Emails from Matt Pyle who is now the head of the CDMS R&D working group. His idea of R&D does not seem to include 6-inch detector work or contact-free interface work, although previously this was part of R&D. Should we respond to his call for topics?
Also he is asking where small chip-detectors should be employed. Do we have a reason to request one?
[Cdms_rand] Future R&D meetings
Matt Pyle <mpyle1@berkeley.edu>
Aug 7 (2 days ago)
to cdms_rand, supercdms_dete.
Hi Everyone,
So I’m starting to sit down and plan future R&D meetings. Here is what is on the list right now:
1) Caleb: Performance of the “photon detector” at SLAC
- can we do a competitive/world leading elastic nuclear recoil DM search with this device in the next month?
- what things do we need to do in the next 2 weeks to get the SuperCDMS electronics/DAQ/processing ready for a DM search?
2) Ziqing: Preliminary performance of the cm^3 Si device at Northwestern
- they have now seen single e/h pairs!
3) Everyone: Plans for Si /Ge 1cm^3 chips ( look for an email soon on this)
- what TF want to run small volume chips?
- what do they want to do
- what studies need to be done?
- what is the current inventory of small volume chips. Do we need to make more?
4) Sam: Continuous time DAQ with offline FIR trigger
- Berkeley/Stanford plan to just continuously stream data from now and then do triggering/ event building offline with an FIR filter.
- Is this something that TAMU / TUNL /UMN /Northwestern want to implement.
If you have additional topics that you want to talk on, definitely send me an email and I’ll put it on the list!
Matt
[Supercdms_detector_rand] "Photon Detector" Performance: Joint meeting between R&D and Tower Technical meeting this Friday (18/08/10) at 10AM
Matt Pyle <mpyle1@berkeley.edu> Aug 7 (2 days ago) to cdms_rand, supercdms_dete. Hi R&D working group, - So Caleb is working on finalizing the performance studies for a cyogenic photon detector: an 11g 3” diameter x 1mm thick Si wafer instrumented with a single photon channel. He’s going to present these results in the project tower technical meeting because they are so pertinent to the project: namely this device is sensitive to RF environmental noise because of its size and thus serves as the perfect "canary in the coal mine” to ask questions like: - ‘Is the shielding and filtering in SuperCDMS SNOLAB sufficient to achieve goal phonon resolution?’ - “Can a SuperCDMS HV detector achieve its theoretical noise performance?” - The R&D working group should be interested in this device for 2 different reasons: 1) We are seriously considering doing a 1gd elastic NR DM search with this device at SLAC in the next run. 2) TUNL/CUTE: you may want to use a device like this for a NaI active photon veto around the tower We’ll use the tower technical meeting number. Thanks, Matt