4.6 Article

Monitoring of the operating parameters of the KATRIN Windowless Gaseous Tritium Source

期刊

NEW JOURNAL OF PHYSICS
卷 14, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/1367-2630/14/10/103046

关键词

-

资金

  1. Bundesministerium fur Bildung und Forschung (BMBF) [05A08VK2]
  2. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) [Transregio 27]
  3. Helmholtz Association (HGF)
  4. Helmholtz Alliance for Astroparticle Physics (HAP)
  5. Department of Energy [DE-SC0004036]
  6. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  7. Open Access Publishing Fund of Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
  8. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) [DE-SC0004036] Funding Source: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The KArlsruhe TRItium Neutrino (KATRIN) experiment will measure the absolute mass scale of neutrinos with a sensitivity of m(nu) = 200 meV/c(2) by high-precision spectroscopy close to the tritium beta-decay endpoint at 18.6 keV. Its Windowless Gaseous Tritium Source (WGTS) is a beta-decay source of high intensity (10(11) s(-1)) and stability, where high-purity molecular tritium at 30K is circulated in a closed loop with a yearly throughput of 10 kg. To limit systematic effects the column density of the source has to be stabilized at the 10(-3) level. This requires extensive sensor instrumentation and dedicated control and monitoring systems for parameters such as the beam tube temperature, injection pressure, gas composition and so on. In this paper, we give an overview of these systems including a dedicated laser-Raman system as well as several beta-decay activity monitors. We also report on the results of the WGTS demonstrator and other large-scale test experiments giving proof-of-principle that all parameters relevant to the systematics can be controlled and monitored on the 10(-3) level or better. As a result of these works, the WGTS systematics can be controlled within stringent margins, enabling the KATRIN experiment to explore the neutrino mass scale with the design sensitivity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据