sphenix-cold-qcd-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: sPHENIX cold QCD topical group
List archive
Re: [Sphenix-cold-qcd-l] Next Cold QCD TG meeting Mon, Feb 4, at 8:30 pm EST
- From: "Lajoie, John G [PHYSA]" <lajoie AT iastate.edu>
- To: "Huang, Jin" <jhuang AT bnl.gov>
- Cc: "'sphenix-cold-qcd-l AT lists.bnl.gov'" <sphenix-cold-qcd-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
- Subject: Re: [Sphenix-cold-qcd-l] Next Cold QCD TG meeting Mon, Feb 4, at 8:30 pm EST
- Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 15:28:05 +0000
Hey Jin,
Very nice. We were trying to have only *two* types of light guides to simply manufacturing, but that yielded the central 7x7 fiber tower that Sasha was unhappy with, and in any case I don’t think it add too much to the cost or complexity to have three light guide styles. What I do like about this very much is that it keeps the assembly module-based, in that we are always dealing with 10cm x 10cm “supermodules” instead of trying to assemble across physical E864 towers.
As Sasha showed in his simulation results, averaging over towers that differ by one fiber cell in the horizontal or vertical dimension doesn’t seem to hurt you too much when you use the shower shape, so this method would likely work similarly (even though the towers are a little larger). In the long run, if we really did this, I suspect you would probably not want to average, especially in the eta 3-4 region, but actually deal with the complexity of the varying tower size. It’s possible the variation is all swamped by shower fluctuations, but simulations should show this.
So, while I think this is much better than what I showed at the meeting last night, it still implies a trade-off – we accept a varying tower size to simplify construction at the expense of complicating the analysis, or we complicate construction to keep a uniform tower size.
IMHO my preference would be to implement the 3-style array in simulation and for the test beam this year. That gets us going, and gives us time to use simulations to answer the question of just how big a problem a variable tower really is, or if we can develop ways to optimize. If we go forward with funding for the full fEMC in the future we might revisit this and reconsider a uniform tower size, but we would have some engineering resources at that point to better tackle the problem and it wouldn’t be much of an extrapolation from what we have tested.
Thoughts? If this seems OK I can modify the simulations and pass this on to Dan to do some ray tracing and make drawings for the light guides.
John
From: Huang, Jin <jhuang AT bnl.gov>
Hi, John
Thanks for pushing this idea forward. Attached is the 3-type 5x5-matrix lightguide layout I mentioned in the end of the meeting that could fit a 47x47-fiber E864 module.
Cheers
Jin
______________________________
Jin HUANG
Associate Physicist Brookhaven National Laboratory Physics Department, Bldg 510 C Upton, NY 11973-5000
Office: 631-344-5898 Cell: 757-604-9946 ______________________________
From: sPHENIX-cold-QCD-l <sphenix-cold-qcd-l-bounces AT lists.bnl.gov>
On Behalf Of Aidala, Christine
Dear all,
This is just a reminder of our Cold QCD TG meeting tomorrow (Monday, Feb 4) at 8:30 pm EST.
Christine
From: Aidala, Christine
Dear Cold QCD enthusiasts,
We will have a meeting on Monday, February 4th, 8:30 pm EST to discuss efforts by John Lajoie, Sasha Bazilevsky, and Joe Osborn towards a forward EMCal based on the E864 calorimeter sections.
The meeting is BlueJeans only (https://bluejeans.com/345777492) with two talks on the agenda so far https://indico.bnl.gov/event/5651/.
Overview of sPHENIX forward EMCal based on E864 calorimeter sections – John Lajoie Simulation studies for forward EMCal based on E864 calorimeter – Sasha Bazilevsky
Let me know if you’d like to be added to the agenda.
Best regards, Christine
-- Christine A. Aidala Associate Professor Department of Physics University of Michigan (734) 764-7611
|
-
Re: [Sphenix-cold-qcd-l] Next Cold QCD TG meeting Mon, Feb 4, at 8:30 pm EST,
Aidala, Christine, 02/03/2019
-
Re: [Sphenix-cold-qcd-l] Next Cold QCD TG meeting Mon, Feb 4, at 8:30 pm EST,
Huang, Jin, 02/04/2019
-
Re: [Sphenix-cold-qcd-l] Next Cold QCD TG meeting Mon, Feb 4, at 8:30 pm EST,
Lajoie, John G [PHYSA], 02/05/2019
- Re: [Sphenix-cold-qcd-l] Next Cold QCD TG meeting Mon, Feb 4, at 8:30 pm EST, Alexander Bazilevsky, 02/05/2019
-
Re: [Sphenix-cold-qcd-l] Next Cold QCD TG meeting Mon, Feb 4, at 8:30 pm EST,
Lajoie, John G [PHYSA], 02/05/2019
-
Re: [Sphenix-cold-qcd-l] Next Cold QCD TG meeting Mon, Feb 4, at 8:30 pm EST,
Huang, Jin, 02/04/2019
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.