Speaker:
Luigi Longo
(Universita e INFN, Bari (IT))
SPS testbeam:
- runs taken:
- HV scan on top/mesh and drift
- X&Y scan
- pions run at different intensity
- links:
- notes:
- able to take very long and stable runs up to 1M events per run
- tracker made of 2 Tmm plus the GEM one placed at the end of the calo structure
- towards the end, changed the flex adaptors with PCBs one -> no dead channels; decided to change all the adapors for PS testbeam
- MM-RM3 -> the plot sent via email done using only pad chambers; understood that the inefficiency on MM-RM3 is a misalignment problem
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cd934/cd9345406ef924d0ed05ae756e6fd6a0afe7dfdb" alt=""
PS testbeam:
- runs taken:
- X&Y scan -> reperformed after having changed all adaptors -> at a first look, only noisy channels and no dead channel
- energy scan from 11 to 3 GeV
- links
-
notes:
- energy scan runs performed adding the CTF clock in AND with the scintillators
- RHUM & MPGDHCAL sharing the same trigger -> possibility to perform offline matching between the 2 DAQ system
What to look at (link):
- SPS:
-
Tracker: 2Tmm+GEM
-
check the charge sharing / cross-talk for calo chambers
-
charge distribution (MPV) as a function of HV
-
cluster size Vs top/Mesh HV
-
spatial resolution Vs top/Mesh HV
-
efficiency (with tracker) Vs top/Mesh HV
-
efficiency (with tracker) Vs Drift HV
-
uniformity (for each position we need to recheck the alignment )
-
timing Vs top/Mesh & drift HV (must be done from the Tmm+GEM)
-
Pions run: charge distribution Vs Rate; efficiency Vs rate
-
muons Vs Pions