Star-tpc-l mailing list

[James Dunlop <dunlop AT bnl.gov>]

Not sure the exact edge in run numbers, was never really written down, but

yes it's around that time before they removed the crossing angle.

You can try to reconstruct when really good data started

from the Runlog and starops mailing list (I just tried but

realized it's a bit more complicated than can be done in 5 minutes)

or ask Shengli and Zhangbu.  This was a really short run

with lots of things changing that ended in a holiday weekend.

--J

On Sep 13, 2024, at 8:01 AM, Fisyak, Yuri V <fisyak AT bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Jamie, by the early days do you mean days 180-182 ?

 

                                                              Yuri Fisyak

STAR                                           Phone: +1 631 344 3913
Brookhaven National Laboratory  Fax:    +1 631 344 4206
510A/1-161
http://www.star.bnl.gov/~fisyak       E-mail: fisyak AT bnl.gov

 

 

 

From: James Dunlop <dunlop AT bnl.gov>
Date: Friday, September 13, 2024 at 7:58 AM
To: Van Buren, Gene <gene AT bnl.gov>
Cc: Dunlop, James C <dunlop AT bnl.gov>, Fisyak, Yuri V <fisyak AT bnl.gov>, Videbaek, Flemming <videbaek AT bnl.gov>, Star-tpc L <Star-tpc-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Subject: Re: [[Star-tpc-l] ] timing shifts

All:

  Those early data with the crossing angle should really be marked bad and ignored.

This was an instance of something not working at all in the collider that caused

gigantic backgrounds both in the trigger and to the TPC.  The data are likely not recoverable.

--J

 

On Sep 12, 2024, at 11:48 PM, Van Buren, Gene <gene AT bnl.gov> wrote:

 

I'm going to make a comment here, but only to say that it is probably NOT the same issue...

 

I will remind that in Babu's SpaceCharge calibration work for that dataset, we were never satisfied with the calibration result for days 180-182. This I attributed to large backgrounds that were present for days 180-182, as can be seen in the attached plot of the ratio of the BBC yellow-beam-background scaler to the BBC coincidence scaler as a function of day.. JH did confirm for me that this was related to the beam crossing angle that was present on days 180-182, which was removed for days 183-188. 

 

For the SpaceCharge issues, day 183 fell in line with the days after it, not the days before it. Yuri's observation must be due to something different if he sees day 183 falls in line with the days before it.

 

-Gene

 

<C64F9DE8-8ADF-44F0-94D4-B48EE43B606C.png>

On Sep 12, 2024, at 6:13 PM, Fisyak, Yuri V <fisyak AT bnl.gov> wrote:

Hi Flemming, 
      For dAu200_2021 it was two interruptions with 26p5GeV_fixedTarget_2021.
There is a possibility that dAu200_2021 takes parameters from 26p5GeV_fixedTarget_2021.
I am checking this right now by removing any adjustments for trigger time delay from DB.
                                                                                   Date              Time
  {"dAu200_2021",                                             20210630,  22849, "y2019", "dAu200_2021"               },
  {"26p5GeV_fixedTarget_2021e",             20210703,  10650, "y2019", "26p5GeV_fixedTarget_2021"  },
  {"dAu200_2021b",                                          20210703,  53033, "y2019", "dAu200_2021"               },
  {"26p5GeV_fixedTarget_2021f",              20210703, 230657, "y2019", "26p5GeV_fixedTarget_2021"  },
  {"dAu200_2021c",                                          20210704,  34046, "y2019", "dAu200_2021"               },

                                                              Yuri Fisyak

STAR                                           Phone: +1 631 344 3913
Brookhaven National Laboratory  Fax:    +1 631 344 4206
510A/1-161
http://www.star.bnl.gov/~fisyak       E-mail: fisyak AT bnl.gov
 
 
 
From: star-tpc-l-request AT lists.bnl.gov <star-tpc-l-request AT lists.bnl.gov> on behalf of videbaek <videbaek AT bnl.gov>
Date: Thursday, September 12, 2024 at 6:05 PM
To: Star-tpc L <Star-tpc-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
Subject: re: [[Star-tpc-l] ] timing shifts


Hi Yuri,
I looked briefly at the conditions that the dAu was run between day 183 
and 184.
As I can tell there is no recorded change in trigger setup. i.e. the 
tier-1 file has same name
and thus according to convention has same parameters. So I think it is 
unlikely that the external trigger timing has changed.
Is it possible that there is a calibration parameters that has been used 
in reconstruction is changing because there was a FXT target run 
in-between day 183 and 184? just asking

Depending on your answer we could contact JH and Akio.

best Flemming


-- 
Flemming Videbaek
senior scientist, emeritus
videbaek @ bnl.gov
Brookhaven National Lab
Physics Department
Bldg 510D
Upton, NY 11973

phone: 631-344-4106
cell     :  631-681-1596

 

 

--

He/Him/His
Please do not feel obligated to respond to this message outside of your work hours.

James C Dunlop Ph.: (631) 344-7781                       

Building 510A         Cell: (631)316-8153

P.O. Box 5000                      

Brookhaven National Laboratory

Upton, NY 11973

dunlop AT bnl.gov

--

He/Him/His
Please do not feel obligated to respond to this message outside of your work hours.

James C Dunlop Ph.: (631) 344-7781                       

Building 510A         Cell: (631)316-8153

P.O. Box 5000                      

Brookhaven National Laboratory

Upton, NY 11973

dunlop AT bnl.gov