1 / 19

Run13 MUID Hit Efficiency

Run13 MUID Hit Efficiency. RIKEN/RBRC Itaru Nakagawa. MUID Hit Efficiency. data driven method. HV Method. D V= D I R. Analysis note 1137. Analysis note 501. HV method basics.

remy
Télécharger la présentation

Run13 MUID Hit Efficiency

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. Run13 MUID Hit Efficiency RIKEN/RBRC Itaru Nakagawa

  2. MUID Hit Efficiency • data driven method • HV Method DV=DI R Analysis note 1137 Analysis note 501

  3. HV method basics • MUID has voltage sagging circuit in order to protect wires in tube in case of over current draw. The more the current, the more voltage to be dropped. So effective HV at tube will be lower than supplied voltage from power supply. Empirical Formula: 5uA extra current causes typically -100V voltage sagging.

  4. Procedure Average Tube Currents for Efficiency

  5. Currents per HV Chain Stable baseline Drawing Currents / HV Chain [uA] Unstable baseline Run Number

  6. Baseline Subtracted Current Stable after baseline subtraction

  7. Drawing Currents per HV Group I2 I1 I0 Average Current per Tube [uA] Horizontal axis : Luminosity

  8. Observered Currents Cross Checks • Clear correlation of the drawing current vs. luminosity. • Currents are proportional to the geometric distance from the beam pipe. From geometry of HV group, one expect following relations I2 I1 I0 Confirmed most of cases in both Vertical and Horizontal Planes HV Group (Vertical) HV Group (Horizontal)

  9. Current -> Efficiency

  10. Efficiency

  11. Conclusion • MUID hit efficiencies were calculated using HV method to cross check data driven results. • Resulting efficiencies calculated by HV method are generally overestimating these of data driven method • According to MUID experts, the formula correlates between current and efficiency used in present analysis may not be up-to-date. • Updating formula by redoing HV scan using cosmic data may resolve the discrepancy.

  12. Problems • However intrinsic difference between HV method and data driven is not trivial to make correction. The HV method evaluates average while data driven evaluates instantaneous efficiency. • No good way to address this hasn’t been invented/established so far.

  13. Backup

  14. Drawing Currents

  15. Baseline Linear Interpolation

  16. Baseline Subtraction Raw current baseline After baseline subtraction

  17. Broken Wire Estimation • Number of Broken Wires are not in any database/records. • Typical cases, the broken wires can be estimated by the drawing current during cosmic runs. • Expected drawing currents are V*(1+2.5N) where N is number of broken wires and V=4.4kV. • I=4.4uA (N=0), I=14uA (N=1), I=25uA (N=2)…

  18. Broken Wire Estimation (Good Samples) Broken Wire = 0 Run Number Broken Wire = 1 Drawing Current Broken Wire = 2

  19. Broken Wire Estimation (Not Clear Samples) Broken Wire = 1 or 2 ?

More Related