1 / 18

# Transfer Line Studies - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transfer Line Studies. James N. Bellinger University of Wisconsin-Madison 12 December 2008. Summary. No Cocoa yet Hand fits show relative rotation among Endcap disks Can identify backwards DCOPS. Description. 6 Transfer lines at 60 degree intervals around the outside of the detector

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

## PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Transfer Line Studies' - kylene

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

James N. Bellinger

12 December 2008

Summary

• No Cocoa yet

• Hand fits show relative rotation among Endcap disks

• Can identify backwards DCOPS

Description

• 6 Transfer lines at 60 degree intervals around the outside of the detector

• 12 DCOPS on each Transfer line

• 4 on each Endcap

• 4 on selected MABs

• 2 Lasers on each Transfer line

• Call them the Plus and Minus lasers

• 72 DCOPS in all, with 144 readings

• Oriented so the 1/3 CCD pair measure Rφ, 2/4 pair measures radius

Problems

• A few DCOPS were unreadable

• Sometimes LV to Barrel DCOPS was off

• Lasers were shadowed in places: no signal

• Laser direction not always adjustable

Layout

YB-2

YB-0

YB+0

YB+2

Laser

Laser

ME-4

ME+1

ME+2

ME+3

ME+4

ME-3

ME-1

ME12

Cocoa Model of Transfer Lines

Data Selection

• From CRAFT run

• Select interval with field at 3.8T in which laser directions don’t drift much

• Select interval with field off ditto

• (CRAFT data taking was two runs: would have been a single run if the power hadn’t failed)

• Plot the distribution of mean values subject to quality cuts

• Background area <300000 pixel x counts

• Signal area>0 and <500000

• Sigma >39 pixels and < 220

• Mean>0 pixels and < 2048

Endcap-only study

• For each magnetic field state

• For each Endcap, use the laser at that end

• For each Transfer line, use the 4 DCOPS

• Reorient the CCD information to match DCOPS mounting

• For each CCD, fit the means at the 4 DCOPS and find the residuals

• Average the residuals of opposite pairs of CCDs

• Interpret these residuals as displacements of the DCOPS and plot them

Plus Endcap DCOPS displacements

Vectors plotted

to show dX

Ring diameter is

not relevant

Largest vector

has length given

in the title

Vectors at center

average of rest,

to estimate disk

displacement

Minus Endcap DCOPS displacements

ME-1 and

ME-2 show

relative rotation

ME-1 and ME-2

show relative

dislocation of

Change with field

Change in relative

displacement with

field is mostly

ME+3 and ME+2

move oppositely

(EXPECTED!)

The disk YE+2 bends, and the DCOPS

positions are cantilevered

Change of Raw Beam Positions

ME-4

ME-3

Difference between

field on and off for

Minus endcap at each

station, as a function of

position (φ) around the

disk.

ME-4 next to laser: little

change

ME-2

ME-1

Connecting Across

• Select data from 16-August

• Not all profiles are usable

• For Transfer Line 1, only connect with Up/Down CCD data (Rφ)

• Both lasers reach across for Line 1, so I can compare their results directly

Example of Transfer Line Profiles

CCD0

CCD0 data reaches across, but

CCD1 gets blocked somewhere

CCD1

DCOPS orientations

This one is odd:

data suggests

other direction

DCOPS directions

aren’t the same

along a line

Deviations from Linear Fit

• 10 Stations had data for Up/Down CCDs (not always both of the pair) for both laser beams

• Estimated laser tilt

• Averaged CCD values if both present

• Corrected for laser tilt if not

• Fit for each laser and plotted the deviations from the fits

Oddity

RMS=3.3mm

Difference is huge

at this point. If

I assume the

DCOPS is

backwards, the

points fit very

well.

RMS=1.0mm

Difference in

deviations found

using Plus and

Minus laser fits

Conclusions

• When the beam is unobstructed we can get useful information out of the system

• Once mounting variations are understood we’ll have a better measure of the resolution of the system