US Beam Test Results and ORCA validation for CMS EMU CSC front-end electronics N. Terentiev Carnegie Mellon University CMS EMU Meeting, CERN June 18, 2005.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
CSC Test Beam Data Analysis Alexander Khodinov and Valeri Tcherniatine.
Advertisements

1 Simulation Status/Plans Malcolm Ellis Sci Fi Tracker Meeting Imperial College, 10 th September 2004.
1 VCI, Werner Riegler RPCs and Wire Chambers for the LHCb Muon System  Overview  Principles  Performance Comparison: Timing, Efficiency,
US FAST site test results – a global view from ROOT T. Ferguson, A. Korytov, N. Terentiev* EMU Meeting University of Florida 01/09/2004.
Victoria04 R. Frey1 Silicon/Tungsten ECal Status and Progress Ray Frey University of Oregon Victoria ALCPG Workshop July 29, 2004 Overview Current R&D.
US Some Preliminary Test Beam Results T. Ferguson, N. Terentiev*, I. Vorobiev CMS EMU Meeting Fermilab Oct , 2004.
US PtMurec and PtRec RMS for Pt=100 GeV muons N. Terentiev (Carnegie Mellon University) Fermilab Jan.11, 2005.
US CMS Collaboration Meeting, UC Riverside, May 19, Endcap Muons John Layter US CMS Collaboration Meeting May 19, 2001.
Rick Wilkinson New CSC Geometry u GEANT Simulation uses DDD Geometry è Uses active gas volumes u Digitization/Reconstruction adds a C++ geometry è Adds.
CMS Physics Meeting, Dec. 6, Analysis Note on the Validation of the ORCA Simulation of the Endcap Muon CSC Front-end Electronics S. Durkin -- Ohio.
US FAST site EMU CSC test results – a global view from ROOT N. Terentiev (Carnegie Mellon University) Fermilab July 23, 2004.
Track Fitting and Comparator Results Emu UC Davis Feb. 26, 2005 Yangheng Zheng University of California, Los Angeles  Motivation & Introduction.
1Calice-UK Cambridge 9/9/05D.R. Ward David Ward Compare Feb’05 DESY data with Geant4 and Geant3 Monte Carlos. Work in progress – no definitive conclusions.
US Test Beam Results Of Front End Timing T. Ferguson, N. Terentiev* (Carnegie Mellon University) CMS EMU Meeting University of California, Davis Feb 25.
US FAST site test results – a global view from ROOT T. Ferguson, A. Korytov, N. Terentiev* EMU Meeting University of Florida 01/09/2004.
US Test beam data analysis & validation of OSCAR/ORCA Tim Cox, UC Davis Nikolai Terentiev*, CMU CMS Physics Week Fermilab Apr , 2005.
Endcap Muon meeting: CMU, Oct 19, 2003 J. Hauser UCLA 1 CSC Trigger Primitives Test Beam Studies Main Test Beam 2003 Goals: Verify the peripheral crate.
US FAST site test results – a global view from ROOT T. Ferguson, A. Korytov, N. Terentiev* CMS EMU Meeting The Ohio State University April 16 – 17, 2004.
US Beam Test Results and ORCA validation for CMS EMU CSC front-end electronics N. Terentiev Carnegie Mellon University CMS EMU Meeting, Fermilab October.
Y. Karadzhov MICE Video Conference Thu April 9 Slide 1 Absolute Time Calibration Method General description of the TOF DAQ setup For the TOF Data Acquisition.
US LPC Muon Group CMSSW code development efforts N. Terentiev Carnegie Mellon University CMS EMU Meeting, Florida Institute of Technology February 17-18,
Analysis Meeting – April 17 '07 Status and plan update for single hadron scale check with minimum bias events N. Davidson.
Neutron Background Simulation R. Wilkinson. 2 Neutron Background Simulation Long-lived neutrons created, diffuse around collision hall They get captured.
US FAST site test results – a global view from ROOT T. Ferguson, A. Korytov, N. Terentiev* CMS EMU Meeting The Ohio State University April 16 – 17, 2004.
27 Jun 2005S. Kahn -- Tof/Ckov Status1 Status of TOF and Ckov Sub- packages in G4Mice Steve Kahn 27 June 2005.
US News from the LPC Muon Group E. James, M. Mulders, N. Terentiev* CMS EMU Meeting University of California, Davis Feb , 2005.
S. Durkin, USCMS-EMU Meeting, Oct. 21, 2005 Critical Data Errors S. Durkin The Ohio State University USCMS EMU Meeting, FNAL, Oct. 20, 2005.
US CMS Phase 2 R&D Discussion 30-July-2013 “Phase 2 muon R&D” J. Hauser, UCLA  Add redundancy (power) to trigger where most needed  First and innermost.
A data-driven performance evaluation method for CMS RPC trigger system & Study of Muon trigger efficiencies with official Tag & Probe package for ICHEP.
15 Dec 2010 CERN Sept 2010 beam test: Sensor response study Chris Walmsley and Sam Leveridge (presented by Paul Dauncey) 1Paul Dauncey.
VC Feb 2010Slide 1 EMR Construction Status o General Design o Electronics o Cosmics test Jean-Sebastien Graulich, Geneva.
Status of the CSC Track-Finder Darin Acosta University of Florida.
Marco Delmastro 23/02/2006 Status of LAr EM performance andmeasurements fro CTB1 Status of LAr EM performance and measurements for CTB Overview Data -
14/6/2000 End Cap Muon Trigger Review at CERN 1 Muon Track Trigger Processing on Slave and Hi-pT Boards C.Fukunaga/Tokyo Metropolitan University TGC electronics.
Muon LPC Meeting, 14 Sep Overview of Muon PRS Activities Darin Acosta University of Florida.
June 22, 2009 P. Colas - Analysis meeting 1 D. Attié, P. Colas, M. Dixit, Yun-Ha Shin (Carleton and Saclay) Analysis of Micromegas Large Prototype data.
A Study of Proton-Proton Collisions at the LHC The Ohio State University - Task A.2 B.G. Bylsma, L.S. Durkin, D. Fisher, J Gilmore, J.H. Gu, D. Larson,
Vertex 2005, Nikko Manfred Pernicka, HEPHY Vienna 1.
Apollo Go, NCU Taiwan BES III Luminosity Monitor Apollo Go National Central University, Taiwan September 16, 2002.
G4 Validation meeting (5/11/2003) S.VIRET LPSC Grenoble Photon testbeam Data/G4 comparison  Motivation  Testbeam setup & simulation  Analysis & results.
LM Feb SSD status and Plans for Year 5 Lilian Martin - SUBATECH STAR Collaboration Meeting BNL - February 2005.
Track Selection Performance of the CMS Cathode Strip Chamber Track Finder and Level 1 Trigger Kristin Beck Advisors: Dan Holmes, Darin Acosta 14 August,
T. Lari – INFN Milan Status of ATLAS Pixel Test beam simulation Status of the validation studies with test-beam data of the Geant4 simulation and Pixel.
USCMS Physics, May 2001Darin Acosta1 Status Report of PRS/  D.Acosta University of Florida Current U.S. activities PRS/  Activities New PRS organization.
Preliminary results on DT T0s in beam collisions J. Santaolalla, J. Alcaraz (+ help/suggestions from C. Battilana, C. Fouz)
US AFEB timing in CSCs in splash events, run N. Terentiev, CMU CSC Synchronization meeting Nov. 16, 2009, CERN.
1 Update on CompareTFandDMBLCTs.cc Analyzer that compares LCTs read out from the Track Finder (input FIFO) with those read out through the EMU data path.
US ALCT / AFEB Analog Test Results N.Bondar, T.Ferguson, N.Terentiev* EMU Meeting UCLA 01/10/2003.
TeV Muon Reconstruction Vladimir Palichik JINR, Dubna NEC’2007 Varna, September 10-17, 2007.
Overview of EMU Software Rick Wilkinson. Slice Test DAQ We succeeded in using Slice Test DAQ code to take test beam data, combining chamber and trigger.
Effects of Endcap Staging/Descoping D.Acosta University of Florida.
3/06/06 CALOR 06Alexandre Zabi - Imperial College1 CMS ECAL Performance: Test Beam Results Alexandre Zabi on behalf of the CMS ECAL Group CMS ECAL.
1 Methods of PSD energy calibration. 2 Dependence of energy resolution on many factors Constant term is essential only for energy measurement of single.
Resolution Studies of the CMS ECAL in the 2003 Test Beam
CMS muon detectors and muon system performance
Status of Full Simulation for Muon Trigger at SLHC
Pulse Shape Fitting Beam Test September, October CERN
Slice Test: Preliminary Data Analysis The Ohio State University
DAQMB/FEBs Readiness for First Beam
CSC Digi & RecHit Validation
CSC Trigger Primitives Test Beam Studies
° status report analysis details: overview; “where we are”; plans: before finalizing result.. I.Larin 02/13/2009.
Changes in Level 1 CSC Trigger in ORCA by Jason Mumford and Slava Valuev University of California Los Angeles June 11,
Updates & Rates in the Level-1 CSC Trigger Primitive code in ORCA
Reddy Pratap Gandrajula (University of Iowa) on behalf of CMS
Pre-installation Tests of the LHCb Muon Chambers
Engineering Design Review
The Ohio State University USCMS EMU Meeting, FNAL, Oct. 29, 2004
Global Trigger Finds Correct BX
° status report analysis details: overview; “where we are”; plans: before finalizing result.. I.Larin 02/13/2009.
Presentation transcript:

US Beam Test Results and ORCA validation for CMS EMU CSC front-end electronics N. Terentiev Carnegie Mellon University CMS EMU Meeting, CERN June 18, 2005

N. Terentiev (CMU) CMS EMU meeting, CERN June 18, Outline Motivation. CSC cathode strip pulse shape fit. Comparison with ORCA simulation. Conclusion.

N. Terentiev (CMU) CMS EMU meeting, CERN June 18, Motivation Why to validate ORCA CSC simulation: importance of realistic simulation of CSC input signals and electronics response (the coordinate and time resolution, L1 trigger primitives, pile-up, neutron background); ORCA simulates input and output CSC signals in great details based on the beam test data and available design parameters; no changes in relevant part of ORCA code since year 2000 (see latest status in CMS Note 2001/013 by R. Wilkinson and T. Cox); old (prototype) front-end electronics parameters are still in use in ORCA simulation; plenty of data available from recent 25 ns structured beam tests of CSC chambers with final set of front - end electronics; validation of ORCA simulation is a part of Physics TDR, Vol. 1.

N. Terentiev (CMU) CMS EMU meeting, CERN June 18, Motivation (cont’d) Latest developments : track fitting, comparator and cross-talk results from beam test data ( Y. Zheng, UCLA, Feb 2005 EMU meeting); pulser cross-talk measurements in SX5, S. Durkin, J. Gilmore, F. Geurts, April 2005, ; new code matching final cathode amplifier design and pulser cross- talk data, S. Durkin, OSU, May 2005, state.edu/~durkin/software/buckeye_utils/Buckeye.htm ; state.edu/~durkin/software/buckeye_utils/Buckeye.htm S. Durkin's code creating CSC track segments with use of Digis from 2003 and 2004 test beam data plus Y. Zheng's cross-talk and correlation code were committed by J. Mumford to CVS repository (EmuDAQ/AnalysisUtilities) and in use now in slice test at SX5; input and output signal simulation is now to be moved from ORCA to OSCAR package.

N. Terentiev (CMU) CMS EMU meeting, CERN June 18, CSC cathode strip pulse shape fit. How to compare cathode amplifier output signal in beam test data with ORCA simulation: amplitude of the output signal is sampled in a Switch Capacitor Array (SCA) in 8 time bins each 50 ns long; the 1-st SCA time bin defined as (L1 Accept) * LCT coincidence, details in note by A. Korytov, ; the phase of signal (time offset) in the beam test data is different in different CSC’s (different DMB/TMB settings); ORCA has its own phase too (max. SCA is always in the 5-th time bin); due to 25 ns beam structure and 50 ns SCA sampling period, can have two positions of signal in time (muon comes with odd/even L1 Accept); therefore fit the SCA pulse shape in beam test data and ORCA simulation data and compare relevant fit parameters; for direct data comparison with simulation choose the signals with the same phase.

N. Terentiev (CMU) CMS EMU meeting, CERN June 18, CSC cathode strip pulse shape fit (cont’d) Fitting function for signal from one cathode strip: semi-Gaussian S(t)~Q*T**4* exp(-T), Q = charge, ADC counts, T = (t-Ts)/T0, 4*T0 = peaking time, ns Ts = time offset, ns; good approximation for the top of the signal; note example with two pulses 25 ns apart and having max. SCA at one and the same SCA time bin.

N. Terentiev (CMU) CMS EMU meeting, CERN June 18, CSC cathode strip pulse shape fit (cont’d) Including strip to strip cross-talk: based on recent external pulser data taken at SX5 (S. Durkin, J. Gilmore, F. Geurts, April 2005), cross-talk from pulser data, convoluted by S. Durkin with ion drift time 1/(t+2.1) and a 50 ns square wave (drift electron arrival); hint from S. Durkin to use his function buckeye_pulse_full(t,P0,P1,Z1) approximating the cross-talk to ~1% near the peak; cross-talk from the strip with charge Q to the side strip: cross-talk = Q * Ct * Fc, Fc = buckeye_pulse_full(t,P0,P1,Z1)/N, N = fixed normalization factor, depending on P0,P1,Z1, Ct = cross-talk coefficient (to be fitted with the beam test data and ORCA simulation); separate fit of the cross-talk pulser data with free P0,P1,Z1 and Ct ( Q =1) yields Ct ~ 0.1, in agreement with beam test data.

N. Terentiev (CMU) CMS EMU meeting, CERN June 18, CSC cathode strip pulse shape fit (cont’d) Events selection: single hit in anode and cathode layer; pedestals as SCA in the first time bin (RMS=2.7); fit SCA using 3 time bins each from 3 cathode strips, 9 in total, with max. SCA time bin in the middle: Ql(-50),Ql(0),Ql(+50) - SCA for left strip, Qm(-50),Qm(0),Qm(+50) - SCA for middle strip, Qr(-50),Qr(0),Qr(+50) - SCA for right strip, where the largest SCA corresponds to max. charge deposition Qm(0) and the time bin is 50 ns long.

N. Terentiev (CMU) CMS EMU meeting, CERN June 18, CSC cathode strip pulse shape fit (cont’d) Fitting function for 9 SCA time bins in 3 strips: SCA_left(t) = Q_left *S+Ct*Fc*(0 + Q_middle) SCA_middle(t)= Q_middle*S+Ct*Fc*(Q_left + Q_right ) SCA_right(t) = Q_right *S+Ct*Fc*(Q_middle+ 0 ) where S – semi-Gaussian, Fc – cross-talk shape. Six fitted parameters (NDF=3): Q_left, Q_middle, Q_right, T0, Ts and Ct. for good measurement of the cross-talk coefficient Ct, select hits with large signal and close to the center of the middle strip: Q_middle > 200 Q_middle/(Q_left+Q_middle+Q_right) > 0.7

N. Terentiev (CMU) CMS EMU meeting, CERN June 18, CSC cathode strip pulse shape fit (beam test) Ct = (RMS) T0 = (RMS), ns

N. Terentiev (CMU) CMS EMU meeting, CERN June 18, CSC cathode strip pulse shape fit (beam test) Cathode strip SCA time offset Ts for one CSC layer and averaged over >= 4 CSC layers. The peaks are 25 ns apart.

N. Terentiev (CMU) CMS EMU meeting, CERN June 18, Comparison with ORCA simulation ORCA (for EMU CSC simulated digitization in full CMS detector, not yet available for beam test geometry): the single muon particle gun sample, Pt=100 GeV; used OSCAR versions 3_2_2 and ORCA versions 8_1_3 (newer versions have the same code for the CSC raw data). Events selection in ORCA simulation: cut 1.3 < EtaGen < 1.6 (~ as in the beam test); all ME234/2 CSC (Station 1 with ME1/1 CSC is excluded); Q_middle > 150, Q_middle/(Q_left+Q_middle+Q_right) > 0.7 to look at strong signal from track close to strip center. Fit by the same function.

N. Terentiev (CMU) CMS EMU meeting, CERN June 18, Comparison with ORCA simulation Ct = (RMS) T0 = (RMS), ns

N. Terentiev (CMU) CMS EMU meeting, CERN June 18, Comparison with ORCA simulation Beam test – almost no correlation between time offset Ts and cross- talk coefficient Ct. Select Ct at Ts>100 in beam test data and simulation for comparison.

N. Terentiev (CMU) CMS EMU meeting, CERN June 18, Comparison with ORCA simulation Beam test: Ct = (RMS). ORCA simulation: Ct = (RMS).

N. Terentiev (CMU) CMS EMU meeting, CERN June 18, Comparison with ORCA simulation Accuracy of the Ct parameter can be improved if use SCA data in the fit from 3 strips with 12 time bins instead of 9 (add the time bin with next to max. of the cross-talk signal to include the cross-talk peak): SCA PedestalPeaking timeT0 Crosstalk Ct ORCA 4.0(RMS) (RMS) (RMS) Beam test 2.7(RMS) (RMS) (RMS) Time Left Middle Right

N. Terentiev (CMU) CMS EMU meeting, CERN June 18, Conclusion The beam test data and ORCA simulation for the CSC cathode strip output pulses were compared using a fitted function and cross-talk from pulser data. Data and simulation seem to agree for the peaking time T0 and cross-talk coefficient Ct. To be confirmed with larger statistics. For future use the cross-talk coefficient should be found from pulser data and fixed. The ORCA code should be updated to include parameters from the final design of front-end electronics. Thanks to S. Durkin and T. Ferguson for helpful discussions.