sPHENIX EMCal discussion

[EdwardOBrien <eobrien AT bnl.gov>]

    Dear pCDR authors,
      One comment from the PMG that there is no need to respond
    to is that there are too man theory plots in Chapter 1. The
    Chapter has the appropriate length and depth of physics
    discussion for this type of document.

    Ed


On 10/12/2015 11:52 PM, John Haggerty wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Here are some comments from Elke in her role on the sPHENIX Project
> Management Group (PMG) on an early snapshot of pCDR to add to our list
> of corrections and additions we're working on.  If you've contributed to
> the pCDR, look through them for things you can correct or add if they
> haven't been addressed yet, and I'll do so as well as we try to finalize
> the document.
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject:        Comments to Draft sPHENIX pCDR
> Date:   Mon, 12 Oct 2015 23:16:39 -0400
> From:   Aschenauer Elke-Caroline <elke AT bnl.gov>
> CC:     Aschenauer Elke-Caroline <elke AT bnl.gov>, Haggerty, John
> <haggerty AT bnl.gov>, Kotcher, Jonathan <kotcher AT bnl.gov>, Lissauer, David
> <lissauer AT bnl.gov>, Mueller, Berndt <bmueller AT bnl.gov>, O'Brien, Edward
> <eobrien AT bnl.gov>, Makdisi, Yousef I <makdisi AT bnl.gov>, Ma, Hong
> <hma AT bnl.gov>, Thomas Roser <roser AT bnl.gov>, Pile, Philip H
> <pile AT bnl.gov>, Dunlop, James C <dunlop AT bnl.gov>, Christie Bill
> <christie AT bnl.gov>, Mills, James A <mills AT bnl.gov>
>
> Dear all,
>
> so I went through the pCDR and it is not clear how to best comment on it
> as still many chapters are not complete.
>
> But here are a couple of high level comments I have going through the
> document in not super detail.
>
> One general remark, the document is most likely to long especially as
> there are only 3 weeks left and the document has not yet been submitted
> to the committee.
> As there is no management, cost and schedule section, it is very
> difficult to see how questions like the critical path for the project
> and per detector component handled.
>
> In general it would be good that for the detectors the design is
> advanced the level of detail is consistent, currently it seems that this
> is not the case.
> Is there a unified approach on test beams, building of prototypes and so
> on for the coming years per detector component.
>
> I'm missing a section on safety.
>
> Chapter 1:
> ========
> As the document is for a more technical committee I think chapter 1 has
> to many "theory" plots instead of plots showing truly the sPHENIX
> performance.
> This means I give a plot which shows the statistical precision  can
> obtain on a observables which needs to be measured to address a certain
> theoretical question.
> It would be even better if a before and after sPHENIX data could be
> shown, but I understand that this is difficult in HI physics as many
> models don't even provide uncertainty bands which could be reduced by
> new data.
> But if there are 1 or 2 observables this would be possible it would be
> good to have these plots.
>
> The assumptions how to take the data sets are missing
>
> Chapter 2:
> ========
> page 25 is not one of the main requirement that you need such a high DAQ
> rate, that you want to take minbias events to avoid any type of bias
> through the trigger.
>
> Chapter 2.2:
> =========
> is there any plot to show the impact on the jet reconstruction on the
> calorimeter segmentation? If yes I would include it.
>
> Chapter 3:
> ========
> - what are the consequences if a magnet quench happens to the different
> detector components, have any precautions for this been included in the
> design?
>
> Chapter 4:
> ========
> - Does the measurement of the upsilon family not also put a limit on the
> radiation length of the tracker material?
>
> To switch between SI-Tracker, TPC and something else makes it very hard
> to read.
> I would make one section Si, next one TPC and last one alternative with
> identical structures
>
> Silicon:
> - what are the requirements on number of Si-layers to keep the number of
> ghost tracks low and the tracking efficiency high, what is the built in
> redundancy
> - how can any work on the Si-Pixel be done in FY2016, if we are running
> till july and all needs to be unmounted.
> - what is the radiation length, what are the alignment requirements. How
> are the most outer layers kept stable and constant to keep alignment.
>
> TPC:
> - why are the requirements from sPHENIX different then the ones from
> ALICE? Summarize this crisply in a table
> - what is the manpower involved in the current TPC design and how does
> it compare with the ALICE effort.
> -which assumptions have been used for the 25 kHz A+A collisions rate
>
> Alternative tracking:
> - Has anybody in the collaboration experience with MAPS ?
>
> Chapter 5:
> ========
> are there studies which really show any influence of the detector
> determining the underlying event. I read a lot of arguments but see no
> proof of the importance of them.
> How can it be that cracks are a problem because of missing energy, but
> the double projective design which leads to loss in the electromagnetic
> energy
> the plots are to small
> unfortunately all the info on the needed gain stabilization and how the
> ECAl is used in the trigger is missing.
> What are the calibration methods
> What is the fraction of the shower loses due to the 2d geometry.
> the caption of fig 5.23 does not fit the figure
> there is still quite some text missing to describe the figures and the
> performance
> how can the ECAl SIPMs and readout electronics be serviced
>
> Chapter 6:
> ========
> has the large constant term in figure 6.31 been understood
> has the difference between some MC and test beam results been understood
> how can the HCAl SIPMs and readout electronics be serviced
> here is still quite some text missing to describe the figures and the
> performance
>
> cheers elke
>
> On Oct 6, 2015, at 8:56, Capasso, Frances <capasso AT bnl.gov
> <mailto:capasso AT bnl.gov>> wrote:
>
> > Hello:
> > Please send comments to Ed O’Brien on both the pCDR and on the HCAL
> > outline talk.
> > Thank you, FranJ
> > Fran Capasso
> > Assistant to the Associate Laboratory Director
> > Nuclear and Particle Physics
> > Brookhaven National Laboratory
> > 20 Pennsylvania Street
> > P.O. Box 5000, Building 510F
> > Upton, NY 11973
> > Phone: 631.344.3830
> > Fax:       631.344.5820
> > Email: capasso AT bnl.gov <mailto:capasso AT bnl.gov>
> > *From:*Lissauer, David
> > *Sent:*Tuesday, October 06, 2015 8:10 AM
> > *To:*Capasso, Frances
> > *Subject:*FW: Draft sPHENIX pCDR
> > Hi Fran,
> >    Can you please dist to the PMG.
> >     Please send comments to Ed O’Brien on both the pCDR and on the HCAL
> > outline talk.
> >    Thanks, David.
> > ********************
> > /David Lissauer/
> > /Deputy Associate Lab Director for Nuclear and Particle Physics/
> > /Brookhaven National Lab./
> > /Lissauer AT bnl.gov <mailto:Lissauer AT bnl.gov>/
> > /1-631-344-4864 (office)/
> > 1-631-294-5089 (Cell)
> > <pCDR_Comments_100515.doc><Hadronic_Calorimetry092415.pdf><sphenix_pcdr_20151005.pdf>
>     ( `,_' )+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=
>      )    `\                                                     -
>     /    '. |                                                     +
>     |       `,              Elke-Caroline Aschenauer               =
>      \,_  `-/                                                       -
>      ,&&&&&V         Brookhaven National Lab                         +
>     ,&&&&&&&&:       Physics Dept.,            25 Corona Road         =
> ,&&&&&&&&&&;      Bldg. 510 /2-195          Rocky Point, NY,        -
> |  |&&&&&&&;\     20 Pennsylvania Avenue                 11778       +
> |  |       :_) _  Upton, NY 11973                                     =
> |  |       ;--' | Tel.:  001-631-344-4769   Tel.:  001-631-569-4290    -
> '--'   `-.--.   |                           Cell:  001-757-256-5224     +
>       \_    |  |---'                                                        =
>         `-._\__/     Mail: elke AT bnl.gov <mailto:elke AT bnl.gov>
> elke.caroline AT me.com <mailto:elke.caroline AT me.com>          -
>
> =-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=