Flemming Videbaek wrote: > Let me just add a few words. > The additional card was added because T2 is 7*16 wide and you should always > have a pair > of FEE cards on a cable segment. And it had to be close. In some sense it > has to be > considered a bonus, though we may not use it. You map also shows as I am > sure you are aware > the row 10 pad 0-15 that are dead , and the row 6 poad 80-95. The problem I > described in > an earlier message from oct 12. This did not precisely detail how to blank > ou pad' but is done > by setting the BrDetectorParamsTPC e.g. t2_param->SetDeadPads(6,80,95). > > Thus one could add the information from row 13-14 but the acceptance might > in fact be more difficult > to evaluate. > > Flemming I don't think that the acceptance changes due to rows 13-14 (but I have not checked). What concerned me (and thus gave poor Peter a lot of work!) was that all files I could find inBRAT (i.e. DetectorParameters.txt and (IIRC) BrDetectorParamsTPC.cxx) have rows13 and 14 set to FALSE. Of course, it does help to have more information along the track, but it is not entirely unconfusing to have the software not describe the real situation. I'm sorry that I did not know that the real place to look was not in BRAT, but in some file on pii3. Thanks for the quick response, both to Flemming and Konstantin. Cheers, -- Ian-------------------------------------------------------------------- | I.G. Bearden | | Niels Bohr Institute Tb 3 email: bearden@nbi.dk | | Blegdamsvej 17 phone: (+45) 35 32 53 23 | | København Ø FAX: (+45) 31 42 10 16 | | Danmark | ----------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 19 2000 - 07:53:20 EDT