1 June 29, 2004, SCT Week SCT Simulation for CTB2004 Zdenka Broklova, Peter Kodys, Carlos Escobar Special thanks to Thijs Cornelissen, Grant Gorfine, Pavel.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
How to check close-to-the-line arrows F E D E R A T I O N I T N E R N A T I O N A L E D E T I R A L ' A R C a b TOP VIEW FRONT VIEW a b c d e c d e.
Advertisements

Optics and magnetic field calculation for the Hall D Tagger Guangliang Yang Glasgow University.
Beam-plug under M2 and HCAL shielding studies Robert Paluch, Burkhard Schmidt October 9,
2x2 module & stave layouts. 2 options “Small chip” “Big chip” Boundary between “small” and “big” is determined by the 6” sensor wafer layout that must.
TRT LAr Tilecal MDT-RPC BOS Pixels&SCT 1 The Atlas combined testbeam Thijs Cornelissen, NIKHEF Jamboree, Nijmegen, December 2004.
D. Elia, INFN BariALICE Offline Week - June Recent results from SPD beam test D. Elia, R. Santoro INFN Bari ALICE Collaboration - SPD Group.
May 14, 2015Pavel Řezníček, IPNP Charles University, Prague1 Tests of ATLAS strip detector modules: beam, source, G4 simulations.
Converting Between Rectangular and Polar Coordinates Sometimes we want to change from rectangular coordinates to polar coordinates, and from polar coordinates.
Copyright © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc. Chapter 32 Light: Reflection and Refraction.
IFIC - Valencia Peter Kodys, July 16, 2004, internal workshop, status and results1 Our status, progress and.
Lotte Verbunt Investigation of leaf positioning accuracy of two types of Siemens MLCs making use of an EPID.
8/17/031 Geant4 Simulations Guilherme Lima, Jeremy McCormick General Comments Test Stand (JM) Test Beam (GL)
IFIC, Valencia Charles University, Prague Peter Kodyš, September 14-16, 2004, RD50 – Workshop Florencia1 Laser.
Surface Area Nets & Rectangular Prisms. Rectangular Prisms Made of 6 sides Top & Bottom Front & Back Left & Right.
Copyright © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc. Lecture 8 - Magnetism.
Building a Typical Electronic Project in Senior Design Peter Wihl (former Guest Lecturer)
Geometry and Measurement
Area of Rectangles, Squares, Parallelograms, Triangles, and Trapezoids.
Surface Area Return to table of contents.
SMRD April 2007 Status of the atmospheric muon studies Piotr Mijakowski OUTLINE: Primary muon spectrum at the sea level Primary muon.
Coordinate Geometry Learning Outcomes
Optics and magnetic field calculation for the Hall D Tagger Guangliang Yang Glasgow University.
Air Racer Design and Layout.
Surface Area of Prisms Unit 5, Lesson 2. What is a Prism? Definition: –A three dimensional figure with 2 congruent polygon bases and rectangular sides.
Status of Atlas Tile Calorimeter and Study of Muon Interactions L. Price for TileCal community Short Overview of the TileCal Project mechanics instrumentation.
8-1 Warm Up Problem of the Day Lesson Presentation
Monte Carlo Comparison of RPCs and Liquid Scintillator R. Ray 5/14/04  RPCs with 1-dimensional readout (generated by RR) and liquid scintillator with.
Chapter 29 Magnetic Fields 1.Introduction to magnetic field. 2.The forces on moving charges and currents inside a magnetic field. 3.The math that will.
HPS Collaboration Meeting JLAB, May Tracker Design Status M.Oriunno, SLAC.
On page 10 of your notebook, predict how the layers will form. Which one will go at the bottom? Which one will go on top?
Marco Delmastro 23/02/2006 Status of LAr EM performance andmeasurements fro CTB1 Status of LAr EM performance and measurements for CTB Overview Data -
TOP counter overview and issues K. Inami (Nagoya university) 2008/7/3-4 2 nd open meeting for proto-collaboration - Overview - Design - Performance - Prototype.
21 Jun 2010Paul Dauncey1 First look at FNAL tracking chamber alignment Paul Dauncey, with lots of help from Daniel and Angela.
I. Mathematics A. Scientific Notation 1. Converting to: a. Move the decimal point to the left with numbers larger than 1 so that there is only one whole.
Simulations Report E. García, UIC. Run 1 Geometry Radiator (water) 1cm x 2cm x 2cm with optical properties Sensitive Volume (hit collector) acrylic (with.
Warm-up: Are these “errors”? 1. Misreading the scale on a triple-beam balance 2. Incorrectly transferring data from your rough data table to the final,
GlueX Two Magnet Tagger G. Yang University of Glasgow Part 1, 3 D Tosca analysis. Part 2, Preliminary Drawings. Part 3, Proposed Assembly Procedures (i)
Peter Kodyš, SCT Week Valencia, Juni 13, Charles University.
HIGH GRANULARITY CALORIMETER ANALYSIS SARAH MARIE BRUNO CMS - CALTECH GROUP SUPERVISORS: ADOLF BORNHEIM, LINDSEY GRAY, MARIA SPIROPULU.
Errors and Uncertainties
Charles University Prague Charles University Prague Institute of Particle and Nuclear Physics Absolute charge measurements using laser setup Pavel Bažant,
Abstract Beam Test of a Large-area GEM Detector Prototype for the Upgrade of the CMS Muon Endcap System V. Bhopatkar, M. Hohlmann, M. Phipps, J. Twigger,
Beam Test of a Large-Area GEM Detector Prototype for the Upgrade of the CMS Muon Endcap System Vallary Bhopatkar M. Hohlmann, M. Phipps, J. Twigger, A.
1 April 2, 2004, Athena tutorial, FZU, PragueZdeňka Broklová SCT Simulation for CTB Status and HowTos Zdenka Broklova, Carlos Escobar, Peter Kodys.
The Luminosity Calorimeter Iftach Sadeh Tel Aviv University Desy ( On behalf of the FCAL collaboration ) June 11 th 2008.
Calculate distances and focal lengths using the mirror equation for concave and convex spherical mirrors. Draw ray diagrams to find the image distance.
The Muon g-2 Experiment – Investigating how the spin of a muon is affected as it moves through a magnetic field Astrid Rodrigues.
Beam collimation in the transfer line from 8 GeV linac to the Main Injector A. Drozhdin The beam transfer line from 8 GeV Linac to the Main Injector is.
18 Sep 2008Paul Dauncey 1 DECAL: Motivation Hence, number of charged particles is an intrinsically better measure than the energy deposited Clearest with.
IDS120j WITHOUT RESISTIVE MAGNETS SEMGENTATION STUDIES FOR BP#2 WITHIN FIRST CRYOSTAT AND RIGHT FLANGE OF Hg POOL INNER VESSEL ( 20 cm GAPS AND 15.8 g/cc.
Chapter 19 Magnetism. Magnetism is one of the most important fields in physics in terms of applications. Magnetism is closely linked with electricity.
Mitchell Yu Carol Guimaraes Arturo Fiorentini York University 2013/11/22 NuStorm Near Detector Flux Study.
Unit 3 Guided Notes. Box and Whiskers 5 Number Summary Provides a numerical Summary of a set of data The first quartile (Q 1 ) is the median of the data.
North Carolina State University Spring What You Will Learn:  Define Orthographic Projection.  Correctly label the placement of the six standard.
Iterative local  2 alignment algorithm for the ATLAS Pixel detector Tobias Göttfert IMPRS young scientists workshop 17 th July 2006.
Beam test Analysis Micromegas TPC by Wenxin Wang.
OPERATED BY STANFORD UNIVERSITY FOR THE U.S. DEPT. OF ENERGY 1 Alexander Novokhatski April 13, 2016 Beam Heating due to Coherent Synchrotron Radiation.
An update on ECAL simulations
Analysis of LumiCal data from the 2010 testbeam
Physics 212 Lecture 14 Biot-Savart Law :05.
Comparison of GAMMA-400 and Fermi-LAT telescopes
GLAST Large Area Telescope:
SIT AND FTD DESIGN FOR ILD
Warm Up Problem of the Day Lesson Presentation Lesson Quizzes.
How to Use a Protractor.
Warm Up Problem of the Day Lesson Presentation Lesson Quizzes.
Adjusting the Tab size.
Combine Test Beam 2004 SCT Modules in Space Draft
Adjusting the Tab size.
Presentation transcript:

1 June 29, 2004, SCT Week SCT Simulation for CTB2004 Zdenka Broklova, Peter Kodys, Carlos Escobar Special thanks to Thijs Cornelissen, Grant Gorfine, Pavel Nevski, Pavel Reznicek, Sasha Rozanov, Manuel Gallas, Vakho Tsulaia and many others for their help. Status and results are summarized on

2 June 29, 2004, SCT Week Overview SCT layout for CTB and explanation of coordinate systems Implementation in Athena SCT_TestBemDetDescr package - latest SCT settings (in NOVA 8.3.0) - position and/or position corrections can come from external file

3 June 29, 2004, SCT Week Checking geometry I. comparison with Peter Kodys ROOT-based macro module in the center of SCT box and particle beam (along x axe) was perpendicular to module using Gauss profile source of 5000 pions (180 GeV), width 80  m 15 points on strips for both sides of each module = 5 strips using 3 points on each of them (10%, 50% and 90% of effective strip length), all ends of these strips were checked as well Example: Outer module, top side, strip 192, 50% of length

4 June 29, 2004, SCT Week Checking geometry II. strip values are converted into  m using average pitch value 80  m bigger error occurs for strip ends, where the statistics is lower because about half of number of particle was not detected by strips and the position of strip ends is known less precise (gartering ring influence, edge effects, … not included in Peter’s macro) all checked strips are in proper position (with precision about 1  m) Histograms of differencies between expected and found strip positions

5 June 29, 2004, SCT Week Checking geometry III. particles were shot along the strip line with step 5  m, the precision including error from line equation calculation is about 10  m along the strip and 5  m in direction perpendicular to the strips insensitive margin around sensor as well as gap between both sensors has correct size

6 June 29, 2004, SCT Week Strip numbering Front electronics strip numbering follows these rules: sum of strip numbers which are crossed by perpendicular particals should be always near 767 on both module sides, master chip is always positioned on left side of the hybrid (if you look from hybrid to sensors, in pictures there is a small arrow labelling it) and there is the strip number 0 on this edge of the sensor Offline software strip numbering follow these rules: strip numbers increase with  coordinate (on all types of modules and both sensors) top side of module (with connectors in hybrid) is marked 1, back side is side 0 there is no difference between top and bottom side of modules in offline software sometimes offline and electronics numbering of the strips on the same module side is inverted by formula StrNo_offline = 767 – StrNo_electronics byte convertor provides the conversion from front electronics strip numbering to offline conventions

7 June 29, 2004, SCT Week Energy losses average energy losses of 50 GeV mions outer module + 10 cm of air

8 June 29, 2004, SCT Week Future plans