Some feedbacks from DRS data analysis (very preliminary) F. Scuri - I.N.F.N Sezione di Pisa RD52 – Collaboration Meeting – Pavia, March 12, 2013 F. Scuri.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

INFN Milano, Universita` degli Studi Milano Bicocca Siena IPRD May Testbeam results of the CMS electromagnetic calorimeter Alessio Ghezzi.

Advertisements

ATLAS Tile Calorimeter Performance Henric Wilkens (CERN), on behalf of the ATLAS collaboration.

DREAM Collaboration: Recent Results on Dual Readout Calorimetry. F.Lacava for the DREAM Collaboration Cagliari – Cosenza – Iowa State – Pavia – Pisa –

The performance of Strip-Fiber EM Calorimeter response uniformity, spatial resolution The 7th ACFA Workshop on Physics and Detector at Future Linear Collider.

Digital Filtering Performance in the ATLAS Level-1 Calorimeter Trigger David Hadley on behalf of the ATLAS Collaboration.

13/02/20071 Event selection methods & First look at new PCB test Manqi Ruan Support & Discussing: Roman Advisor: Z. ZHANG (LAL) & Y. GAO (Tsinghua))

1 Study of the Tail Catcher Muon Tracker (TCMT) Scintillator Strips and Leakage with Simulated Coil Rick Salcido Northern Illinois University For CALICE.

24-28 May, 2010 S. Mastroianni - 17th Real-Time Conference, Lisboa, Portugal ARGO-YBJ is a cosmic ray air shower detector based on a single layer of RPC.

1 Hadronic In-Situ Calibration of the ATLAS Detector N. Davidson The University of Melbourne.

GLAST LAT Project Test Beam Meeting, June 6, 2006 S. Funk 1/6 PS Positron Simulations Stefan Funk June 6, 2006.

The Transverse detector is made of an array of 256 scintillating fibers coupled to Avalanche PhotoDiodes (APD). The small size of the fibers (5X5mm) results.

The PEPPo e - & e + polarization measurements E. Fanchini On behalf of the PEPPo collaboration POSIPOL 2012 Zeuthen 4-6 September E. Fanchini -Posipol.

Adam Para, Fermilab, April 26, Total Absorption Dual Readout Calorimetry R&D Fermilab, Caltech, University of Iowa, Argonne National Laboratory,

1 S. E. Tzamarias Hellenic Open University N eutrino E xtended S ubmarine T elescope with O ceanographic R esearch Readout Electronics DAQ & Calibration.

Time development of showers in a Tungsten-HCAL Calice Collaboration Meeting – Casablanca 2010 Christian Soldner Max-Planck-Institute for Physics.

Reports from DESY Satoru Uozumi (Staying at DESY during Nov 11 – 25) Nov-21 GLDCAL Japan-Korea meeting.

Preliminary comparison of ATLAS Combined test-beam data with G4: pions in calorimetric system Andrea Dotti, Per Johansson Physics Validation of LHC Simulation.

14/02/2007 Paolo Walter Cattaneo 1 1.Trigger analysis 2.Muon rate 3.Q distribution 4.Baseline 5.Pulse shape 6.Z measurement 7.Att measurement OUTLINE.

The ATLAS Tile Calorimeter: Commissioning and Preparation for Collisions Presented by Oleg Solovyanov On behalf of the Tile Calorimeter Collaboration of.

Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Page 1 EC / PCAL ENERGY CALIBRATION Cole Smith UVA PCAL EC Outline Why 2 calorimeters? Requirements Using.

ATLAS Liquid Argon Calorimeter Monitoring & Data Quality Jessica Levêque Centre de Physique des Particules de Marseille ATLAS Liquid Argon Calorimeter.

Exclusive π 0 electroproduction in the resonance region. Nikolay Markov, Maurizio Ungaro, Kyungseon Joo University of Connecticut Hadron spectroscopy meeting.

The DRS2 Chip: A 4.5 GHz Waveform Digitizing Chip for the MEG Experiment Stefan Ritt Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland.

Shashlyk FE-DAQ requirements Pavel Semenov IHEP, Protvino on behalf of the IHEP PANDA group PANDA FE-DAQ workshop, Bodenmais April 2009.

08-June-2006 / Mayda M. VelascoCALOR Chicago1 Initial Calibration for the CMS Hadronic Calorimeter Barrel Mayda M. Velasco Northwestern University.

Apollo Go, NCU Taiwan BES III Luminosity Monitor Apollo Go National Central University, Taiwan September 16, 2002.

W-DHCAL Analysis Overview José Repond Argonne National Laboratory.

E. GaruttiCALICE collaboration meeting, Prague CERN Test beam (part II) Erika Garutti, Fabrizio Salvatore.

1 Yu. Guz HCAL status 22/06/ Yu. Guz HCAL 137 Cs calibration The 3 rd run in 2011 was performed at the technical stop, May-09. Two source passages,

LM Feb SSD status and Plans for Year 5 Lilian Martin - SUBATECH STAR Collaboration Meeting BNL - February 2005.

 -bin Number Tower Calibration (ch/GeV) Desired E T matched gain s  =1.0  =2.0 from electrons slopesMIPs EEMC Towers Calibration Run 3 p+p Used 4 methods.

Test beam preliminary results D. Di Filippo, P. Massarotti, T. Spadaro.

Mauro Iodice INFN Roma (Italy) Hall A Collaboration Meeting - JLAB May 18, 2004.

LC Power Distribution & Pulsing Workshop, May 2011 Super-ALTRO Demonstrator Test Results LC Power Distribution & Pulsing Workshop, May nd November.

(s)T3B Update – Calibration and Temperature Corrections AHCAL meeting– December 13 th 2011 – Hamburg Christian Soldner Max-Planck-Institute for Physics.

Nantes — 2008, July Analysis of results from EmCal beam test at CERN PS (and SPS) energies P. La Rocca & F. Riggi University & INFN Catania University.

1 Electronics Status Trigger and DAQ run successfully in RUN2006 for the first time Trigger communication to DRS boards via trigger bus Trigger firmware.

Reconstructing energy from HERD beam test data Zheng QUAN IHEP 3 rd HERD work shop Xi’an, 20 Jan

LHCf Detectors Sampling Calorimeter W 44 r.l, 1.6λ I Scintilator x 16 Layers Position Detector Scifi x 4 (Arm#1) Scilicon Tracker x 4(Arm#2) Detector size.

Status of the PSD upgrade - Status of the PSD cooling and temperature stabilization system - MAPD gain monitoring system - PSD readout upgrade F.Guber,

1 S, Fedele, Student Presentations, 2004/08/04S Amazing Title Slide Reworking the CES Cluster Reconstruction Algorithm By: Steve Fedele Advisor: Pavel.

DREAM December 07 BGO Data Analysis based on QADC Signals L. La Rotonda, E. Meoni, A. Policicchio, G. Susinno, T. Venturelli Calabria University & INFN.

DREAM Coll. Meeting, Rome 2009F. Bedeschi, INFN-Pisa Template Analysis of DRS Data  Motivations  Preliminary results F. Bedeschi, R. Carosi, M. Incagli,

MaPMT Readout with boardBeetle: First Experiences Beetle User meeting, Zürich, Stephan Eisenhardt University of Edinburgh  Testbeam experiences:

CALICE, CERN June 29, 2004J. Zálešák, APDs for tileHCAL1 APDs for tileHCAL MiniCal studies with APDs in e-test beam J. Zálešák, Prague with different preamplifiers.

Testbeam analysis Lesya Shchutska. 2 beam telescope ECAL trigger  Prototype: short bars (3×7.35×114 mm 3 ), W absorber, 21 layer, 18 X 0  Readout: Signal.

High Performance PbWO 4 - Lead Glass Hybrid Calorimeter at Jefferson Lab M. Kubantsev ITEP, Moscow, Russia/Northwestern University, Evanston, USA A. Gasparian.

Sensitivity of HO to Muons Shashi Dugad for HO group India-CMS Meeting 6-7 Oct

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.

 13 Readout Electronics A First Look 28-Jan-2004.

Chen-Ning Yang Tsung-Dao Lee Chien-Shiung Wu In 1972, PVDIS result from SLAC E122 was consistent with sin 2 q W =1/4, confirmed the Standard Model prediction;

A possible BGO Setup for the 2008 Beam Test Campaign

Preliminary Analysis of the New Focusing DIRC Prototype Beam Data

Analysis of LumiCal data from the 2010 testbeam

The PSD at Pb-Pb run PSD drawbacks at Ar beam

EZDC spectra reconstruction and calibration

Marcin Chrząszcz Cracow University of Technology Itamar Levy

HERD Prototype Beam Test

Ioannis Manthos Laboratory of Nuclear & Particle Physics

CALICE scintillator HCAL

Roberto Chierici - CERN

Pulse Shape Fitting Beam Test September, October CERN

Introduction The aim of this talk is to try to get a feeling on the expected degradation of performance of a calibration once we move from MonteCarlo.

A First Look J. Pilcher 12-Mar-2004

Sergey Abrahamyan Yerevan Physics Institute APEX collaboration

Status report Minjung Kim

Rick Salcido Northern Illinois University For CALICE Collaboration

WARP: fitting gamma signals

Steve Magill Steve Kuhlmann ANL/SLAC Motivation

Presentation transcript:

Some feedbacks from DRS data analysis (very preliminary) F. Scuri - I.N.F.N Sezione di Pisa RD52 – Collaboration Meeting – Pavia, March 12, 2013 F. Scuri 12/03/20131 Sorry for the poor quality of the slides, last minute assembly ……

DRS 16 chs S3 = ADC12 C3 = N.C S9 = ADC0 C9 = N.C S13= ADC8 S14= ADC1 S15= ADC2 S16= ADC4 S17 = ADC9 C13=ADC10 C14=ADC5 C15 = ADC6 C16=ADC7 C17 =ADC14 S21= ADC4 C21= ADC11 S27= ADC13 C27 = N.C. T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 T12 T13 T14 T15 T16 T17 T18 T19 T20 T21 T22 T23 T24 T25 T26 T27 T28 T29 T30 T31 T32 T33 T34 T35 T36 DRS readout geometry Trigger = ADC15 F. Scuri 12/03/20132 USB Personal laptop + DRS = “pocket DAQ” Physics and ped. Trigger from the RD52 DAQ

180 Gev pions on Tower 15; run 9350, RD-52 run started only to have trigger signal in time with the analog detector signal Calibration constants from SeeWock No cuts possbile ! Event writing rate on the host laptop not matching the timing of the RD52 DAQ. S15 / C15 analog signal attenuated with a passive attenuator to avoid ADC saturation (6dB (:2) or 12dB (:4), I didn’t mark on the logbook !) 30 seconds / event (only Scintillation) is the processing time in my laptop … == > Only a small fraction of the available statistics processed Data taking summary F. Scuri 12/03/20133

S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 (attenuated) S19 S20 S21 S22 S23 S25 S26 S27 S28 S29 Integrated Charge - Scintillation F. Scuri 12/03/20134 No tail in this distribution …. … uhmm…

S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 (attenuated) S19 S20 S21 S22 S23 S25 S26 S27 S28 S29 Saturation in the analog input ! Peak amplitude - Scintillation F. Scuri 12/03/20135

S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 (attenuated) S19 S20 S21 S22 S23 S25 S26 S27 S28 S29 Pulse time profiles Different average time profile Two component distribution F. Scuri 12/03/20136

Event 2: regular shape Event 3: “saturated signal” shape T15 and T16 S-time profiles F. Scuri 12/03/20137

40 ns signal charge integration window 20 ns tail charge integration window F. Scuri 12/03/20138 Time window regions

S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S19 S20 S21 S22 S23 S25 S26 S27 S28 S29 Charge integral ratio : tail window / signal window F. Scuri 12/03/20139 Non-Gaussian !

Ave: RMS: Ave: RMS: Ave : RMS: Ave: RMS: Ave : RMS: Ave : RMS: Ave : RMS: Ave : RMS: Ave : RMS: Almost constant average ratios and RMS in each ring ! Integrated charge ratio: distribution statistics F. Scuri 12/03/201310

Reconstructed position with the method of the center of mass of the energy deposition (S15 excluded) Reconstructed beam spot not centered: - Bad detector positioning or - Non perfect calibration or - Just the tilt effect ? F. Scuri 12/03/ mm

F. Scuri 12/03/ Next to do Look at the Cherenkov channels Check that there is no difference among channels in the ratio of charge integration regions Study the correlation of the ratio in scintillation vs C/S Very difficult, however, with the problems in the central tower T15 Think about some method to clean-up the sample by using timing information available with DRS