Checking the Acd hardware veto setting The hardware veto is generated in the front-end electronics Discriminator with coarse and fine settings Both are.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
R. Zitoun, Stony Brook and LAPP CTF Meeting10 February Much Noise About Nothing? Robert Zitoun Stony Brook and LAPP CTF Meeting February 10, 2003.
Advertisements

07/16/2002 p. 1 Muon Fake RatesPetra Merkel Muon Fake Rates Concept: determine rate of fake muons due to pion/kaon punch-through (PT) muons out of pion/kaon.
Defined plateau region Knee 95% WP=knee+150V RPC operation and Hardware Performance  Annual HV module recalibration – all CAEN A3512N HV module offsets.
Preshower 15/03/2005 P.Kokkas Preshower September Run Data Analysis P. Kokkas.
LI Gain Curves Peter Litchfield Calibration Workshop, 6 th September 2005  Beginning to understand the LI system  Beginning to understand the software.
29 June 2004Paul Dauncey1 ECAL Readout Tests Paul Dauncey For the CALICE-UK electronics group A. Baird, D. Bowerman, P. Dauncey, C. Fry, R. Halsall, M.
Veto Wall Test Hyupwoo Lee MINERvA/Jupiter Group Meeting Feb, 13, 2008.
9/11/2007JC Wang1 Track Resolution Scale, assume equal  meas for different planes. HP3 HP4 All 6 measurements. Without leftmost one. Without rightmost.
GLAST LAT Project Instrument Analysis Workshop 5 – 05/08/29 F. Piron & E. Nuss (IN2P3/LPTA – Montpellier) 1 Comprehensive review of CAL calibrations Gamma-ray.
Y. Karadzhov MICE Video Conference Thu April 9 Slide 1 Absolute Time Calibration Method General description of the TOF DAQ setup For the TOF Data Acquisition.
GLAST LAT ProjectGLAST Flight Software IDT, October 16, 2001 JJRussell1 October 16, 2001 What’s Covered Activity –Monitoring FSW defines this as activity.
SVACInstrument Analysis Meeting, January 13, 2006 Anders W. Borgland 1 Data Is (Nearly) Here! Anders W. Borgland Science Verification, Analysis and Calibrations.
DAQ WS03 Sept 2006Jean-Sébastien GraulichSlide 1 DDAQ Trigger o Reminder: DAQ Trigger vs Particle Trigger o DAQ Trigger o Particle Trigger 1) Possible.
Trending ACD performance Parameters of interest Online tests (CPTs) TCI (charge injection) -> PHA TCI -> Veto mapping Timing PHA Pedestals Offline tests.
GLAST LAT Project SE Test Planning meeting October 4, 2004 E. do Couto e Silva 1/13 SVAC Data Taking during LAT SLAC Oct 4, 2004 Eduardo.
More on Testbeam Analysis FLZ. Stability Checks for TCMT Pedestal stability already shown by Kurt MIP calibration stability Response stability.
J. Estrada - Fermilab1 AFEII in the test cryostat at DAB J. Estrada, C. Garcia, B. Hoeneisen, P. Rubinov First VLPC spectrum with the TriP chip Z measurement.
FPIX0 Electronic Test Marina Artuso Paul Gelling Jianchun Wang  The system works fine with charge injection calibration  Gain curve, threshold, and noise.
Alex Moiseev NASA/GSFC 12/16/2005 Some ACD Calibration issues I.ACD mip peak monitoring 1. ACD mip peak monitoring requires the measurements to be done.
ACD calibrations Pedestals Measured from online script Measure PHA w/ HV off, no charge injection Use cyclic triggers ~ ADC counts, very narrow.
CFT Calibration Calibration Workshop Calibration Requirements Calibration Scheme Online Calibration databases.
Learn to solve multi-step equations.
SVX4 chip 4 SVX4 chips hybrid 4 chips hybridSilicon sensors Front side Back side Hybrid data with calibration charge injection for some channels IEEE Nuclear.
Performance test of STS demonstrators Anton Lymanets 15 th CBM collaboration meeting, April 12 th, 2010.
1 HBD Commissioning (II) Itzhak Tserruya HBD group meeting November 28, 2006 Progress from October 3 to November 28, 2006.
ACD Calibrations in L&EO Needed Calibrations Pedestals (low and high range) Low range gains via MIP peak positions Veto and HLD discriminator set points.
07/19/2005 Arithmetic / Logic Unit – ALU Design Presentation F CSE : Introduction to Computer Architecture Slides by Gojko Babić.
Development of Multi-pixel photon counters(2) M.Taguchi, T.Nakaya, M.Yokoyama, S.Gomi(kyoto) T.Nakadaira, K.Yoshimura(KEK) for KEKDTP photon sensor group.
Claudia-Elisabeth Wulz Institute for High Energy Physics Vienna Level-1 Trigger Menu Working Group CERN, 9 November 2000 Global Trigger Overview.
‘Dude where's my muon?’ Trigger Efficiency of the Single Station. Edward Overton 1.
January 31, MICE DAQ MICE and ISIS Introduction MICE Detector Front End Electronics Software and MICE DAQ Architecture MICE Triggers Status and Schedule.
MPPC status M.Taguchi(kyoto) T2K ND /7/7.
Nov 2002T. Ljubicic DAQ100 Calibration Needs 10 to 8 bit (and back!) conversion table Gain correction per pad T0 correction per pad.
GLAST LAT ProjectLAT Muons at NRL 28 Feb 2006 J. Eric Grove Naval Research Lab Washington DC LAT Muon Data Taking During Environmental Test at NRL J. Eric.
 -bin Number Tower Calibration (ch/GeV) Desired E T matched gain s  =1.0  =2.0 from electrons slopesMIPs EEMC Towers Calibration Run 3 p+p Used 4 methods.
LHCb VELO Upgrade Strip Chip Option: Data Processing Algorithms Giulio Forcolin, Abdul Afandi, Chris Parkes, Tomasz Szumlak* * AGH-Krakow Part I: LCMS.
F Don Lincoln, Fermilab f Fermilab/Boeing Test Results for HiSTE-VI Don Lincoln Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory.
Helps us determine the most probable Lewis structure when there are several correct possibilities Determines the charge on a bonded atom if there was no.
SRS Calibration Michael Phipps, Bob Azmoun, Craig Woody 1.
S.MonteilPS COMMISSIONING1 MaPMT-VFE-FE ELECTRONICS COMMISSIONING AND MONITORING. OUTLINE 1)Ma-PMT TEST BENCHES MEASUREMENTS 2)VFE AND FE ELECTRONICS FEATURES.
GLAST ACD Status. GLAST Overview McPositionHitCol AcdDigiCol AcdRecon AcdDigiAlg AcdReconAlg TkrFitTrackCol TDS Gaudi Algorithms.
Sensitivity of HO to Muons Shashi Dugad for HO group India-CMS Meeting 6-7 Oct
Monitoring of cell to cell inhomogeneity and transfer into simulation M. Vander Donckt.
22/06/2016James Leaver Current FED Tester Status.
Development of Multi-pixel photon counters(2) M.Taguchi, T.Nakaya, M.Yokoyama, S.Gomi(kyoto) T.Nakadaira, K.Yoshimura(KEK) for KEKDTP photon sensor group.
Performance of 1600-pixel MPPC for the GLD Calorimeter Readout Jan. 30(Tue.) Korea-Japan Joint Shinshu Univ. Takashi Maeda ( Univ. of Tsukuba)
Feb C.Smith UVA EC energy calibration – g13 pass0 For pass0 data were cooked with CALDB calibration constants reset to nominal 10 channels / MeV.
Rainer Stamen, Norman Gee
Acd Veto Latching The Acd front end electronics generate a veto primitive when a discriminator goes above threshold. But. The signal is split: One path.
Monitoring of cell to cell inhomogeneity and transfer into simulation
EZDC spectra reconstruction and calibration
Tracker TriP-t Test Stand
Solving Multistep Equations
Overview of Acd Reconstruction
Solving pedestal problem
The Silicon Drift Detector of the ALICE Experiment
CDS comments on supporting note
Detection of muons at 150 GeV/c with a CMS Preshower Prototype
Design of Digital Filter Bank and General Purpose Digital Shaper
Large CMS GEM with APV & SRS electronics
VeLo Analog Line Status
Calorimeter calibrations with Flight Software.
Signal studies OUTLINE 1- Signal extraction
GLAST LAT System Engineering
GLAST Large Area Telescope:
Eduardo do Couto e Silva Feb 28, 2006
Normal Distribution: Finding Probabilities
CAL crosstalk issues and their implications
Status of the cross section analysis in e! e
Presentation transcript:

Checking the Acd hardware veto setting The hardware veto is generated in the front-end electronics Discriminator with coarse and fine settings Both are 6 bit registers (0-63) 32 fine counts = 1 coarse count Multi-step process to configure the veto correctly Use charge injection calibration and/or muon data to map veto setting to PHA value Use muon data to get MIP peaks in terms of PHA counts Combine the two to set the veto as a MIP fraction ie, set the veto to 0.3 mips

Pedestals Even with no input signal the PHAs are non zero Use B/13 (ie, non-zero suppressed) run to get pedestals Configuration is chosen to give pedestals at least 100 pha counts

Mip peaks Select events to be close to normal incidence on ACD Subtract pedestals Fit for most probable value of MIP distribution HV bias is set so that mip peaks are > 400 counts above pedestal

Veto turn on Compare all PHA values to those values where the veto is set

Vetos were set lower that expected Compare veto values to MIP peak values Find that veto values were about 0.1 MIPs (wanted 0.2) Spread of distribution is fairly large (0.032 MIPs) Should be able to improve this considerably