Login

SCIENCE BRINGS NATIONS TOGETHER
Garfield+LTSpice simulation #10

→ Europe/Moscow
Description

zoom: https://cern.zoom.us/j/68545205504?pwd=VWxlVzF0ZnptU01zNG1qbDBLRGljUT09

Hide

Summarizing the progress and ToDos from today: 
 

=> gas gain studies
 

    --> the outputs of microscopic gain calculations are available in the text format. To be

        1) treated to find mean and error on mean
        2) plotted as hostograms with a reasonable scale (here mean of the histrograms to be compared with the calculated mean)
        3) the mean values with errors to be plotted in the famous "data and garfield gas gain vs HV"
       We agreed to do it for ALTAS and 10mm straws without Penning and with Penning of 0.54.  
  --> as soon as the microscopic results are ready and make sense, the corresponding mean of the gas gain distributions can be used for RK method with the correct gain shape.

    --> what is default penning for 70/30 Ar/CO2 - 0.57 or 0.54 (Alexey, Sergey)

--> next steps (Sonja, Assel) many thanks to Alexey for git and detailed instruction (https://github.com/AlexNealMoz/Garfiled_plus_plus/blob/main/Microscopic_Tracking/%D0%A2%D0%97_%D0%A7%D0%95%D0%A2%D0%92%D0%95%D0%A0%D0%93_23_02_2023.md)


 
      - briefly: 
 
         1) repeating the microscopic studies for default penning values (and 0.32 for the ALTAS case)
         2) in parallel starting RK without penning using the proper gain shapes and mean values calculated with and without 0-bin contributions (*)
 
         3) if (1) is ready, starting RK for gain means from (1)

         4) whatever is ready by the next meeting, please update the plots with correct points (**)
 

- Sergey: Garfield studies for gain distributions for given mean obtained with attachment vs without attachment  
 

Sergey needs results from Sonja and Assel to continue and hopes to get the input on Monday and discuss them on Tuesday 
 

    --> Sergey can start Garfield production without penning using already existing data (shapes and mean) generated by Assel and Sonja (gain vs HV) adding the points to the common plots (**) - to be compared to Sonja/Assel results from (*)
 

   ---> as soon as Garfield++ microscopic data for penning is ready, Garfield simulation with penning can be started
The results here should be 
 
  - adding Garfield predictions to the common plot (**)
  - answering the question if generation of the data without attachment make sense at all

  - the suspect here is that if we ask to simulate the attachment, we need to use the distribution without 0-bin - to be confirmed 
 

 

=> Vitaly, Alexey, Sergey: Garfield vs Gafrield++ for reliable signal shape simulation

- to be answered when first two parts are done

 

 

=> Dosbol+Vitaly: uniform muon distribution studies for the testbeam case

- currently the simulation is done for exponential gain distribution with mean of 90k and no attachment.

 

- average drift time and correlation plots to be done with the already existing results 
 

- the description of TB and examples of average drift time for data and Garfield+LTSPice can be found in the proceedings linked below (also uploaded to the agenda). The data for the proper HV (1750V) should be requested from Andrey and Dima.

- as soon as the conclusion on the proper gas gain simulation approach is made based on Assel/Sonja/Sergey/Alexey results, the data sample has to be regenerated and plots to be re-done

https://indico.jinr.ru/event/3527/contributions/19360/attachments/14580/24477/PM2021_Vitaly_NIMA22.pdf

https://indico.jinr.ru/event/3527/contributions/19360/attachments/14580/24476/icppa2022_proceedings_zelenov_upd.pdf


 

There are minutes attached to this event. Show them.
Powered by Indico v3.3.6