sPHENIX HCal discussion

[Edouard Kistenev <kistenev AT bnl.gov>]

John, I missed to say that the observed signal are cosmic muons (there are three possible sources - light from the blue diode in the box, natural radioactivity of polystyrene etc and cosmic muons). The picture stays essentially the same when light is out so we see signal of cosmic muons and very clean environment. I laughed - Becquerel experiment with digital camera in place of emulsion plate.

I do not think this can be made quantitative enough for calibration/quality control purposes but … let’s see if my helper will come with something worth serious consideration. 

But the answer to the question which was asked is clear - TEDLAR is unbelievably good material, probably even too good for our purposes. Its like a layer of paint but does a really great job - 100% extinction and no signs of pin holes.

Edward

On Apr 26, 2018, at 11:42 AM, John Lajoie <lajoie AT iastate.edu> wrote:

Hi Edward,

    This is interesting, but I'm not sure how to make it quantitative. What we really care about is the average offset compared to a typical shower, right? Of course in the IR the tiles will be between the gaps and I think the lights are typically off when we are running. If you are worried about single photons then I would be surprised if this could be enough to affect a typical shower.

    Would a better measure be something done with the prototype and random triggers? You could average the baseline for a bunch of random triggers under different lighting conditions and see how much it moves. That would be much closer to the kind of effect we might experience.

John

On 4/26/2018 9:01 AM, Edouard Kistenev wrote:

With help of Rob Pisani we found this week that white tedlar used in demonstration wrap of HInner tiles is very leaky thing - lets a lot of light to get through. I got a bit anxious if black TEDLAR is that much better to protect our tiles from ambient light with one layer only 30mkm thick. 

So we did a not so simple a test (took a bit of creativity from tester). Unwrapped tile was placed on a sheet of TYVEK and covered with another sheet of TYVEK and single sheet of black TEDLAR (see attached pictures). A thick (black on inside) box with a hole one one side and a source of blue light inside the box was pressed against the tedlar spread over top of the tile. Fiber exits were viewed by digital camera. Visually no difference in the amount of light exiting fibers when light source on and off was observed. Digital camera is not a great single photon registrar so the signal from fibers, using image processor from camera - no signal was firmly established for the 4s exposure. But 8s exposure processed through software does show clear presence of aa accumulated single photon hits opposite the fiber exits. 

Estimated background -s <1hit in the signal aperture. Integral is unknown but I asked the kid who did this test ti dig on internet for means to estimate its value - then we will have a way to measure tile luminosity in 10 s .

Edward

Picture 1 - Illustration to the setup

Picture 2 - Processed image with 4s exposure

Picture 3 - Processed image with 8s exposure

<P1090860.jpeg><выдержка 4 сек.jpeg><выдержка 8 сек.jpeg><выдержка 8 сек фрагмент.jpg>

_______________________________________________
sPHENIX-HCal-l mailing list
sPHENIX-HCal-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-hcal-l

--

John Lajoie

Professor of Physics

Iowa State University

 

(515) 294-6952

lajoie AT iastate.edu

_______________________________________________
sPHENIX-HCal-l mailing list
sPHENIX-HCal-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-hcal-l