Hi Pawel, et al., Thanks for your note. I think that this sounds pretty good, and I believe (though do not *know*) that these changes are within those allowed by the survey. If this is, in fact, the case, is it possible to get these changes implemented in the geometry DB today? Is there anyone (besides Kris, who is incommunicado) that can do this insertion? Cheers, Ian -----Original Message----- From: owner-brahms-dev-l@bnl.gov [mailto:owner-brahms-dev-l@bnl.gov]On Behalf Of Pawel Staszel Sent: 18. juni 2002 16:08 To: brahms-dev-l@bnl.gov Subject: T1 and T2 geometry in y direction. Hi Flemming Ian and all, I realized that after having the "full" T1 and T2 calibration T2 projected tracks to T3 T4 and T5 detectors have systematic offsets if dy namely ~0.5cm for T3 1.3cm and 2.cm for T5. I found that by changing T2 horizontal rotation from 0 to -0.126 deg and rising T2 by 0.1cm (from 0.8 to 0.9cm) we can remove all this offsets and additionally we get perfect consistency with y-slopes for all T2-DC combinations. Additionally if we rotate T1 horizontally by -0.08 deg and rise it by 0.5 (from 0.8 to 1.30cm) we obtain a nice consistency between T1-T2 and T1-DCs. I also made a test with the new geometry and I got nice consistency for matching peaks (I will provide the figures soon). I think that we should update geometry in the db for the QM analysis. We are just about to start doing the global tracking. Regards Pawel. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- | Pawel Staszel | | Niels Bohr Institute Tb 8 email: staszel@nbi.dk | | Blegdamsvej 17 phone: (+45) 35 32 53 51 | | København Ø FAX: (+45) 35 32 50 16 | | Danmark | ----------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jun 18 2002 - 10:19:03 EDT