Proton Calorimetry/Meetings/2021/04/28: Difference between revisions
SaadShaikh (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
SaadShaikh (talk | contribs) |
||
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
**Measured stack thickness and recorded sheet order for UCLH beam test. | **Measured stack thickness and recorded sheet order for UCLH beam test. | ||
**Briefly tested cross-talk with UCLH setup – little to none observed. | **Briefly tested cross-talk with UCLH setup – little to none observed. | ||
*Investigated source of noise "pulsing" observed during UCLH beam test, results record in [ this page]. | *Investigated source of noise "pulsing" observed during UCLH beam test, results record in [http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/pbt/wiki/Proton_Calorimetry/Experimental_Runs/2021/Apr22 this page]. | ||
**Pulsing largely due to external electronic noise from 50Hz mains. | **Pulsing largely due to external electronic noise from 50Hz mains. | ||
**CMOS sensor amplifies external noise. | **CMOS sensor amplifies external noise. | ||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
**Live plot and fit can now accept background and shoot-through measurements to plot calibrated data. | **Live plot and fit can now accept background and shoot-through measurements to plot calibrated data. | ||
***Calibrated data written to file accessed by Bortfeld page on web GUI. | ***Calibrated data written to file accessed by Bortfeld page on web GUI. | ||
*Completed analysis of photodiode data from [http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/pbt/wiki/Proton_Calorimetry/Experimental_Runs/2021/Apr15 UCLH beam test], results discussed in [ this presentation]. | *Completed analysis of photodiode data from [http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/pbt/wiki/Proton_Calorimetry/Experimental_Runs/2021/Apr15 UCLH beam test], results discussed in [http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/pbt/wikiData/presentations/2021/SS210428_UCLH.pptx this presentation]. | ||
**Due to signficant electronic noise, better not to do background subtraction. | **Due to signficant electronic noise, better not to do background subtraction. | ||
**Best fit results came | **Best fit results came by not performing any correction of pulsing observed from electronic noise. | ||
**Fit results similar for high and low current results. Should be able to do direct comparisons with CMOS sensor. | **Fit results similar for high and low current results. Should be able to do direct comparisons with CMOS sensor. | ||
**Wrote macro to read reference curves from UCLH. Emailed Andy asking for required x-axis offset to compare with measurements made in detector. | **Wrote macro to read reference curves from UCLH. Emailed Andy asking for required x-axis offset to compare with measurements made in detector. | ||
*Will analyse CMOS sensor data for next week. | *Will analyse CMOS sensor data for next week. |
Latest revision as of 17:44, 9 December 2021
Minutes for UCL Proton Calorimetry Meetings, 28th April
Present
Simon Jolly, Raffaella Radogna, Saad Shaikh
Saad Shaikh
- Met with Simon last week to take detector measurements:
- Measured stack thickness and recorded sheet order for UCLH beam test.
- Briefly tested cross-talk with UCLH setup – little to none observed.
- Investigated source of noise "pulsing" observed during UCLH beam test, results record in this page.
- Pulsing largely due to external electronic noise from 50Hz mains.
- CMOS sensor amplifies external noise.
- Grounding detector enclosure significantly reduces noise, even in lab conditions.
- Software developments:
- Added argument to all plotting routines to set y-scale range. Setting to 0 sets the default range.
- Added argument to averaged replay script to set the averaging rate (separate to frame rate).
- Added argument to stepped replay script to choose which measurement to start from and the number of measurements to replay. Last measurement persists on screen.
- Live plot and fit can now accept background and shoot-through measurements to plot calibrated data.
- Calibrated data written to file accessed by Bortfeld page on web GUI.
- Completed analysis of photodiode data from UCLH beam test, results discussed in this presentation.
- Due to signficant electronic noise, better not to do background subtraction.
- Best fit results came by not performing any correction of pulsing observed from electronic noise.
- Fit results similar for high and low current results. Should be able to do direct comparisons with CMOS sensor.
- Wrote macro to read reference curves from UCLH. Emailed Andy asking for required x-axis offset to compare with measurements made in detector.
- Will analyse CMOS sensor data for next week.