Steering Group of the CERN-ECFA studies of a
EUROPEAN NEUTRINO FACTORY COMPLEX
MINUTES of the Meeting held at CERN, 8 May 2001
MUG: Alain Blondel (chair), Friedrich Dydak, John Ellis, Helmut Haseroth,
Ken Peach (excused), Michel Spiro, Paolo Strolin
Working Group conveners:
Friedrich Dydak, Juan Jose Gomez-Cadenas (Neutrino oscillations),
Gian Giudice, Andries van der Schaaf (Stopped Muons),
Michelangelo Mangano (DIS),
Gerhard Buchalla (Kaon physics),
Patrick Janot (Higgs factory),
Helmut Haseroth (Neutrino Factory Working Group)
Helge Ravn (Target + Horns)
Horst Schonauer (Accelerator and Compressor)
Roland Garoby (SPL, RF)
Alessandra Lombardi (Cooling studies)
Spokespersons of Experimental R&D :
Friedrich Dydak (HARP), Rob Edgecock (MUSCAT)
Invited: Enrique Fernandez, Stefano Ragazzi (Large Magnetic Detector, Monolith)
1. Review of on-going activities:
a. yellow report
b. R&D experiments : liquid target tests (Ravn); RF tests and prototypes (Garoby); HARP (Dydak), MUSCAT (Edgecock)
2. future projects
a. Large Magnetic detector (Dydak or Gomez-Cadenas, Fernandez)
b. SPL and low energy superbeam (Dydak or Gomez Cadenas, Spiro)
c. Cooling experiment (Haseroth)
with emphasis on: funding, status of collaboration in Europe and with
US; more generally how do we see the development in time and priorities
of these projects, & support to DG initiative to ask more R&D resources
3. organizational aspects
DIS, Kaon, Muon chapters ready;
NFWG and Higgs factory chapters under edition and finalization.
Neutrino oscillations: being written.
drafts to be sent to Michele.Jouhet@cern.ch
Goal: finish in JUNE! This is important in view of the discussions of this summer and of the imminent outcome of the ECFA working group on the future of High energy physics in Europe.
Target studies: (H. Ravn et al)
First experimental results arrive!. After a trough test with a few 1012 ppb, a real liquid jet was produced in BNL E951 experiment and exposed to 3.81012 ppb. Spectacular shots of exploding jets! Collaboration with US successful see report in the plenary meeting 10 May. Progress is fund limited. The plan is to have an energy density deposition similar to the real Nufact as soon as possible.
RF studies: (R. Garoby)
How high a gradient can a 44 MHz or 88 MHz cavity reach with a high density of particles and a high magnetic field?. These high gradients studies essential for Phase rotation, cooling. A 100 MHz cavity is being modified to become a 88 MHz cavity. First results expected in jan. 2002. Active search for provider of magnet on-going. Indian laboratory is a possibility; Saclay magnet experts could be contacted as well.
MUSCAT: (R. Edgecock)
This is an experiment of 10 institutes and 30 members, that involves europeans, americans and japanese. An engineering run took place in 2000. Data taking again in oct. 2001 with scintillating fibers tracking, to measure scattering tails in Hydrogen and other light materials.
HARP: (F. Dydak)
The HARP experiment comprises 130 members and 23 institutes(!). The construction is almost complete now. First data have been recorded. Proposals have been submitted to SPSC for continued running in 2002. MUG reiterated strong support for HARP running in 2002 with Helium, as well as for the hadron production experiment at higher energies using NA49
Large Magnetic Detector (E. Fernandez).
A magnetic detector is necessary for the neutrino factory, but would also be very interesting for atmospheric neutrinos, with the possibility for large q 13 to observe the matter effects for neutrinos of energy about 10 GeV. Constructing a 100 kton detector requires a large amount of detector R&D. A workshop is to be organised in the fall in Barcelona.
E. Fernandez will act as organizer. Synergy and collaboration with the Monolith collaboration is noted. MUG supports this initiative.
Superbeam: (M. Spiro)
The first studies show an interesting physics potential. There is a coincidence between the fact that a low energy proton driver is studied for the CERN neutrino Factory Complex, that the Frejus Tunnel 130 km from CERN needs to have a second gallery dug out for safety, and the reflection world wide about very large water Cerenkov detectors.
A Workshop with UNO collaboration (400 KT Water Cerenkov) is foreseen in the fall at CERN. M. Spiro will act as organizer.
MUG supports this initiative.
Cooling experiment: (H. Haseroth)
There is unanimous agreement that we need one: cooling of minimum ionization particles has never been done before. In the CERN scheme, cooling provides an increase of intensity by a factor 15. The aim is to have the experiment running in summer 2004. As mentioned earlier the construction of a 88 MHz cavity is underway. Tests of RF cavity at high radiation have been successful in summer 2000. The experiment it self is being designed: principle is to design, engineer and build a prototype of the cooling channel that is able to cool by an amount that is sufficient to observe cooling unambiguously. First baseline goal is 10% cooling. (this represents 8 cavities if they reach 4 MV per meter)
F. Dydak expressed the opinion that the proposed experiment was far too big and that the necessary cost of 30 MCHF could not be raised, and that a proposal should not be made if it could be turned down.
H. Haseroth argued that the rough number estimated by A. Blondel in London (30 MCHF indeed) represented the current status of ideas at the time. That cost included construction of a completely new beam line (est. 10 MCHF) and a cooling section with 16 cavities. Now two possible beams have been found (PSI, RAL) outside CERN. The final size and cost can only be determined once the accuracy of the measurement is established. Successful contacts are taking place with the (US) Muon Collaboration (S. Geer et al) to establish international collaboration. A discussion in NUFACT01 is organized on friday evening. Next steps: tests of detectors in RF fields and a written description of a possible experiment. It is very important that a good proposal be written to fuel the request for funds for accelerator R&D that the CERN DG plans to submit to Council in december 2001.
1. plenary muon weeks
A. Blondel proposed that V. Palladino be asked to organize the plenary muon weeks. (next one is 15-18 October 2001) This was agreed. (Vittorio has since accepted)
2. Proposal of the creation of a "neutrino Factory collaboration" (F. Dydak)
Despite much progress since our studies were launched*) Friedrich believes that our organization need to be more formalized, in order to be able to achieve the goal of a design report in 2005 and to begin the construction of the neutrino factory in 2010.
He sees one of the obstacles in the organizational shortcomings:
"no respectable neutrino factory project exists[...] In CERN's research sector no staff positions can be requested"
"the leadership is in part self-appointed and lacks legitimization"
Thus he proposes a "Neutrino Factory Collaboration"
... between institutes that ... work on machine or experiments design and related R&D
... allows free move between projects
... would have elected executive structure
... supreme body being board of representatives from collaborating institutes
... and a board of overseers.
the collaboration would request approval from the CERN research board, and therefore be a legal entity.
This proposal was new to most members of the MUon Steering Group (although request had been made to Friedrich to provide this the week before). Reactions were generally that the Steering group would like to discuss the proposal in detail.
The following points were noted during the discussion.
-- There is no mention in the proposal of the several other physics groups beyond neutrino oscillations. These groups should remain included in any organization that we give ourselves, should we change it. P. Janot suggested that "Muon and Neutrino Factory" would be more acceptable.
-- The present funding is based on a project-by-project basis. Several of those present were of the opinion that a collaboration could potentially made the funding more secure. Others argued that it is far from evident that a collaboration would be able to raise more than what could be obtained at present in the more flexible way, and that what seems really needed, more than further administrative structure, is to have credible, concrete projects.
-- There is nothing in the present organization that prevents free move between projects, except for the (good) fact that committed individuals tend to absorb themselves in the achievement of their goals.
-- The present legitimization of the studies of a European Neutrino Factory Complex -- and of the steering group-- is the sponsorship of ECFA. This is our main strength and we should keep it.
-- It is far from clear that CERN's Research board would approve such a global collaboration, since the CERN management is pushing for a European technical committee and an international committee. It was commented that that process is not making progress very fast!
The problem raised by Friedrich that "In CERN's research sector no staff positions can be requested" was generally perceived as real and maybe similar in other institutes. This deserves discussion with the CERN management.
In general it was felt that the initiative of Friedrich deserves further discussion within the steering group, to understand which solution(s)
-- maximizes our chances
-- includes all interested parties without exclusion or division
-- respects existing mandates.
Minutes written by A. Blondel, agreed by on 21 May.
*) in fact more than three years ago, ECFA encouraged our first "prospective study of muon storage rings at CERN"