1 / 20

ATLAS Liquid Argon Forward Calorimeter Status of Calibration Test Beam Analysis

ATLAS Liquid Argon Forward Calorimeter Status of Calibration Test Beam Analysis. J. Rutherfoord 11 September 2002. Goals of Test Beam Run. Energy calibration of the FCal Edge scan at high |  | Repeat HV cold test of last November.

alleyt
Télécharger la présentation

ATLAS Liquid Argon Forward Calorimeter Status of Calibration Test Beam Analysis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ATLAS Liquid ArgonForward CalorimeterStatus of CalibrationTest Beam Analysis J. Rutherfoord 11 September 2002

  2. Goals of Test Beam Run • Energy calibration of the FCal • Edge scan at high || • Repeat HV cold test of last November J. Rutherfoord

  3. Instrumented Sections Limited due to availability of pigtails J. Rutherfoord

  4. Simulated upstream material Beam hole thru FCal Beam spots for calibration Beam spots for edge scan FCal outer edge J. Rutherfoord

  5. Display of Energy Deposits in FCal1, 2, and 3 due to 200 GeV ’s J. Rutherfoord

  6. Fitting the pulse shape • SPICE models and reflections • Optimal filtering • Time resolution • What’s next? J. Rutherfoord

  7. J. Rutherfoord

  8. Data are points in black Vac & Ped Cables J. Rutherfoord

  9. Unexpected reflection • Due to preamp input impedance? • About 4  larger than cable impedance • Consistent with pulser data • Ratio of response to pulser, without and with ped cables connected, should be 2.0 but is measured to be about 2.16 Preamp input Z Pulser Cold Cable J. Rutherfoord

  10. J. Rutherfoord

  11. Close-up of peak region J. Rutherfoord

  12. TDC’s start on beam counter and stop on TTC stop on inverted TTC J. Rutherfoord

  13.  = 250 ps J. Rutherfoord

  14. Electrons into FCal2 and FCal3 FCal3 FCal2 FCal1 Electron beam Evacuated “beam pipe” J. Rutherfoord

  15. The signal Amplitude • Electronics Noise • Electron response • Hadron response J. Rutherfoord

  16. Electronics noise in 1 of 8 FEBs Prediction is 3.3 ADC counts Unused channel J. Rutherfoord

  17. Coherent Noise 11% 5.5% J. Rutherfoord

  18. 193.1 GeV Zpa=30  J. Rutherfoord

  19. J. Rutherfoord

  20. What’s next? • Improve SPICE model and • Better understand the pulse shape • Better understand the pulse amplitude • Improve timing resolution (correct for light transit time in scintillator) • Make optimal use of pulser data • Repeat the standard analyses we do with test beam data J. Rutherfoord

More Related