From: Jens Ivar Jordre (jensivar.jordre@fi.uib.no)
Date: Wed Sep 03 2003 - 09:07:38 EDT
Hello Flemming.
Flemming Videbaek wrote:
> A comment to the issue Jens Ivar brought up on the TOF cal.
>
> a) The way the raw data PRESENTLY are fill should guarentee that the
> "number of slats" == "number of hits" not only for Tof systesm but also BB
> and others etectors with fixe #channels. We have in the last two runs used
> some hardware channele eg from BB to other purpose, usually this would
> plainly result in having both ac and tdc == 0 for those channels, and the
> calibration software would just map these as being bad.
> So it is in fact a bit surprising that you at all got an error unless the
> detectorparams.txt no of tubes does not match the number of actual 'slats'
> in the raw data. Could you give a bit more info.
This has an easy explanation. I was just testing calibration on
simulated data to see what came out and if I can use this as calibration
numbers when pumping simulated data through the analysis chain. (In the
same process I found of course out that TDC gain can not be "calibrated"
from simulated data, but that's a different story.) I need some numbers
where calibration is used when analyzing real data.
I wasn't aware of what you mention above regarding "number of hits" ==
"number of slats", so I guess one could return to the version of
BrTdcGainCalibModule I deemed buggy. However, the way its Event function
is now I guess is better conseptually, so I'll let it be unless you tell
me otherwise.
Best wishes from
Jens Ivar
--
_____________________________________________________
________| Jens Ivar Jřrdre |_______
\ | Dept. of Physics Office: 521 | /
\ | Allégt 55 Phone: +47 55 58 27 92 | /
\ | 5007 Bergen Fax: +47 55 58 94 40 | /
/ | Norway E-mail: jensivar.jordre@fi.uib.no | \
/ |_____________________________________________________| \
/__________) (_________\
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 03 2003 - 09:09:52 EDT