Barrel Barrel

Endcap Endcap

The RPC SystemThe RPC System

Baseline• Six stations in the Barrel • Four station in the Endcap up to = 2.1

Baseline• Six stations in the Barrel • Four station in the Endcap up to = 2.1

However, due to technical and financial reasons, only three layers up to = 1.6 are present in the endcap region.

However, due to technical and financial reasons, only three layers up to = 1.6 are present in the endcap region.

RE 1/1

RE 1/2

RE 1/3

RE 2/1

RE 2/2

RE 2/3

RE 3/1

RE 3/2

RE 3/3

RE 4/1

RE 4/2

RE 4/3

No. of chambers 36*2 36*2 36*2 18*2 36*2 36*2 18*2 36*2 36*2 18*2 36*2 36*2

up scope

Low up-scopeLow up-scope

Increasing the number of stations the algorithm has a better efficiency and is less affected by noise

Increasing the number of stations the algorithm has a better efficiency and is less affected by noise

Two options:

• Restore the TDR scheme by adding a fourth layer in YE4• Move the actual layer in YE2 to YE4 and add a double-chamber layers in YE2

Two options:

• Restore the TDR scheme by adding a fourth layer in YE4• Move the actual layer in YE2 to YE4 and add a double-chamber layers in YE2

Also a double station with OR/AND capability could reduce the noise

Also a double station with OR/AND capability could reduce the noise

TDR vs Double StationTDR vs Double Station

TDR:• 150 new chambers• no noise redaction capability in layer YE2

TDR:• 150 new chambers• no noise redaction capability in layer YE2

Double Station:• 300 new chambers• Integration issues are demanding

Double Station:• 300 new chambers• Integration issues are demanding

Full Endcap ( Towers 8 – 16 == 1.04 < η <2.10 )

Ghost rate is dominated by RE1 and RE3. Switching off RE2 does not affect the ghost rate

TDR Geometry• ε = 95 %• Rate = 0.05 Hz cm-2

What if the second station (RE2) fails?What if the second station (RE2) fails?

The RPC up scope basicsThe RPC up scope basics

Although simulation studies are continuing, at the moment seem reasonable to go with the “single layer” approach.

The project should be in the context of the present RPC project, which would then have an “operation” branch and an “up scope” branch. This would ensure the proper expertise in all phases (production, test, installation/integration, commissioning, operation).

Strong “European “ involvement and funding should be ensured.

Production should be concentrated in very few sites (maximum two). An important CERN/CMS facility for production /quality assurance should be foreseen.

A draft scheme to be discussedA draft scheme to be discussed

Project partnersProject partners

Main partners should be: Korea, Pakistan, China, India, Belgium, CERN_ CMS*, Italy*.

Colombia, Brazil, Egypt, Iran, have expressed interest. Their involvement should be maximized. Korea (KODEL) just ended gap production for PHOENIX. Willing to continue. A more comprehensive involvement in CMS RPC is under way by all the Korean groups.

Pakistan was very active in the RPC forward production. Large involvement in operation. At the moment funds are not secured for the up scope

* Discussion under way

Project partnersProject partners

China is ready to produce part of the mechanic.

India already produced few spare chambers. Willing to continue.

Belgium is largely involved in the operation. Strong interest for the up scope.

CERN_CMS was coordinating some procurement, final test at ISR , integration, logistic. Its involvement is absolutely needed. Could substantial production fraction take place at CERN?

Italy_INFN participation should be secured. Possible contribution could be the off detector electronics.

Gap productionGap production

HPL procurement in Italy. Some effort needed to reestablish production. Expertise available. A different factory (w.r.t. to the past) has to be involved.

Gap should be built in Korea. There we have a team of physicists to follow the validation procedure. GT could as well produce gaps, but we need a team for the production validation. In this case it has to be from CERN (backup solution).

Procurement/Production matrixProcurement/Production matrix

HPL Coordinated by CERN Gap KODELFront end India/BelgiumHoneycomb panel/strip ChinaOther mechanic components Assembly sitesOff detector electronics Italy HV/LV system India/BelgiumCables Coordinated by CERN

Chamber assembly candidates: CERN (904), Belgium (Ghent), India (BARC). Try to further concentrate. Investigate local agencies constraints about “in kind /cash” contribution ratio.

Concentrate expertise from other labs in the production host labs

A possible scenario for productionA possible scenario for production

Allow minimal production/certification (order 20 chambers) to take place in India and Belgium for students and physicists training

Concentrate the core production (order 130 chambers) at CERN under the responsibility of Indian/Belgium groups. Preassembly components at the home labs, but make the final assembly/certification at CERN

Built a strong CERN facility under the CMS group financial and operational responsibility

Strongly motivate Indian/Chinese/Pakistan/Belgium/Egyptian physicist to joint both chamber production and detector operation at CERN

Cost/Funds ( kCHF) Cost/Funds ( kCHF)

Double station TDRDetector 1450 725Front end 320 160Off detector electronics 600 600HV/LV system 600 600Service/infrastructure 350 350Cable 280 280Logistic CERN 700 700Assembly/installation 160 150 4460 3565Korea 400Pakistan ?China 500Belgium 800India 800Egypt 200CERN 700 (tentatively estimated, to be discussed)Italy 600 (tentatively estimated, to be discussed) 4000

One ye

ar o

ld qu

otatio

ns

Concluding remarksConcluding remarks

A minimal achievement of one end cap installation in the 2012-2013 shut-down seems realistic. Also synchronization with CSC installation should be considered.

Important integration issues to be studied: chamber installation, cooling up scope, design of gas/HV/LV/signal services. Some re-design of services also at chamber level needed.

Objectives of the workshop-Boost local interest in the project-Call for funds availability -Draft project organization-Draft responsibility matrix

MilestonesMilestones

Confirm feasibility of HPL production. Pre-produce 10% of the need and check specifications (Ian)

Update the cost estimate with market enquires (Pino, Walter)

Review the Integration/Service needs. Steering group with CSC (Salvatore, Walter)

Review chamber design for cooling and gas circuit improvement (Luc)

Discuss migration of LB system responsibly to INFN (Guido, Austin, Pino)

TDR addendum by June?