Sphenix-tpc-l mailing list

[Thomas K Hemmick <tkhemmick AT gmail.com>]

HI Nikolai

Somehow, you assume that I don't listen to you...the opposite is true.  You mentioned this before and we calculated...

The volume is very small and the leak rate is unknown, but varies from infinity to zero.  The total volume of the honeycomb is 3 parts per mil of the TPC volume.  At 20% oxygen, this is a "load" of 0.56 parts per mil and much lower for water concentration  You can take various leak assumptions and the fact that the volume is finite (infinite leak means that the rate is identically zero and is no problem) and it does not look that it s a problem.

Tom

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 9:39 AM Nikolai Smirnov <nikolai.smirnov AT yale.edu> wrote:

   Dear Vicki and All,

I am sure that this "point" was discussed before in the collaboration.

But for some reason (questions during presentation) I would like to remind you that some attempts to use connecomb for gas detectors were not "so good".

(last example - ALICE OROC test vessel) The problem is a "permanent leak" from the gas inside of connecomb structure.

 It easy can organize the O2 and H2O in a "working" gas mixture.

 I hope you know how to fix this problem.

    Best regards, Nikolai.

 

Virus-free. www.avast.com

On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 1:42 PM Greene, Senta V <senta.v.greene AT vanderbilt.edu> wrote:

Hi all,

I am attaching a draft of the poster I propose to present at QM19 covering the TPC central membrane simulations.  Please review, comment, and (hopefully) approve as soon as possible, since I will leave for China on Wednesday, October 30.

Many thanks,
Vicki