Project

General

Profile

Feature #1770

Cerenkov Analysis

Added by Rogers, Chris over 8 years ago. Updated about 7 years ago.

Status:
Closed
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Start date:
06 October 2015
Due date:
% Done:

100%

Estimated time:

Description

Tracking analysis of Cerenkov data from weekend 25-29 September.


Files

#1

Updated by Rogers, Chris over 8 years ago

Ao raised the issue that TOF reconstruction shows TOF01 values that are lower than the corresponding D2 setting would lead one to believe. A few avenues to investigate

  1. The calculation of momentum based on TOF does not take into account increased path length of the incoming particles. Worth reading ch. 5 of http://mice.iit.edu/phd/MarkRayner_thesis.pdf
  2. The listed momentum in e.g. RunPlan20150925 Task 5 is momentum at the target. There is about 30 MeV/c momentum lost in intervening material.
  3. It is noted that the two tables in RunPlan20150925 Task 5 are inconsistent.
#2

Updated by Liu, Ao over 8 years ago

Comments on question 3:
It is noted that the two tables in RunPlan20150925 Task 5 are inconsistent.

Steve, David,
If you compare the current setting at p@target=300 MeV/c, you may see the difference. Where did your spreadsheet come from? Could you check where the inconsistency may come from?

#3

Updated by Liu, Ao over 8 years ago

I still don't know where the current setting in the upper spreadsheet came from, but I've checked David's setting.

I believe what David was using was the optics WITHOUT DS, however it was turned on when we took the data.

I'll request another set of data run tomorrow to apply the accurate DS current since we are now able to change the current in DS.

#4

Updated by Liu, Ao over 8 years ago

The photoelectron yield v.s. momentum for pions and muons for Ckov A and B. I assumed straight tracks, which should be UNDER-estimating the momentum. The correction will be added later.

The missing momentum band at p=200 MeV/c for pions is still mysterious.

The turn on momentum for A and B seems to be more or less consistent with data in MICE note
http://mice.iit.edu/micenotes/public/pdf/MICE0473/MICE0473.pdf

Durga's idea is to use data in other runs (not specifically for Ckov scan) to compensate the missing momentum bins, which could be the next step for the analysis.

Should there be any questions, please don't hesitate to ask.

Best,
Ao

#5

Updated by Rogers, Chris over 8 years ago

The turn on momentum for A and B seems to be more or less consistent with data in MICE note

Really?

I note that the bottom plot in Fig. 1 of 473 shows a clear turn on in Ckov-a at 270 MeV/c. In http://micewww.pp.rl.ac.uk/attachments/4973/Avrg___of_CkovA_pes_v.s._momentum_PID_13.png it looks like you are getting more light pretty clearly at 240-250 MeV/c.

Ckov-b I think looks pretty consistent by eye. It would be helpful to superimpose the two plots.

Another suggestion - you could repeat the analysis, with your analysis script, for the data taken in the Spring.

#6

Updated by Liu, Ao over 8 years ago

Hi Chris,

You are right. The CkovA does have a bigger discrepancy than CkovB, that's also why I said more or less.
I originally thought this could be partially due to the underestimation of particle orbit length, but note 473 did not consider this correction either. We'll need to discuss more about it.

Surely I can look at the data in the spring.

Cheers,
Ao

#7

Updated by Rogers, Chris over 8 years ago

TOF surveys mice notes:

418
468
471

#9

Updated by Rogers, Chris about 7 years ago

  • Status changed from Open to Closed
  • % Done changed from 0 to 100

Also available in: Atom PDF