sphenix-maps-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: sPHENIX MAPS tracker discussion
List archive
- From: Christof Roland <christof.roland AT cern.ch>
- To: Mickey Chiu <chiu AT bnl.gov>
- Cc: "Chiu, Mickey" <chiu AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>, "sphenix-intt-l AT lists.bnl.gov" <sphenix-intt-l AT lists.bnl.gov>, Sanghoon Lim <Sanghoon.Lim AT Colorado.EDU>, Molly Taylor <mitay AT mit.edu>, sphenix-maps-l <sphenix-maps-l AT lists.bnl.gov>, "Todoroki, Takahito" <todoroki AT rcf.rhic.bnl.gov>
- Subject: Re: [Sphenix-maps-l] Magic radii for INTT layers
- Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 15:21:09 +0200
Hi Mickey,
I tested a INTT configuration with 2 layers, both with rphi resolution, i.e type 1 in Tony's nomenclature
with radii of:
layer 1: 12.676 and 13.179
layer 2: 15.1183 and 15.6
This gives the best performance for the extrapolation precision to the TPC I have seen so far.
Would a configuration with layer positions in this ballpark be mechanically feasible?
If yes we will do more detailled studies with this setup file.
Thanks for your input
Cheers
Christof
On 18. Oct 2018, at 16:39, Mickey Chiu <chiu AT bnl.gov> wrote:Hi Tony,After talking to Rachid yesterday, I was about to send out exactly something like this. I think this is useful because we’ll actually simulate positions that are close to final, rather than choosing a random radius.My only comment would be that you do need to have some sort of support structure to hold the detector in place, as well as install it. Right now our solution is a rail system, and the outer limit available for the INTT is 15.7 cm. Thus, within the current design limitations, the outermost layer would betype 0 - 15.0846type 1 - 15.1183According to what I see, we should be able to push out the rails by 0.5 cm (Dan Cacace disagrees a little). So if we can push out the rails by 0.5 cm, you can pick the next step out in the radial location.MickeyOn Oct 17, 2018, at 5:32 PM, Anthony Frawley <afrawley AT fsu.edu> wrote:Hi All,I made a little macro to estimate the best sensor radius to use in the tracking macro to get close packing of the ladders. It prints this out as a function of the number of ladders in a layer. If you want to play with it, the macro is at:/sphenix/user/frawley/macros_newTPC_june6/macros/macros/g4simulations/calculate_optimum_ladder_radii.CThe output is as follows, where I have indicated the number of ladders presently used for the default configuration with an arrow. The number in parenthesis after the arrow is the radius presently used for the default configuration in the tracking macro. The radii from my macro are within about 0.02 cm for those cases.Ladder type 0 ladder_rphi 2.55 clearance rphi 0.0365
nladders 17 sensor_radius 6.85152 <==== (macro: 6.876)
nladders 18 sensor_radius 7.26318
nladders 19 sensor_radius 7.67483
nladders 20 sensor_radius 8.08649
nladders 21 sensor_radius 8.49814
nladders 22 sensor_radius 8.90979
nladders 23 sensor_radius 9.32145
nladders 24 sensor_radius 9.7331
nladders 25 sensor_radius 10.1448
nladders 26 sensor_radius 10.5564
nladders 27 sensor_radius 10.9681
nladders 28 sensor_radius 11.3797
nladders 29 sensor_radius 11.7914
nladders 30 sensor_radius 12.203
nladders 31 sensor_radius 12.6147
nladders 32 sensor_radius 13.0263
nladders 33 sensor_radius 13.438
nladders 34 sensor_radius 13.8496
nladders 35 sensor_radius 14.2613
nladders 36 sensor_radius 14.673
nladders 37 sensor_radius 15.0846
nladders 38 sensor_radius 15.4963
nladders 39 sensor_radius 15.9079
nladders 40 sensor_radius 16.3196
nladders 41 sensor_radius 16.7312
nladders 42 sensor_radius 17.1429
Ladder type 1 ladder_rphi 3.8 clearance rphi 0.0365
nladders 11 sensor_radius 6.56998
nladders 12 sensor_radius 7.18058
nladders 13 sensor_radius 7.79117
nladders 14 sensor_radius 8.40177
nladders 15 sensor_radius 9.01237 <======= (macro: 8.987)
nladders 16 sensor_radius 9.62297
nladders 17 sensor_radius 10.2336
nladders 18 sensor_radius 10.8442 <======= (macro: 10.835)
nladders 19 sensor_radius 11.4548
nladders 20 sensor_radius 12.0654
nladders 21 sensor_radius 12.676 <======= (macro: 12.676)
nladders 22 sensor_radius 13.2866
nladders 23 sensor_radius 13.8972
nladders 24 sensor_radius 14.5078
nladders 25 sensor_radius 15.1183
nladders 26 sensor_radius 15.7289
nladders 27 sensor_radius 16.3395
nladders 28 sensor_radius 16.9501
nladders 29 sensor_radius 17.5607
nladders 30 sensor_radius 18.1713
nladders 31 sensor_radius 18.7819
nladders 32 sensor_radius 19.3925Note that these are the radii that should be used for the inner sublayer of an overlapping pair of sublayers. The second overlapping layer should have the same number of ladders, and a radius larger by about 0.6 to 0.5 cm (decreasing a little as the layer radii increase).CheersTony
-
Re: [Sphenix-maps-l] Next Meeting of the Inner Tracker Task Force,
Christof Roland, 10/09/2018
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
-
[Sphenix-maps-l] Next Meeting of the Inner Tracker Task Force,
Christof Roland, 10/16/2018
-
Re: [Sphenix-maps-l] Next Meeting of the Inner Tracker Task Force,
Huang, Jin, 10/17/2018
-
[Sphenix-maps-l] Magic radii for INTT layers,
Anthony Frawley, 10/17/2018
-
Re: [Sphenix-maps-l] Magic radii for INTT layers,
Mickey Chiu, 10/18/2018
-
Re: [Sphenix-maps-l] Magic radii for INTT layers,
Christof Roland, 10/26/2018
-
Re: [Sphenix-maps-l] Magic radii for INTT layers,
nouicer, 10/26/2018
- Re: [Sphenix-maps-l] Magic radii for INTT layers, nouicer, 10/26/2018
-
Re: [Sphenix-maps-l] Magic radii for INTT layers,
Mickey Chiu, 10/27/2018
- [Sphenix-maps-l] Magic radii for INTT layers, nouicer, 10/29/2018
- Re: [Sphenix-maps-l] Magic radii for INTT layers, Anthony Frawley, 10/29/2018
- Re: [Sphenix-maps-l] Magic radii for INTT layers, Anthony Frawley, 10/30/2018
- Re: [Sphenix-maps-l] Magic radii for INTT layers, mxliu, 10/31/2018
-
Re: [Sphenix-maps-l] Magic radii for INTT layers,
nouicer, 10/26/2018
-
Re: [Sphenix-maps-l] Magic radii for INTT layers,
Christof Roland, 10/26/2018
-
Re: [Sphenix-maps-l] Magic radii for INTT layers,
Mickey Chiu, 10/18/2018
-
[Sphenix-maps-l] Magic radii for INTT layers,
Anthony Frawley, 10/17/2018
-
Re: [Sphenix-maps-l] Next Meeting of the Inner Tracker Task Force,
Huang, Jin, 10/17/2018
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.