studies:-SPSC-P-343, arXiv:1111.2242-SPSC-P347, arXiv:1203.3432-ESPP, arXiv:1208.0862-LOI CENF: https://edms.cern.ch/nav/P:CERN-0000096725:V0/P:CERN-0000096728:V0/TAB3
-L. Stanco et al., AHEP 2013 (2013) ID 948626, arXiv:1306.3455v2
Note: increasing consensus in the Community that Spectrometer(s) are needed either for SBL or LBL
5
• Two Iron spectrometers (ICM), 1500 + 800 t, composed by:
• 48 yoke blocks, , 4.5 x 0.6 x 1 m, 25t• 480 slabs, 2 – 3 t, 1.25m x 3.5–6 m• 1800 + 700 m2 of RPC• «sandwich style» assembly to be made
in situ, one piece per time
• 20,000+12,000 digital channels
• Two ACM preassembled andinstalled in one shot
• Precision Trackers preassembled and installed in one shot
• Near Nessie movable aside on air-pad
• 1 + 0.5 MW , 10 kA, power(summed up for ACM and ICM)
NESSiE Initial Design
ICM
ACM
Optimized ! Reduced by about a factor of 2 !!!
6
7
Excerpt from ESPP CERN strategy, final document approved on May 7 2013, Endorsed by CERN Council at the end of June.:
High-priority large-scale scientific activities: (c-d-e-f)
Following the outcome of the European Strategy Group,CERN committed us to start an R&D program for Neutrino Physics,in sinergy with LBL (USA or Japan), while waiting for a granted SBL beam
Another fact:
8
WA104(NESSiE)
CENF/CERN
SBL/FNAL
NeDe/LBNE
(from recent P5DG presentation)
Which scenarios ?
(1) Use OPERA Spectrometers to explore 1-2 orders of magnitude indisappearance(Need CENF-like beam, or new tunnels/caverns in NuMI)
(1) Use NESSiE-original (ICM+ACM) plus a target (LAr or Scintillators)to also measure NC, and cross-sections(Need CENF-like beam for PhysicsEnough FNAL Booster just for cross-sections)
(1) Use large-ACM superconducting in LAr (5x3x2) to couple ACM and target.ICM also present, for Physics. How much R&D ?(Need Charged Beams, beams for Physics as in (2))
(2) Use LAr tank of order 100 ton, with magnetized SC-ACM, and/or ACM-saPrototype useful for one of the LNBE-Nears(Need Charged Beams, need CENF-like beam and T600 for Physics)
9
SBL disappearance search(*)
- Focus the physics goal to gain an order of magnitude in disappearance limit at eV scale for m2
- Set the issue of using only iron magnets, with a small scintillator target to measure NC
- Define a way to extract oscillation by using a new variable
(*) LS et al.: AHEP 2013 (2013) ID 948626, arXiv:1306.3455v2. 10
Scenario (1)
11Non oscillation hypothesis is tested with a 2 test to a flat (= 1) distribution
New variable: log10(1/E)
Double ratio (F/N)data / (F/N)no-osci
SPECTROMETERS ONLY… beam
anti-beam
11
T2K, end 2012, ND, data vs Simulation, http://arxiv.org/pdf/1211.0469.pdf
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1311.4750.pdf
12
Part of Scenario (2)
13
Re-arrangement using OPERA Spectrs
NESSiE Footprints NEAR Site FAR Site
Height (along y) 5.47 m 6.65 m
Length (along z) 10.06 m 10.06 m
Transverse (along x) 9.75 m 13.5 m
14
Conductor: AlCoil Cross Section 72x72 mm2
Hole (cooling) = 30 mmØB=0.12T
NESSiE ACM NEAR Site
FAR Site
Nb of coils 39 51
Conductor Length/coil
14,8 m 22,3 m
Power 230 kW 450 kWCompare e.g. with ISS-Detectors, http://arxiv.org/pdf/0712.4129v1.pdf 14
15
Sensitivities for the present NESSiE configuration(full simulation, with neutrino beam) Charge ID
Momentum measured by range (ICM)up to 3.5 GeV, then ACM and ICM provide ≈30%
Momentum
Best, ever, sensitivity for detectionwith similar apparata over large area(and few MCHF cost)
(goal ≥ 250 MeV)
(goal ≥ 250 MeV)
16
However recent developments on SuperConducting cables or even theuse of SC coils à la ATLAS allow us to think to a different approach in magnetization.
R&D on magnetization of LAr tank:
Pros: - best detector for both muons and electrons - similar Near and Far detector sites for the LBNE project - couple ACM with target
Cons: - structural forces (depending of the magnetic field) - insulation structures - cost ? - long way ?
17
R&D planning:
1) Prototype ACM-warm (conditionally funded by INFN)2) Tracking Detectors in Magnetic Field R&D 3) Evaluation ACM-cold4) Collaboration with LAr activities/groups
18
CONCLUSION/VISION
1. Neutrino Physics is a MUST for Particle Physics (neutrino mass, Majorana/Fermi, astroparticle connection, window for BSM)
2. CERN/Europe should be a MAJOR actor (facilities, past experience, major partner in the Global picture)
3. Large and experienced community (knowledge, motivation, largeness)
1. A Global Coherent Strategy is MANDATORY (increasing bigness of the experiments)
• Prioritization or Compromise ? (multi-year projects, limited resources)
Thank you !
19
20
Backup slides
B
(G
auss)
LAr ACM (z = - 3.5 m)z (beam axis, m)
22 Gauss
Fringe Magnetic Field upstream the ACM – No shielding
10
0.7 Gauss
Fringe Magnetic Field upstream the ACM – With shielding
B
(G
auss)
LAr ACM (z = - 3.5 m)z (beam axis, m)11
Shielding
2 iron slabs (5 cm thick)1 Vacoflux-50 slab (1 cm thick)
Vacoflux = Colbalt-Iron Alloywith maximum saturation at 2.35 T
y
z
12
New configuration (to be optimized)
Iron Core Magnet =>1 higher iron slab (50 cm thick)
y
13z y (m)
New configuration (to be optimized)
Iron Core Magnet => 1 higher iron slab (50 cm thick)
14 LAr ACM (z = - 3.5 m)z (beam axis, m)
In the first design the power consuption was
PNEAR = 600 kW PFAR = 1630 kW
The design was optimized in order to reduce the powerconsuption but keeping the required muon charge ID
Full cross section = 72 x 72 mm2
Cooling hole = 30 mm => Conductor cross-section S = 4477 mm2
Coil length L = 17.2 m
Coil number N = 39
Al = 0.027 mm2 / m
I =8100 A => B = 0.12 TPNEAR = N I2 Al L /S = 270 kW
( PFAR = 760 kW )
Power/Spending review
NESSiE – WA104
16
27
OPERA re-use (under pressure of SPSC and INFN)
• 2 Spectrometers “available”, with Detectors and Servicing• Possibility to full re-use for Far AND Near ICM• Need two new sets of Yokes (Top & Bottom)
new Electronics for RPC Mechanical Tools PT detectors
Scintillators• Other: ACMs
Under discussion in OPERA: possible start dismantling begin 2015
MONEY estimation and Opera endowment
Iron magnets: in-kind value 5940 K€ (from OPERA MoU)Cost for transportation to CERN and refurbishing: 3000 K€In-kind value of Precision Tracker: 1900 K€ possible refurbishing: 700 K€In-kind value of Scintillators: 1900 K€ possible refurbishing: 300 K€Cost ACM: 1000 (Near) + 1200 (Far)
TOTAL: 3+1+1+1 = 6 M€
ACM-FAR might be staged at 2nd phase (after LS2)
ACM-NEAR, including R&D, designs, certifications
28
(dismantling in 2015)
Top view
Side view
30
Booster Beam (at 700 m)
(realistic simulation with fluxes, cross-sections, GEANI 2.6)
FNAL options under investigation
Muon momentum distributionPositive polarity (compare all)
21/04/23 31
• The spectrum at FNAL is softer than CERN but the rate including the numi off-axis are comparable.
• In positive polarity the anti-nu from from defocused mesons are small
• The various component test different L/E
32
New Beam for LBNE (at 700 m)
(fluxes comparison, to be evaluated for the LBL-Near Detector)