correlation of ho signal with dt
DESCRIPTION
Gobinda Majumder T.I.F.R. Correlation of HO signal with DT. Reconstruction of muon tracks and extrapolation to HO HO signals in different time slices Signal and cross talks Conclusion. Drift Chamber information. Do not have data base for all runs - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
1
Correlation of HO signal with DT
Gobinda MajumderT.I.F.R.
• Reconstruction of muon tracks and extrapolation to HO
• HO signals in different time slices
• Signal and cross talks
• Conclusion
2
Drift Chamber information• Do not have data base for all runs
• Only databases from Run# 2377 (Bon) and Run#2255 (no field for MTCC-I)
• Reconstruct DTRechit → DTRecSegment2D→DTRecsegment4D
• 3.8T field (Run # 2559-2618): Use StandaloneMuon reconstruction code (modified for MTCC, but field map is for 4 Tesla) and then extrapolate to HO (only 30 cm away)– Extrapolation without any information of database
• No field case (Run # 2476-2552): Use low uniform magnetic field (200 Gauss) to reconstruct muon track.
• MTCC-II : 4412-4438 (4T) and 4446-4457 (ZERO) field : Only Ring2 timing are useful. 3986-4020 (3.8T), but many variation of timings and connections.
3
Cosmic ray muon spectrum in MTCC-I
• Muon trigger is only in sector 10 (Vertically downward)• Momentum has to scale down by a factor 3.8/4• Known problem : Ratio of μ+ and μ– are not 1.3• Use muon with P>4 GeV and |θ–π/2|<0.5, |φ+π/2|<0.5, ndof>30
P (GeV) θ (rad)
4
Pixel configuration of Ring1&Ring2
• No difference in Ring1 and Ring2
• Look for signal in nearby six pixel (if there and also readout)
5
Time profile of Sector10, examples
• Variation of timing within few time period
Phase-I YB1
Phase-II YB2 (3.8T)
Phase-II YB1 (3.8T)
Phase-I YB2
6
HO signals and cross talk
• Signals only in Sector-10, φ=270o
• Use only time slice 2-5 for MTCC-I
• MTCC-II : 3-6 for Ring-I and 4-7 for Ring-2
• Pedestal is obtained from a single run, e.g., run# 3986 for data at 3.8T in phase-II
• Signal to the extrapolated HO towers as well as nearest towers (pixel and physical position of tower)
• To check random noise use same pixel in Ring-1(2), when extrapolated muon on Ring-2(1)
• To have better accuracy of extrapolation, events are selected where muon hits inside 10cm of an edge of HO tile
7
Stability of pedestals
• Pedestal values are stable over MTCC run period
Pedestal of all HO pixels for run# 3334-3338
Variation of pedestal for different runs (two of them)
Run # Run #
8
Signal in geometrically nearby tower
η=–1 Φ=–1
η=0 Φ=–1
η=+1 Φ=–1
η=0 Φ=0
η=+1 Φ=0
η=–1 Φ=0
η=–1 Φ=+1
η=0 Φ=+1
η=+1 Φ=+1
• There are some +ve signals in geometrycally nearby towers, due to extrapolation or pixel cross talk or both ?
-10 (fC) 20
-10 (fC) 20
-10 (fC) 20
-10 (fC) 20
-10 (fC) 20
-10 (fC) 20
-10 (fC) 20
-10 (fC) 20
-10 (fC) 20
9
Signal in geometrically nearby tower,but in different RM (ZERO field)
• Projection is not perfect, Muon reco/Extrapolation ?
Projected φ=55
Signal in Φ=56
Projected φ=56
Signal in Φ=55
∆η=–1 ∆η=0 ∆η=+1
fC
fC fC
fCfC
fC
10
Signal in geometrically nearby tower,but in different RM (3.8T field)
• Projection is not perfect, Muon reco/Extrapolation ?
Projected φ=55
Signal in Φ=56
Projected φ=56
Signal in Φ=55
∆η=–1 ∆η=0 ∆η=+1
fC
fCfCfC
fCfC
11
Uncorrelated noise level (muon in YB1,signal in YB2)
• In YB+1 case, we see some noise in presence of magnetic field
B=0 YB=1
B=0 YB=2
B=3.8TYB=2B=3.8T
YB=1
fC
fCfC
fC
12
Signals in towers of nearest pixel, Ring1 without any field (H,15)
• Little signal in nearby pixel
Up left
Up right
ProjectedRight
Left
Bot Left Bot
rightAll six
QADC (fC)
13
Signals in towers of nearest pixel, Ring1 with B=3.8T (H,15)
• Not much cross-talk, but signal height gone down
Up left
Up right
ProjectedRight
Left
Bot Left Bot
rightAll six
QADC (fC)
14
Signals in towers of nearest pixel, Ring2 with 3.8T (H,15)
• Little signal in up-right pixel
Up left
Up right
ProjectedRight
Left
Bot Left Bot
rightAll six
QADC (fC)
15
• Statistical error ~1-3%. Total cross talk is 5-10%.
Phase I data : Sector 10 @ZERO field
16
Phase I data : Sector 10 @3.8T field
• Cross talk increase to ~15% for ring 1
17
Phase II data : Sector 10 @ZERO field
18
Phase II data : Sector 10 @4.0T field
• No visible change in signal and cross-talk
19
Comparison of means with and without B-field
• There is no effect in ring-2, but ring-1 signal has gone down by a factor ~2, whereas cross talk is only about 10-25%
20
Comparison of HO signal and pedestal width in TB2006 & MTCC-I (no filed)
• Signal distribution is fitted with a (Gaussian (for ped)+Gaussian convoluted Landau (signal) in TB2006, for MTCC signal is fitted with only Gaussian convoluted Landau function
TB2006 MTCC
fC
fC
fC
fC
Pedestal Pedestal
Signal Signal
21
• qw
HO signal and pedestal width in TB2006
Sigma peak/sigma
22
HO signal and pedestal width in MTCC(zero field)
• Signal@ZERO field is comparable to TB2006 signal. Though signals are not consistent (in TB06 muons cover more path in the scintillator)
23
Conclusion
• There is negligible cross-talk in Ring-2 pixel (~0.2T)
• Ring-1 pixel shows increase in cross-talk of the level ~10% (0.3T)
• Similarly uncorrelated noise is very low ~4×10–4
• Irrespective of cross-talk, total signal has gone down with magnetic field.
24
• Many test on time slice, half of RM were not connected etc.
25
HO signal and pedestal width in MTCC(3.8T field)
26
27
Angle between Bz/By vs z, important to eliminate HPD xtalk
28
2000, 2003 preditions vs 2006 Hall probe, By
Field value also changes !
Field less than0.2T (2kG) needed to have no discharges in HO
29
Bfield measurements with moving Hall probes (vladimir epshteyn, slava)
YB/1
-0.5-0.4-0.3-0.2-0.1
00.1
0 500 1000 1500 2000
Distance, mm
B, T
Bx By Bz
YB/2
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
-2500 -2000 -1500 -1000 -500 0
Distance, mmB,
T
Bx, T By, T Bz, T
Hall probes installed during mtcc1/mtcc2 shutdowndata taken at 3.8T (Wednesday morning, oct-25-2006)And at 4.0T (Monday, oct-31-2006)
0,4T is no good,We want <0.2 T, need to displace box by ~70 cm
70cm