1 of 11

Calibration sources for CYGNO

Flavio Di Clemente

Giulia D’Imperio

Gianluca Cavoto

9 / 3 / 20

2 of 11

964 keV

1120 keV

Problem: track containment

In general, only a fraction of the total energy carried by the particle is deposited inside the sensitive region

The maximum registered energy contained inside a 0.5m3 region (between cathode and readout) is ~420keV

Compton edges

Electrons from 60Co decays

Initial electron energy [keV]

Fraction of deposited energy [keV]

60Co

3 of 11

55Fe

Low energy X-rays can deposit all of their energy

4 of 11

55Fe

We have a factor ~50 between the # of tracks in the side camera (in which the source is) and the # of tracks in the center camera.

How can we move the source?

Can we swap cameras positions?

A “double-side” calibration would decrease the ratio by a factor 2

Problem: coverage area

5 of 11

it is possible to carry out a systematic study of the detector response to the various isotopes suitable for our needs.

How our calibration source should be made

  • X-ray emitter with E<100-150keV

This is required to have tracks fully contained in the sensitive region, especially for side-cameras

  • Good coverage of the cameras nearest to the one in which the source is

The crucial point of the double-sided calibration is being able to calibrate the cameras in the center

  • A sufficiently long half-life

To make it simple to build the calibrated emission spectrum of the source

6 of 11

Preview*

*A full study will be available very soon!

7 of 11

125 I (Half-life: 60d)

The energy range of fully-contained tracks is much wider than the 55Fe case

The spectrum offer different, well separated, energy regions

Is the half-life too low?

(it depends on how much time the calibration scan will take)

8 of 11

The ability to cover many cameras is not that better with respect to the case of the 55Fe

9 of 11

133Ba (Half-life: 10.5y)

The energy range of fully-contained tracks is even wider than the 125I53 case

Unfortunately the 133Ba introduces higher levels which contribute only to noise, since they are usually partial tracks

10 of 11

Even for 133Ba56, the cameras coverage is not that better with respect to the case of the 55Fe

11 of 11

There are many other nuclides to be tested!

Recap

We still haven’t figured out how to solve the coverage problem. Nevertheless we found other suitable choices for our sources, which can improve our energy range in the calibration scan.

Full track containment and coverage are opponents, so we should find the balance between this two features.

A double-sided study will be done, and some numbers on activities will be therefore carried out soon.