Tevatron run issues with higher luminosity
description
Transcript of Tevatron run issues with higher luminosity
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
1
Tevatron run issues with higher luminosity
4th International Workshop on Heavy Quarkonia
Vaia Papadimitriou, FermilabBNL, June 27-30 2006
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
2
OUTLINE
Tevatron performance and projections
CDF data sets and plans for higher luminosity
D0 data sets and plans for higher luminosity
Conclusion
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
3
The Fermilab Accelerator Complex
√s 1.96 TeV
P
P
CDFCDF D0D0
MAIN INJECTOR: 150 GeVRECYCLER / e-COOLING
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
4
Tevatron Performance
Tevatron (Run I 1992-96, ∫L dt = 110 pb-1 ): p pbar at s = 1.8 TeV, 3.5 s between collisions
Tevatron (Run II 2002-Present, ∫L dt = ~1.53 fb-1 ): p pbar at s = 1.96 TeV, 396 ns between collisions
Best 1.72 x 1032 cm-1s-1
7.17 pb-1 delivered per experiment in one store, Feb. 12, 2006
~ 1.53 fb-1 delivered per experiment in Run II
FY05
FY05
FY04
FY04
FY03
FY03
FY02
FY02
FY06
FY06
( original plan for 132 ns )
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
5
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
Eng. Run Run Ia Run Ib Run IIa Run IIb(base)
Run IIb(design)
Inte
grat
ed L
umin
osity
(fb
-1)
Collider Luminosity History (per detector)
1986-1987 Eng. Run I .05 pb-1
1988-1989 Eng. Run II 9.2 pb-1
Run Ia (1992-1993) 32.2 pb-1
Run Ib (1994-1996) 154.7 pb-1
Run IIa (2002-2005) 1200 pb-1
Run IIb (2006-2009) 3,060 – 6,880 pb-1
Run IIa + IIb (2002-2009) 4,260 – 8,080 pb-1
Pro
ject
ed
Pro
ject
ed
Log Scale !
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
6
Luminosity
The major luminosity limitations areThe number of antiprotons (BNpbar)
The proton beam brightness (Np/p)
Beam-Beam effects
The transverse antiproton emittance Transverse beam optics at the interaction point (*)F<1
p
p
p,pL
p,py,x*
p
pp*
o
1
,,,FNBN
f3L
~30 cm
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
7
Tevatron Performance
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
8
Stacking Performance
FY03FY02
FY04
FY06
FY05
Stack size (1010)Zero stack stacking rate
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
9/29/03 9/29/04 9/30/05 10/1/06 10/2/07 10/2/08 10/3/09
Date
Inte
gra
ted
Lu
min
osi
ty (
fb-1)
30mA/hr
25mA/hr
20mA/hr
15mA/hr
DESIGN
BASE
8.1 fb-1
4.3 fb-
1
Expected Integrated Luminosity
5.3 fb-1
Fermilab Tevatron
30 mA/hr
15 mA/hr
6.7 fb-1
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
10
Fiscal Year
30 mA/h
(fb-1)
25 mA/h
(fb-1)
20 mA/h
(fb-1)
15 mA/h
(fb-1)
FY03 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33
FY04 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67
FY05 1.27 1.27 1.27 1.27
FY06 2.07 1.94 1.91 1.87
FY07 3.84 3.24 2.93 2.63
FY08 5.92 4.88 4.03 3.40
FY09 8.08 6.70 5.28 4.26
Fiscal Year
30 mA/h
(fb-1)
25 mA/h
(fb-1)
20 mA/h
(fb-1)
15 mA/h
(fb-1)
FY03 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33
FY04 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34
FY05 0.61 0.60 0.60 0.60
FY06 0.80 0.67 0.64 0.60
FY07 1.77 1.30 1.01 0.76
FY08 2.08 1.64 1.10 0.77
FY09 2.17 1.82 1.25 0.87
Accumulated Luminosity and Luminosity per fiscal year
Accumulated Luminosity Luminosity per fiscal year
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
11
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
9/29/03 9/29/04 9/30/05 10/1/06 10/2/07 10/2/08 10/3/09
Date
Pe
ak
Lu
min
osi
ty (
x1030
cm-2
sec-1
)
30mA/hr
25mA/hr
20mA/hr
15mA/hr
Expected Peak Luminosity
30 mA/hr
15 mA/hr
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
12
Data sets
CDF/D0 have about 10 million J/’s each in 1 fb-1 of Run II data.
1.62 fb-1
1.30 fb-1
1.44 fb-1
1.20 fb-1
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
13
Trigger rates
Trigger Level Maximum rate CDF
Maximum rate D0
Level 1 30 kHz 1.6 (1.8) kHz
Level 2 0.7 (1.0) kHz
<10% dead time
0.95 (1.05) kHz
<5% (10-15%) dt
Level 3 150 Hz 300 – 400 Hz
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
14
A Study of Store Lifetime
Collected data for all Tevatron stores of 2004-2005 lasting longer than 24 hours Used 116 stores Fit first 24h of each store with: Fit is typically good to better than ~ 5% Model is easy to integrate/solve Only two parameters (L0, )
Phenomenological study of vs. L0 to extrapolate to higher luminosities
Use results to predict integrated luminosities for low lum tables that “kick-in” only after instantaneous luminosity drops below threshold.
t
L)t(L
1
0
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
15
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
66%34%0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
64%36%
hours hours
Inst
. Lu
min
os
ity
(E32
)
Inst
. Lu
min
os
ity
(E32
)
Peak Lum = 2E32Peak Lum = 3E32
Typical projected store evolution
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
< 1.5 E32
1.5 – 2.0 E32
2.0 – 2.5 E32
2.5 – 3.0 E32
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
16
The D0 Detector
Excellent muon and tracking coverage
Tracking up to ||<3
Muons up to ||<2
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
17
J/ triggers
Central (||<1.6) muon pT requirements are 1.5 GeV/c and 3.0 GeV/c
Forward muons do not have tracking coverage and one cannot apply pT cuts at Level 1. (~1 GeV/c muons can penetrate the iron)
At higher trigger levels one requires either two forward muons with pT
>2 GeV/c or one forward and one central muon with pTs greater than 1 and 3 GeV/c respectively.
Dielectron triggers as well in Run IIA but with roughly a factor of 500 smaller yield. Expect to collect more dielectron J/’s in Run IIB ( ~ 5-10 times smaller yield than dimuon J/’s)
No dynamic prescaling (DPS) used; change prescales every few hours
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
18
The CDF Detector
Central Outer Tracker: ||<1.0 dE/dx for PID
Silicon: |z|<45 cm, ||<2.0
Central Muon Detectors: ||<1.0
1.3<||<3.5
3.5<||<5.1
ToF counter for K/ separation placed right before the solenoid
Excellent mass resolution Particle ID: dE/dx, TOF Tracking triggers (Hadronic
B’s):L1: Tracks
L2: Secondary vertex
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
19
J/ triggers
CMU1.5/CMU1.5 <1200, oppQ J/CMUCMU L2 10:1:1
CMU1.5/CMX2 <1200, oppQ J/CMUCMX L2 10:1:1
CMU1.5/CMX2 <1200, oppQ J/CMUCMX L2 PS=2
CMU1.5/CMU1.5 <1200, oppQ J/CMUCMU L2 PS=2
CMU1.5/CMU1.5 auto J/CMUCMU L2 PS=100
CMU1.5/CMX2 auto J/CMUCMX L2 PS=100
CMUP4 auto J/CMUCMU L2 50:10:1
CMUP4 auto J/CMUCMX L2 50:10:1
CMUP4 CMUP8 J/CMUCMU L2 10:1:1
CMUP4 CMUP8 J/CMUCMX L2 10:1:1
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 PrescaleDPS
DPS
DPS
DPS
DPS
DPS
Dielectron triggers as well
Sin
gle
lept
on
Hig
h p
T
polarization
calib
ratio
n
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
20
Trigger cross section - rate extrapolation
Current XFTUpgraded XFT
As the luminosity increases, higher average number of primary interactions per bunch crossing yield more complex events with higher occupancies and higher trigger rates which cause higher dead time fractions and lower efficiencies.
One example: High Pt CMX Muon
In principle, a physics process trigger cross section, is constant .
In reality, a given trigger crosssection behaves as: = A/L + B + CL + DL2
Confirmation of XFT tracks by stereo layers is expected to yield a substantial reduction of fakes
Use existing data toextrapolate
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
21
Trigger/DAQ Upgrades for higher luminosity
Goals Increase bandwidth at all levels Improve purity at L1
Status - Complete COT TDC -- readout latency COT Track Trigger (XFT)-- purity Silicon Vertex Trigger (SVT)-- latency L2/L3 trigger -- latency Event builder -- latency Data logger -- throughput
Track trigger installation done, being commissioned
Data logger installation in progress
Add stereo layer info
Proc power: 1THz 2.6THz
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
22Impact of L2 decision crate & SVT upgrades on L1 bandwidthD
ead
tim
e %
L1A rate (Hz)
BeforeUpgrade
Lumi~20-50E30
AfterUpgrade
Lumi~90E30
18KHz 25KHz
5%
Before: 5% deadtime
with L1A 18KHz
@ ~< 50E30
After: 5% deadtime
with L1A 25KHz
@ ~ 90E30
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
23
Trigger rate extrapolation – Jet 100 GeV
Primary vertex multiplicity vs inst. luminosity
Trigger cross section vs primary vertex multipl.
Predicted cross section vs inst. luminosity
3rd order poly
2nd order poly
3rd order poly
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
24
Trigger rate extrapolation – B hadronic two track trigger
Primary vertex multiplicity vs inst. luminosity
Trigger cross section vs primary vertex multipl.
2nd order poly
3rd order poly
Predicted cross section vs inst. luminosity
3rd order poly
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
25
J/ triggers for higher luminosity
CMU1.5/CMU1.5 <1200, oppQ J/CMUCMU L2 10:1:1
CMU1.5/CMX2 <1200, oppQ J/CMUCMX L2 10:1:1
CMU1.5/CMX2 <1200, oppQ J/CMUCMX L2 PS=25
CMU1.5/CMU1.5 <1200, oppQ J/CMUCMU L2 PS=2 5
CMU1.5/CMU1.5 J/CMUCMU no pres.
CMU1.5/CMX2 J/CMUCMX no pres.
CMUP4 auto J/CMUCMU L2 50:10:1
CMUP4 auto J/CMUCMX L2 50:10:1
CMUP4 CMUP8 J/CMUCMU L2 10:1:1
CMUP4 CMUP8 J/CMUCMX L2 10:1:1
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 PrescaleDPS
DPS
DPS
DPS
DPS
DPS
1.75, 2.5 GeV/c2< mT < 4 GeV
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
26
Preparation for doing physics at highest luminosity
Dedicated studies to understand evolution of Tracking, Lepton Identification, B-Jet Tagging, Missing Energy Resolution, Jet Corrections, etc.
Strategy: Use Monte Carlo: over-lay additional minimum-bias events to simulate
luminosity up to 3 E32 Use data: in bins of # of interactions/event; makes use of the bunch-to-bunch
luminosity variations to gain a level arm to higher luminosity Data vs MC comparison
PRLdetector
OnlineTrigger/DAQ
Offline computing Analysis/meetings
~100s ns ~ µs to ~ms ~weeks ~ months
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
27
on Average: 10% (relative) loss in B-tag efficiency
Tracking: High Occupancy Physics
Avgnow
Avg2007-09
Peak (3 E32)2007-09
vs number of z vertices
At highest luminosities: – COT efficiency more significantly impacted–SVX efficiency minimally affected
Top, Higgs,…
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
28
Tracking: Low Occupancy Physics
1%
o No significant effect on this type of CDF physics program
B, W, …
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
29
ConclusionsThe Tevatron is running very well (1.53 fb-1 delivered) Many new resultsThe Tevatron is expected to provide 4.3 – 8.1 fb-1 by
October 2009 Typical peak luminosities of the order of 1.5-1.6 x 1032
now and 2.0-3.0 x 1032 expected CDF and D0 have of the order of 107 J/’s each in 1fb-1
of data They expect to retain similar yields up to 2 x 1032 and
80-95% of the yield per fb-1 at higher peak luminosities A lot of answers and surprises awaiting!!
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
30
Backup
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
31
Tevatron Performance
Base
Design
FY02
FY05
FY05
FY04
FY03
FY02
FY06
FY06
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
32
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
9/29/03 9/29/04 9/30/05 10/1/06 10/2/07 10/2/08 10/3/09
Date
Inte
gra
ted
Lu
min
osi
ty p
er
We
ek
(pb-1
)
30mA/hr
25mA/hr
20mA/hr
15mA/hr
Expected Weekly Luminosity
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
33
Data Analysis and physics results turn around time
Data Analysis processing power: 8.2 THz - distributed among 10 Central Analysis Farms (CAFs) 5.8THz on-site (30% from non-FNAL funds), 2.4 THz off-site (for Monte Carlo)
Improvement - use a single entry point for job submission to offsite CAFsexpands CPU resources available for CDF and increases efficiency of their use (world-wide CDF-Grid of CPU clusters)
Physics results turn around time:
recent 1 fb-1 data to 1st physics result ~ 10 weeks
PRLdetector
OnlineTrigger/DAQ
Offline computing Analysis/meetings
~100s ns ~ µs to ~ms ~weeks ~ months
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
34
Antiproton Parameters
Antiproton ParametersPhase 1 2 3 4 5 6
Zero Stack Stacking Rate 13.0 16.0 18.9 30.2 30.2 30.2 x1010/hour13.0 16.0 16.6 25.2 25.2 25.213.0 16.0 16.6 20.2 20.2 20.213.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0
Average Stacking Rate 6.3 7.4 9.6 21.7 21.7 21.7 x1010/hour6.3 7.4 8.5 14.8 17.4 17.46.3 7.4 8.5 11.3 11.3 13.36.3 7.4 8.3 8.3 8.3 9.7
Stack Size transferred 158.2 163.8 211.5 476.5 476.5 476.5 x1010
158.2 163.8 187.9 324.7 382.5 382.5158.2 163.8 187.9 248.6 248.6 293.5158.2 163.8 181.5 181.5 181.5 214.5
Stack to Low Beta 117.1 124.5 169.2 381.2 381.2 381.2 x1010
117.1 124.5 144.7 253.3 298.3 298.3117.1 124.5 144.7 191.4 191.4 226.0117.1 124.5 138.0 138.0 138.0 163.0
Pbar Production 16.0 15.0 16.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 x10-6
16.0 15.0 15.0 17.5 17.5 17.516.0 15.0 15.0 16.0 16.0 16.016.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0
Design (30mA/hr) Fallback (25mA/hr) Fallback (20mA/hr) Base (15mA/hr)
FY
04
Pla
n
Slip
Sta
ck
ing
8/8
/20
05
Re
cy
cle
r E
co
ol
2/2
7/2
00
6
Sta
ck
Ta
il
5/1
4/2
00
7
He
lix
6/3
0/2
00
8
Re
lia
bilit
y
8/3
1/2
00
9
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
35
Future Pbar Work Lithium Lens (0 – 15%)
Lens Gradient from 760T/m to 1000 T/m
Slip Stacking (7%) Currently at 7.5x1012 on average Design 8.0x1012 on average
AP2 Line (5-30%) Lens Steering AP2 Steer to apertures AP2 Lattice
Debuncher Aperture (13%) Currently at 30-32um Design to 35um
DRF1 Voltage (5%) Currently running on old tubes at
4.0 MEV Need to be a t 5.3 MeV
Accumulator & D/A Aperture (20%) Currently at 2.4 sec Design to 2.0 sec
Stacktail Efficiency Can improve core 4-8 GHz
bandwidth by a factor of 2
Timeline Effects SY120 takes up 7% of the timeline
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
36
Trigger cross section/rate extrapolation is based on existing data
Confirmation of XFT tracks by stereo layers is expected to yield a substantial reduction of fakes
Current XFTUpgraded XFT
One example: High Pt CMX Muon Main reason for the growth of
trigger cross section is the
increasing # of interactions
per bunch crossing By counting the number of
vertices found offline,
one could estimate
the effective luminosity Variation of bunch to
bunch luminosity due to
anti-proton intensity…
Those information is used for rate extrapolation and cross checks
BNL, June 2006 Vaia Papadimitriou
37#h
its o
n tr
acks
SVX COT
At highest luminosities: – SVX efficiency minimally affected– COT efficiency more significantly impacted
Tracking (SVX & COT): High Occupancy Physics
Number of interactions per event