S4 Proposal for a Liquid Argon Detector at DUSEL

Marvin L. Marshak/University of Minnesota

Thanks to Bonnie Fleming for multiple slides.

1

LAr S4 CollaborationLAr S4 Collaboration Brookhaven National Laboratory, CNA

Engineering, Colorado State University, Dunham Associates, Fermilab, Indiana University, Itasca Consultants, Michigan State University, Miller Dunwoodie Architects, St. Mary’s University, Tufts University, University of Minnesota—Duluth, University of Minnesota—Twin Cities (Physics and Mechanical Engineering), University of Texas—Dallas, Yale University

2

Goals of the S4 WorkGoals of the S4 Work Develop an S5 Proposal for a 5 kT LAr Detector

by late Winter/early Spring 2010

Make progress on research, engineering, design regarding major components of S5 Proposal Physics capabilities of LAr Detectors Ability to design, estimate cost and manage the

construction and installation of a 5 kT LAr Detector Ability to design, estimate cost and manage the

interface between the 5 kT LAr Detector and DUSEL Ability to demonstrate safe installation and

operation of a 5 kT LAr Detector

3

Physics CapabilitiesPhysics Capabilities LAr technology appears scalable to large

fiducial masses and is complementary to WC Produces fine-grained “pictures” of events Ionization detector; not subject to Cerenkov

energy threshold

For neutrino oscillation physics, LAr is better able to reduce backgrounds for ve appearance. An LAr Detector is equivalent to a WC Detector with substantially larger mass

For proton decay, LAr is directly sensitive to supersymmetric neutrino kaon modes

4

Search for CP ViolationSearch for CP Violation

5

Search for Proton Search for Proton DecayDecay

6

Designing a 5 kT LAr Designing a 5 kT LAr DetectorDetector

Past and Ongoing Work ICARUS at Gran Sasso R&D program at Yale ArgoNeuT installed at Fermilab 20 T Purity Demonstrator at Fermilab MicroBOONE at Fermilab (175 T LAr; data in

2011)

7

Designing a 5 kT LAr Designing a 5 kT LAr DetectorDetector

Key issues for Detector Design Cryostat: How many? Vacuum or foam

insulation. Foam is cheaper to construct but has more heat leaks, microphonics, cannot be initially evacuated [Indiana]

Electronics: Cold electronics reduces cabling issues and cost, but requires operation with high reliability in hostile environment [BNL/Michigan State]

TPC, PMT and HV: need long drifts [large voltages], reliable triggering [UCLA]

Argon Purification: Need to achieve high purity to sustain long drifts [Entire Collaboration]

8

Designing a 5 kT LAr Designing a 5 kT LAr DetectorDetector

Key Issues for Detector/Lab Interface Dedicated or shared lab Ancillary or integrated space for support systems Bringing cryostat pieces underground and

assembling cryostats Bringing the argon underground Facilities for liquid nitrogen, if required Electrical and heat loads Normal and emergency venting Storage of argon if a cryostat needs to be

emptied Extensive safety analysis and mitigation design

9

Cryostat/Cryogenics Cryostat/Cryogenics – Organization– Organization

J. Urheim is coordinating efforts toward cryostat conceptual design.

For now, don’t have a coordinator for cryogenics, but many people w/ real experience are involved.

Have just started bi-weekly series of phone meetings – Thursdays @ 1PM Central; so far participants include: Larry Bartoszek (Bartoszek Eng), Carl Bromberg (Michigan State)

Bonnie Fleming (Yale), Walt Fox (Indiana), Bob Kephart (FNAL), Chris Laughton (FNAL), Marvin Marshak (Minnesota), Bill Miller (Minnesota), Stephen Pordes (FNAL), Rob Plunkett (FNAL), Jack Sondericker (BNL), Jon Urheim (Indiana), Hanguo Wang (UCLA)

Additional participation is welcome/needed !!

Cryostat/Cryogenics – Cryostat/Cryogenics – Initial ActivitiesInitial Activities

Aim is to develop a conceptual design on timescale of a year. Need S4 proposal to be successful to have a chance…

Starting from a blank slate: looking to experience w/ MicroBooNE, ICARUS, other efforts, but must confront unique features (size/scalability, underground construction, safety issues) head on.

Currently reviewing existing ideas (simple geometries, LNG tanker ships, LANNDD-like modular TPCs, etc…). Some key questions: Modular or Monolithic ?

Vacuum or passive insulation ?

Transport of materials & cryogens underground ?

At the same time must develop a framework for concept development, specifically: Requirements Documents – what the systems need to

accomplish

Constraints Documents – what the DUSEL environment dictates

Materials & Fabrication details – what the options are for implementation

Cryostat/Cryogenics – Cryostat/Cryogenics – Possible TimelinePossible Timeline

March / April ’09 Develop requirements/constraints/etc documents

Review existing concepts

April / May ’09 Arrive at cartoon level strawman concept(s) for baseline

Summer ’09

Provide detail for baseline concept(s)

Will require considerable coordination w/ DUSEL infrastructure & cavern construction efforts

Hopefully real engineering support becomes available at this point; will need to understand how to best factorize the design process.

Fall ‘09 and beyond Develop conceptual design to a level that can be costed

Longer Range PlansLonger Range Plans

13

Longer Range PlansLonger Range Plans

14

LAr S4 SummaryLAr S4 Summary Proposal submitted January 9

Builds on past and ongoing LAr development initiatives

Deep underground location poses challenging issues; significant engineering work will start soon

Major milestone is sufficient knowledge and design work for DUSEL Proposal in Spring 2010

15