[Moller_intdet] summer students

[Michael Gericke]

Yes, I know. Dave Bowman and I (and others) are developing an experiment
that uses an ion chamber for a PV experiment right now.

But anyway ...

Chill out Roger ... I didn't forget what we talked about and I am not 
trying
to blow you off. It should be possible to try different types of light 
guides
if we test the quartz prototype.

I really do appreciate and value your input and I understand that you
don't think it is a good idea to try ion chambers, but don't ever tell 
me I am
treating my students and postdocs poorly! When it comes to students, I 
don't
just talk the talk ... I also walk the walk ...

Anyone else wanna chew off my leg for something ?

Michael

P.S. If you have a paper for me that puts this to rest, please forward it!


On 10/06/2011 11:45 PM, Roger Carlini wrote:
> Hi Michael:
>
> This issues I have outlined were studied extensively for years, 
> prototyped, production chambers built and designs published 30+ years 
> ago by among others: Bowman, Yuan, myself and your colleagues Wim and 
> Shelley. All you need to do is a literature search. You should talk to 
> thoses that developed ion chambers for PV research before you invest 
> (read waste) some poor students time. There are much better candidate 
> solutions as we discussed the last time you were here - such as using 
> a solid light pipe placed at an angle so as to leak out the unwanted 
> Cherenkov light, etc .... But is it your time.
>
> Best Regards
>
> Roger
>
>  On 6/11/11 12:00 AM, Michael Gericke wrote:
>> Hi Roger,
>>
>> I understand your concerns, and I am not pushing it in any particular 
>> way.
>> However, this was tabled a few years back by Dave, as a low cost 
>> potential
>> alternative and it deserves a closer look. It may or may not be worth
>> prototyping it, if the safety constraints make it too complicated or
>> expensive,
>> but it should otherwise not be too hard to build a small prototype 
>> and just
>> see what happens.
>>
>> In any case, for the moment I am treating this as another thing to
>> investigate
>> until it is properly put to bed if it doesn't work, or until it is ruled
>> out by majority
>> vote (or by some form of consensus). Your concerns are very valid, but
>> all of them,
>> including linearity, required fields, and charge collection time depend
>> on particular
>> design choices, which would need to be studied carefully to really
>> exclude this
>> possibility. Someone would have to really invest some time into studying
>> this
>> option and if nobody does, then I suppose it is off the table
>> automatically.
>>
>> So, in short, the proposal for ion chambers is on the table and being
>> responsible
>> for the integrating detector development coordination I feel compelled
>> to take a
>> look at it!
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/06/2011 2:15 PM, Roger D. Carlini wrote:
>>> Hi Michael:
>>>
>>> I am not sure what you would propose using an ion chamber for. If your
>>> thinking about it as a possible replacement for the Quartz (Cherenkov)
>>> detectors, then (forgetting about it being sensitive to particles
>>> other than electrons) it must be a very low pressure (sub-atmospheric)
>>> high voltage hydrogen gas ion chamber. Otherwise it will be way to
>>> slow (collection time) for the a rapid helicity reversal PV experiment
>>> and be very non-linear as well. Not to mention all the spallation
>>> fragment noise issues, etc.
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>>
>>> Roger
>>>
>>> On 6/10/11 2:48 PM, Michael Gericke wrote:
>>>> Hi Juliette,
>>>>
>>>> I want to have a phone call with Wim and KK to discuss the
>>>> possibility of applying for a small equipment grant through
>>>> NSERC this fall. If this goes ahead (and I don't see a reason
>>>> why not) then Rob would be the one to write (with my help)
>>>> the grant proposal this summer.
>>>>
>>>> So what has to happen first this summer are a few
>>>> simulations for the geometries that KK and his group
>>>> now have in the CAD and the development of some
>>>> prototype assembly design; something that can be put
>>>> into the hall for testing when we have beam, without
>>>> disturbing the running experiment. In addition, since this
>>>> is a benchmarking exercise, I think it would be nice to
>>>> build a prototype ion chamber, just to see if the resolution
>>>> for GeV electrons is really that poor and to see how sensitive
>>>> they are to background. This is a little more complicated (as
>>>> Dave pointed out to me) since this involves building a pressure
>>>> vessel which has to satisfy the JLab used engineering code.
>>>> So someone would have to go talk to a JLab engineer about
>>>> that.
>>>>
>>>> The design and simulations can then be used in the proposal.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What we need for the proposal:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Purpose and goal:
>>>> That one is easy: benchmark simulations and
>>>> selection of detector material/geometry etc ...
>>>>
>>>> 2) Physics and working principle:
>>>> This should be clear!
>>>>
>>>> 3) Time line:
>>>> There is not much room to play with. If the proposal
>>>> gets put in this fall and ends up being successful, then the
>>>> money would be available April 1st, 2012. I have some
>>>> money (about 10k - 20k) available now to get started, which I would
>>>> replace in April, if the grant is successful, but the major question
>>>> is how expensive the quartz pieces will be and how long it would
>>>> take to get them after the order is placed. The people I
>>>> know of who might have an estimate of these are Dave Mack
>>>> and Mark Pitt.
>>>>
>>>> 4) Cost estimates (with quotes):
>>>> - Two quartz pieces for each geometry (how many are there ?)
>>>> - Suitable PMTs and divider hardware (this may all be stuff that can
>>>> be found at the lab already, but is should be in the proposal for
>>>> completeness and because it is good to show that some of the
>>>> costs are covered by other source ... leverage)
>>>> - Any other hardware needed
>>>> - DAQ: use a free qweak MD channel ?
>>>>
>>>> 5) Manpower
>>>> - You
>>>> - Rob
>>>> - Students
>>>> Summer students are fine, but it would be good if a Canadian
>>>> graduate student was involved for HQP (training of highly qualified
>>>> personnel accounting) which increases the chances for grant success.
>>>> I am thinking about Scott at some small fraction of his time.
>>>>
>>>> So, to answer your question Juliette, I would say it is clear that
>>>> there is
>>>> work to be done this summer, but I am not sure it will be hardware 
>>>> work
>>>> (yet).
>>>>
>>>> If anyone has any ideas or suggestion, please let me know.
>>>>
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10/06/2011 8:39 AM, Juliette Mammei wrote:
>>>>> Hey guys,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am going to be mentoring at least one high school summer student. I
>>>>> think that he will work on a simulation project for MOLLER, either 
>>>>> for
>>>>> the main detectors specifically or looking at the photon backgrounds
>>>>> or something like that.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is another student who needs a mentor; is there a 
>>>>> possibility to
>>>>> have her do some work on the prototype detector over the summer? If
>>>>> so, then I am willing to handle the business side of things to mentor
>>>>> her as well, unless Rob wants to do it himself... I think it will 
>>>>> be a
>>>>> good experience.
>>>>>
>>>>> Talk to you later,
>>>>>
>>>>> Juliette
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>


-- 
Michael Gericke

Assistant Professor

University of Manitoba
Department of Physics
30A Sifton Road, 213 Allen Bldg.
Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N2, Canada

Tel.: 204 474 6203
Fax.: 204 474 7622