0
$\begingroup$

There are two detectors/experiments at the proposed international linear collider, but what is the difference?

I am thinking that one is better at getting position and energy deposition, while the other one is better at getting trajectories and velocities?

EDIT Acronyms

  • SiD - Silicon Detector
  • ILD - International Large Detector
  • ILC - International Linear Collider
$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Consider spelling out acronyms. $\endgroup$ – Qmechanic Dec 9 '17 at 7:21
3
$\begingroup$

I found this article on the detectors for the ILC.

From the abstract

We are optimizing our two detectors, International Large Detector (ILD) and Silicon Detector (SiD) to maximize the physics reach expected in ILC with reasonable detector cost and good reliability.

It lists the physics they want to pursue and compares the two detectors discussed at present

ILD employs Time Projection Chamber (TPC) for the main tracking device, operating with inner and outer silicon strip layers. SiD, in constrast, has only five silicon strip layers in addition to the vertex layers. ILD has a larger tracking system of about 1800 mm radius with 3.5 Tesla of magnetic field in the current design, while SiD has smaller one of 1200 mm with 5.0 Tesla of magnetic field

Way back when working at LEP I was involved with the construction of the ALEPH TPC,( time projection chamber) a beautiful detector for tracking, and it seems that this is the proposed tracking detector for the international collaboration. The silicon collaboration obviously depends on silicon for tracking.

For the performance, ILD gives better momentum resolution in low pT tracks, with SiD better in high pT tracks, as shown in Fig. 4. For the material budget, ILD and SiD have similar material at barrel region, but in endcap region ILD has more material because of elec- tronics of TPC at endplates. As a unique capability of ILD, dE / dx can be obtained at the energy deposit from TPC. The effect of dE/dx to physics is now being investigated. On the other hand, SiD tracking is more robuston dense track environment

Anyway it seems that the comparison of the two types is ongoing, and depends on the importance of the interaction channels to be detected.

We aim to conclude the optimization to establish final designs in a few years, to finish detector TDR and proposal in reply to expected ”green sign” of the ILC project

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.