University of Wisconsin-Madison ME+1 hSLM Fits James N. Bellinger University of Wisconsin-Madison 3 December 2008
Summary Fits converge using Field on and field off data from CRAFT DCOPS data Link disk fit positions Link laser sensor data Z1 (distance to MAB) sensor data Field on and field off data from CRAFT Small bug remains with Z positions James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
Model x 6 DCOPS laser Z1 sensor: Transfer plate to MAB MAB YE+1 Illuminates 4 DCOPS ME+1/3 MAB YE+1 Need to refine Z at this point x 6 ME+1/2 Measures ME+1/2 Measures MAB Ignore ME+1/1 in this model Link laser: prism makes 2 lines James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
Some massaging required Raw sensor values for PT1 Z1 Distance from Transfer to MAB Select an appropriate region, and use the average value. There is some drift Ramping field 3.8T James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
Positions Photogrammetry targets Chamber centers Cocoa Field Off (at end of CRAFT) to PG values Direct comparison only Chamber centers Field Off to Field On Field Off to Ideal Direct comparison and removing overall shifts Field On to Ideal James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
PG Targets: ME+1/2 1.1mm 1.0mm 1.0mm 1.3mm 0.8mm X 1.0mm Y James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
PG Targets: ME+1/2 Z PROBLEM: Inconsistency in the ideal target positions, and Cocoa Z definition. Investigating; should be solved by end of the day. James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
PG Targets: ME+1/3 0.4mm 1.6mm 0.4mm 1.0mm Y X 0.7mm 1.4mm James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
PG Targets: ME+1/3 Z PROBLEM: Inconsistency in the ideal target positions, and Cocoa Z definition. Investigating; should be solved by end of the day. James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
Chamber Centers Ideal position Cocoa fit with field on Cocoa fit with field off No centers generated from PG targets yet for ME+1 James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
Chamber centers ME+1/2 Difference between field off and field on fit positions Center pulled in in Z by 8.1mm James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
Chamber centers ME+1/3 Difference between field off and field on fit positions No significant shift in chamber center in Z. Needs check! James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
Chamber centers in Z Ring 2 fits for Z Ring 3 fits for Z James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
Overall Shifts If a ring is rotated, its PG and chamber positions will reconstruct away from the ideal. Direct comparison of PG and COCOA fits is misleading because these rotations aren't taken into account—precision is better than it appears. James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
Removing Overall Shifts Want to know shift relative to ring Subtract off the overall misalignment of the disk/ring Look at relative shifts, esp vs position around ring Measures variation in relative mounting MuonGeometryArrange tool Calculates shifts of chambers, builds an overall shift of the ring Shifts the ring and re-compares chamber shifts Bug prevents comparing incomplete geometries to each other James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
Cocoa vs Ideal ME+1/2 Remaining deviations after ring realignment Plot of deviations as vectors starting from chamber centers. Scale at top is length of longest deviation. Deviations of order mm from field off to field on. NOTE that the scale changes! James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
Cocoa vs Ideal ME+1/3 Deviations of order 0.1mm from ideal, and from field off to field on James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
Cocoa vs Ideal ME+1/2 Z Variation in Z around the ring after ring shift is removed James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
Cocoa vs Ideal ME+1/3 Z Variation in Z around the ring after ring shift is removed James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008
Z shifts around ring No obvious pattern to relative Z shifts Shifts are of order a few hundred microns James N. Bellinger 3-December-2008