SuperFRS GEM-TPC Development Status Report COLLABORATORS F. García, R. Turpeinen, J. Heino, A. Karadzhinova, E. Tuominen, R. Lauhakangas Helsinki Institute of Physics University of Helsinki - Finland R. Janik u, P. Strmen, M. Pikna, B. Sitar FMFI Bratislava, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia Kunkel J., V. Kleipa, A. Prochazka, B. Voss Detector Laboratory GSI Darmstadt - Germany J. Hoffmann, N. Kurz, I. Rusanov, M. Shizu EE - GSI Darmstadt - Germany
IT HAS BEEN A JOURNEY: OUTLINE First meeting at Eurorib 08 with Haik Simon Meeting at HIP already in Oct. 2008 Meeting at GSI, Feb. 2009 First visit to Bratislava, March. 2009 Design of GEM stack at HIP Fabrication of GEM foils at CERN by Rui de Oliveira Successful Tests of the First GEM stack, Dec. 2009 Integration of the HB1, GEM-TPC, Feb. 2010 First Test Beam at GSI with HB1, GEM-TPC, Aug. 2010 Meeting at HIP, Jan. 2011 NUSTAR meeting at GSI, Feb. 2011 Concept presented to the RD51, Apr, 2011 NUSTAR meeting in Bucharest, Oct. 2011 NUSTAR meeting at GSI, Feb. 2012 Integration of the HB3, GEM-TPC, Apr. 2012 Second Test Beam at GSI with HB3, May. 2012 The HB4, twin GEM-TPC is on going Simulations Important Issues Milestones - Summary 2
MOTIVATION NUSTAR collaboration (Nuclear Structure, Astrophysics, and Reactions) has more than 700 members in total. Part of the Finnish Contribution will be in the superconducting in-flight separator (Super-FRS) Diagnostic systems, which is a work package dedicated to provide 36 GEM-TPC detectors 3
Gas Electron Multiplier foils - GEM GEM Foil GEM Operation Principle Extraction of the Electron Cloud and Signal Induction Avalanche development in time domain 4
Integration of the HB1, GEM-TPC, Feb. 2010 Tests and assembling at Comenius University - Bratislava Field cage of 60 mm drift Capacitance measurement setup Flange the GEM- TPC HB1 equipped with delayed lines Triple GEM stack First GEM-TPC called HB1 detector (Helsinki Bratislava prototype 1) Right: The electrodes of the board with strips of 200 m width and 500 m pitch And 8 Header Panasonic connectors with 130 Pin each 5
Test in the Lab. of HB1, Feb. 2010 GEM-TPC test in lab at Comenius University It can be observed: Signals from the delayed lines are very clean Same relative time between them Trigger signal bipolar, it can be that the 40% negative overshoot is due to e- transparency loses in the GEM 3 GEM-TPC tracking capabilities for 55 Fe Trigger Signal before reshaping Trigger Signal with rise and decay time reshaped In the picture above there are multiple picks from the different source positions. The source was not very well collimated therefore a mm scale resolution on X was achieved and the trigger was taken from the bottom of the GEM3 6
First Test Beam at GSI with HB1, GEM-TPC, Aug. 2010 GEM-TPC Beam test at GSI - Darmstadt Beam profile 64 Ni ions at 550 MeV/u At the prespec experiment - S363 GEM-TPC Gain GEM-TPC at S4 7
First Test Beam at GSI with HB1, GEM-TPC, Aug. 2010 GEM-TPC Results for the Beam test @GSI The GEM-TPC shows that the resolution in Y (Drift) reaches value around 130 m and on X between 130 to 300 m 8
Integration of the HB3, GEM-TPC, Apr. 2012 Four GEMEX cards inside the detector and fit very well 9
Integration of the HB3, GEM-TPC, Apr. 2012 HB3 with four GEMEX cards The Noisy guys Four GEMEX cards inside the detector and fit very well GEMEX card with two n-xyters 10
Integration of the HB3, GEM-TPC, Apr. 2012 HB3 under test in the Lab. 55 Fe Signals in the Lab Noise of 32 MHz from Explode clock in the trigger lines 11
Integration of the HB3, GEM-TPC, Apr. 2012 Distribution of the signals amplitude vs. the channel number (back side) Whole active area of the Detector irradiated with 55 Fe Front side of the detector, it has 512 strips parallels to the front side We can see that the whole detector works properly from both sides 12
Integration of the HB3, GEM-TPC, Apr. 2012 Distribution of the signal amplitude for the Front side of the detector Irradiated with a narrow beam using small hole collimator 13
Second Test Beam at GSI with HB3, May. 2012 HB3 @ S2 and ready to take the Beam of 197 Au at 770 MeV/u Slow Control and Power - ok Noise at S2 14
Second Test Beam at GSI with HB3, May. 2012 Pedestals of 4 GEMEX cards and Pulse Height distribution of one channel Projection of the beam in X coordinate In X direction the beam size was of 7 mm. HB3 shows 15 channels at 0.5 mm per channel Projection of the beam in Y coordinate In Y direction the was at the center. HB3 shows 200 counts which is a systemic error to be corrected during data analysis 15
Second Test Beam at GSI with HB3, May. 2012 Position correlations between the TPC tracker and the HB1 and HB3 for the run 150. It can be seen that the GEM-TPC record similar distribution as in the tracker 16
Second Test Beam at GSI with HB3, May. 2012 The nonlinearity for the HB1 and HB3 for the run 150. Variations are due to the fact that the baseline fluctuations were not monitored during the data taken. 17
Second Test Beam at GSI with HB3, May. 2012 The position resolution in X coordinate for the HB1 and HB3 for all the runs. Variations are due to beam characteristics 18
Second Test Beam at GSI with HB3, May. 2012 Efficiency plots for the HB1 and HB3 for all the runs. Variations in the efficiency are due to beam configuration and readout electronics settings. 19
The HB4, twin GEM-TPC is on going A total of 6 (six) High Voltage filters has been built, cleaned and tests. All withstand 5 kv and the current was of 1 na GEM foil Framing - Frascati stretcher GEM foil Leakage Current measurement 20
The HB4, twin GEM-TPC is on going <X> = 45.46 m = 1.11 m <X> = 48.03 m = 0.85 m Inner Hole Distribution Pitch Hole Distribution <X> = 138.40 m = 2.21 m 21
SIMULATIONS Efficiency Plots simulations for the GEM-TPC equipped with Delayed lines and with high density readout. In the case of gases P10 and ArCO 2 CF 4. The twin GEM-TPC has a 21 ns check sum from 1.6 s window 22
IMPORTANT ISSUES and MILESTONES Work package 2.4.6.1.3 HIP F. Garcia Comenius Univ. FMFI B. Sitar GSI Det. Lab. B. Voss HIP Det. Lab. E. Tuominen Issues: Consolidation of the Consortium Proposal to the In-Kind review board has been submitted Year 2013 will be dedicated to produce Final Prototype Requirements has been established Relevant Milestones: Preparation work ending Feb. 2014 M4 Contract sign ending Dec. 2014 23
REQUIREMENTS C. Nociforo 24
SUMMARY The Test Beam for HB1 and HB3 has been performed The results in terms of Position resolution and Efficiency are satisfactory The Production of the HB4 which is a twin GEM-TPC is on going and the plans are to have a test beam at the end of this year The consortium is consolidated Requirements has been established Cooperation with the interrelated workpackages is needed to be addressed soon, in terms of fulfilling mechanical constraints, services and DAQ 25