Proton Calorimetry/Meetings/2022/11/09: Difference between revisions
SaadShaikh (talk | contribs) |
SaadShaikh (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
=== [[ELogs/SaadShaikh|Saad Shaikh]] === | === [[ELogs/SaadShaikh|Saad Shaikh]] === | ||
*Presented first round of analysis on Manchester beam test, resulted shown in this presentation. | *Presented first round of analysis on Manchester beam test, resulted shown in [http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/pbt/wikiData/presentations/2022/SS221109_Manchester.pptx this presentation]. | ||
**Some WET measurements might not be correct, possibly due to poor resolution in IDDs for some runs. | **Some WET measurements might not be correct, possibly due to poor resolution in IDDs for some runs. | ||
**Generally range reconstruction is good, but some further calibration of WET is required. | **Generally range reconstruction is good, but some further calibration of WET is required. | ||
Latest revision as of 11:57, 18 November 2022
Minutes for UCL Proton Calorimetry Meetings, 9th November
Present
Saad Shaikh, Simon Jolly, Sonia Escribano, Maya Maciurzynska, Raffaella Radogna, Sam Manger
Saad Shaikh
- Presented first round of analysis on Manchester beam test, resulted shown in this presentation.
- Some WET measurements might not be correct, possibly due to poor resolution in IDDs for some runs.
- Generally range reconstruction is good, but some further calibration of WET is required.
- Cloudy sheets again produce worse data than clear sheets and could be making calibration process less effective.
- Will investigate further WET calibration and normalising light levels across different stacks.
- Marko has got 0.5 m Qualtek USB-C cable to work with Rev. D set up, however results are identical to 1m cable in terms of noise.
- Discussed with Simon and Connor next steps for detector enclosure improvements for Groningen beam test.
- Spent some time reading Snowmass paper on climate of the HEPA field.