sPHENIX cold QCD topical group

["Huang, Jin" <jhuang AT bnl.gov>]

Hi, Dave

 

Few more comments which I hope you find useful:

 

1.       Slide 2 or 6: we could also mention verbally that the large magnetic field volume from Babar is useful in the forward direction too, since the momentum resolution in the high momentum limit scales with B * L^2.

 

2.       Slide 14: we could explicitly emphasize possible detector configurations are being developed in collaboration with EIC detector and sPHENIX R&D:

 

·       EMCal and forward HCal in collaboration eRD1 calorimeter consortium

·       PID detectors (red regions) in collaboration with eRD14 EIC PID consortium

·       h-going Gas RICH and GEMs are in in collaboration eRD6 tracking PID consortium

·       Chris is also member of eRD20 EIC simulation consortium

·       And we can inherit detector and experience on the barrel detectors from sPHENIX construction and operation, as Sasha also pointed out.

·       I would expect the 100 Gb/s sPHENIX DAQ would provide more than enough bandwidth to handle EIC DAQ too.

 

3.       Slide 16: when building the list of studies, we could add a SBU/BNL study on EIC NC interactions, published as DOI:10.1140/epja/i2017-12245-2

 

Cheers,

 

Jin

 

 

______________________________

 

Jin HUANG

 

Associate Physicist

Brookhaven National Laboratory

Physics Department, Bldg 510 C

Upton, NY 11973-5000

 

Office: 631-344-5898

Cell:   757-604-9946

______________________________

 

From: sPHENIX-cold-QCD-l [mailto:sphenix-cold-qcd-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov] On Behalf Of Nils Feege
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 2:53 PM
To: sphenix-cold-qcd-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: Re: [Sphenix-cold-qcd-l] draft slides for meeting at Temple on detector strategy

 

Hi Dave,

 

briefly following up on Sasha's comment about the 20 GeV electron beam studies, here are slides for such studies that Sasha did post-LOI:

 

https://indico.bnl.gov/getFile.py/access?contribId=0&resId=0&materialId=slides&confId=1574

 

(attached also plots for DIS electron energy vs eta at 10x250 GeV and 20x250 GeV)

 

You could add some of the plots on your slide of ongoing studies, or just mention on the LOI slide that we have updated some of the studies to the higher energies, as Sasha suggested.

 

-Nils

 

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Alexander Bazilevsky <shura AT bnl.gov> wrote:

Dear Dave, John,

I think I understand your presentation strategy which looks reasonable to me. However the invitation to start with bare magnet (well, plus barrel outer HCal, which though is not a critical element for an EIC detector) looks to me not a winning point. I already heard opinions that the $10M magnet (estimate from your slide 4) is really not so big chunk in the whole detector cost (of >$100M at least), so why don't we do it from the very beginning designing the magnet we exactly want.

I think we still should emphasize we have much more to directly borrow from sPHENIX (at least TPC, EMCal ... forward detectors if the forward program is approved), which will perfectly work for EIC goals. You do beautifully show that (e.g. slide 14), but it is completely missing in the summary.

Also to mention, related to slide 9, yes, we did studies in LOI for 5-10 GeV beams, but actually this work was updated to 15-20 GeV beams. Therefore the studies are ongoing and the (one of the) proposed detector configuration (based on sPHENIX) will perfectly fit the EIC goals.

Probably balancing two strategies/viewpoints is desirable here.

Regards,

Sasha.

On 11/28/17 10:38 AM, David Morrison wrote:

Hi John,

Right, that's my thinking.  I think we come out of this in a stronger
position if the EIC community understands sPHENIX as a potential
precursor – and perhaps the most realistic precursor - to an excellent
EIC detector.  There will naturally be debates as we go forward about
what sPHENIX elements might be reused or rebuilt or replaced for the
purpose of an EIC detector.  My response would be that even at the very
extreme end of that spectrum of views, that none of the sPHENIX
detectors are suitable for an EIC detector – a view I don't share, btw –
the community should very seriously consider the sPHENIX solenoid and
flux return as a foundation.  Design around that and you're already
several steps ahead.

At the same time, I do want the audience to know that we didn't sit on
our hands following the writing of the 2014 LoI.  For that, I could use
some help adding detail to slide 16.  A list of specific studies that
have been done since then would convey to people the seriousness of the
effort that has continued to go toward an EIC detector built on sPHENIX.
  I wouldn't have time to describe those studies, but rattling them off
would show that the effort is vibrant and current.  I'd also like to
annotate the various detector cutaways to show how EIC detector R&D is
playing a role.

Cheers,
Dave

On 11/28/17 9:25 AM, John Lajoie wrote:

Hi Dave,

     I very much like your approach and especially your statement in the
conclusions -  the solenoid and flux return (HCAL) are a great
foundation.  The traditional argument against the "ePHENIX" approach has
been to focus on a particular aspect of detector performance and use
that to declare the approach unsatisfactory, and this undercuts that
argument very effectively.  I'm sure what you will say on slide 10
(something like "...this is one possible implementation..." ) will be
consistent with your approach.

John


On 11/27/2017 4:06 PM, David Morrison wrote:

Dear sPHENIX,

I'll be giving a 10 minute (!) talk this Thursday at the EICUG Detector
Discussion Meeting at Temple University.  I'll be the last in a series
of talks about detector concepts, and the talk is so brief, that I'm
planning to focus on one main point – that starting with the BaBar
solenoid in the sPHENIX support structure and with the oHCal as an
instrumented flux return is a a great starting point for an EIC
detector.  Of course, you can do even better by also using the TPC and
the MVTX and the EMCal, but I think presenting a nearly "blank canvas"
as part of the spectrum of options has the potential to be maximally
inviting.

My draft slides are here:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/y2ib26f7iwz6h68/EICUG.pptx?dl=0

Nils and Jin helped me get some up to date dimensions for the current
EIC concept detector to Dan Cacace, who has made some nice 3D
renderings.  I'm very happy to get feedback.  The big constraint is the
alloted time, so for anything significant that goes in, something will
have to come out.

I need to add names and institutions to some of the slides and finish
adding labels to some of the renderings.

Cheers,
Dave

*John Lajoie*

Professor of Physics

Iowa State University

 
(515) 294-6952

lajoie AT iastate.edu

Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/john.lajoie.5> LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/pub/john-lajoie/9/a9/bba/>
Contact me: Skype john.lajoie

<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=icon>
        Virus-free. www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=link>


<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>


_______________________________________________
sPHENIX-cold-QCD-l mailing list
sPHENIX-cold-QCD-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-cold-qcd-l

--

Alexander Bazilevsky
Brookhaven National Laboratory, Bldg. 510D, 2-232
Upton, NY 11973 Tel: 631-344-3712
Email: shura AT bnl.gov
-------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
sPHENIX-cold-QCD-l mailing list
sPHENIX-cold-QCD-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-cold-qcd-l

 

--

Dr. Nils Feege

Research Assistant Professor

 

SUNY at Stony Brook

Department of Physics & Astronomy

Stony Brook, NY 11794-3800

 

e-mail nils.feege AT stonybrook.edu

skype nils1920

phone +1-631-632-8710

 

www.linkedin.com/in/nilsfeege