1 / 15

FCal2 Channel Mapping Issues Identified During 2011 Analysis of Pb-Pb Collision Data

This document outlines the findings from the FCal2 positioning studies presented at the Toronto LAr Week in April 2011. Using run 169045 data from Pb-Pb collisions, a detailed analysis of channel mapping in the FCal2 detector modules was conducted. The study revealed that while FCal2 channel mapping is generally okay, electrode mapping is incorrect. The observed discrepancies in tube layout patterns significantly affect the shape and position of the FCal2 channels, particularly impacting irregular-shaped channels. Corrective measures and updates to the simulation are required.

mariah
Télécharger la présentation

FCal2 Channel Mapping Issues Identified During 2011 Analysis of Pb-Pb Collision Data

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. FCal2 Mapping Problem P.Krieger, Toronto LAr Week, Munich, April 2011

  2. Bad Channel / FCal Positioning Studies • Plot of <Ecell> vs. rT (transverse distance of FCal cell from beamspot) • Here using run 169045 (Pb-Pb collision data: lots of FCal energy FCal1A FCal1C

  3. FCalA (three ranges of rT)

  4. FCalC (three ranges of rT)

  5. FCal2A rT < 180 mm i.e. FCal2A iϕ = 01, iη = 29 A2.01.29 A2.05.29 A2.09.29 A2.13.29 A2.02.29 A2.06.29 A2.10.29 A2.14.29

  6. FCal2C rT < 180 mm C2.01.29 C2.05.29 C2.09.29 C2.13.29 C2.02.29 C2.06.29 C2.10.29 C2.14.29

  7. Look at FCal2A Initial thought: A2.01.29   <-->  A2.02.29 A2.05.29   <-->  A2.06.29 A2.09.29   <-->  A2.10.29 A2.13.29   <-->  A2.14.29 since, according to mapping spreadsheet, or example, A2.06.29 has smaller rT than A2.05.29 But look more closely…..

  8. Drawing close to 1/10 scale View is of readout side of FCal2A (so towards the IP since that is the rear face)

  9. Drawing close to 1/10 scale

  10. FCal2A Signal Endplate Drawing FCal2A Readout Tile Drawing Drawing close to 1/10 scale Note that these views are from the same side, so should match.

  11. Reality Check: As-built detector modules

  12. FCal2C Inner Edge Tiling FCal2A Inner Edge Tiling Location of downward pointing fish-shaped channel consistent with FCal2 Tiling drawings.

  13. FCal3A check

  14. Summary • FCal2 channel mapping is OK (there is no mis-cabling). • FCal2 electrode mapping is wrong  tube layout pattern for entire FCal2 (both sides) is the mirror image of what is should be (and layout is not mirror symmetric). • The tube layout assumed for a given channel (iϕ,iη) is that that actually belonging to the channel with the same iη value but reflected iϕ. • This affects the shape and position of every FCal2 channel, but the effect is rather small except for irregular-shaped channels which have rather different shapes on the -x and +x side of the detector: in practical terms this mean un-summed channels at the inner and out edge. • This problem is not present for either the FCal1 or FCal3 modules. • The mapping needs to be fixed. But this will take a bit of time. • This will also necessitate regeneration of the nearest neighbour map (Sven) as well as changes to the simulation.

More Related