|
MUST2
SAMURAI_2018
S3-LEB-LPC
SUPERNEMO
MUGAST
EXPAND
SCALP
GALATRON
HiCARI
VELO
|
| MUGAST |
Not logged in |
|
|
|
 Sat Feb 29 10:34:31 2020, mugast ; valerian irene, e775s, OFFLINE, Software, Ongoing, CD2-Au, Issues in the EX reconstruction 
|
 Sat Feb 29 14:27:48 2020, mugast ; Valerian, e775s, OFFLINE, Software, Ongoing, CD2, Issues in the EX reconstruction 6x
| |
Sat Feb 29 15:53:12 2020, mugast ; Valerian, e775s, OFFLINE, Software, Ongoing, CD2-Au, Issues in the EX reconstruction
| |
Sat Feb 29 17:18:02 2020, mugast ; Valerian, Marlène , Pierre, e775s, OFFLINE, Software, Ongoing, CD2-Au, Issues in the EX reconstruction
|
|
|
Message ID: 5845
Entry time: Sat Feb 29 17:18:02 2020
In reply to: 5841
|
| Author: |
mugast ; Valerian, Marlène , Pierre |
| ExpNbr: |
e775s |
| Type: |
OFFLINE |
| Category: |
Software |
| Status: |
Ongoing |
| Target-Source: |
CD2-Au |
| Subject: |
Issues in the EX reconstruction |
|
|
| mugast ; Valerian wrote: |
| mugast ; Valerian wrote: |
| mugast ; valerian irene wrote: | We are currently working on the EX reconstruction which is off for detector 1, 3 and 7... One of our guess might be that there is an issue with the position of the detectors which gives error in theta... As the energy calibration is ok. Joined are :
- the Excitation energy for good detectors compared to all detectors,
- the theoretical kinematic line for the 3.57 state for each detectors,
- the excitation energy as a function of the laboratory angle (for this last spectra a clear dependency is visible for telescopes 1,3 and 7)
- the 3D view, which doesn't show clear problem in position... |
Testing changing the beam impact :
-Kine for beam impact = (0,0,0) for reference
-Kine for beam impact = (0,0,-5mm)
-Kine for beam impact = (0,0,+5mm)
-Ex vs ThetaLab for beam impact = (0,0,0) for reference
-Ex vs ThetaLab for beam impact = (0,0,-5mm)
-Ex vs ThetaLab for beam impact = (0,0,+5mm)
Red lines corresponds to Ex = 3.570 MeV and Ex = 4.070 MeV
To try to correct the problem i also offseted the beam in X and Y, but this doesn't solve the problem quite the opposite as it make the result worse for other detectors also... The fact that it is better at lower angle and worse at higher angle might mean that the detectors angles are tilted compared to the
surveyors measurments... I also tried to use the CAO positions for MG3 (see Detectors/mugast.detector) but it didn't solve the problem. |
By looking at the EnergyCalibrator.C, I saw that the extrapolation used to find the dead layer of aluminum is commented... This might be an answer to the problem... |
WE HAVE A SOLUTION!!! It seems that the order of the detectors in mugast.detector matters!! Now we start with a dummy MG8, then MG1, MG2, ... And everything is fine!! We think that is because it was taking the wrong calibration files (to be checked).
Joined are (for run 128,137,138,139,151,152,153):
-Ex vs ThetaLab
-Ex for all detectors
-Egamma vs Ex |
|
|
|
|
|
|