[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: BCAL06 note version 1.1
Hi Blake:
Reading your second version and after our brief discussion, here are my
thoughts:
While the resolution certainly meets the demands for the DOE input, I
believe that any further analysis should await the refinement of the
tagger OR. We are now seeing the effects of the fluctuations evident in
Figure 6 that can only come from slight timing misalignment among the
tagger t-counters. You mention deviation from the mean of 100 ps and
even though this is a small number, it's large enough to affect both the
absolute value of the floor term and the combined resolution of say
cells 7 and 8 (Richard's comment). Cell 8 has superior statistics, so
all else being equal, it should give better numbers than 7 while we see
the opposite. Also the lack of improvement when they are combined also
hints to me that we are bumping against an uncorrected effect.
All in all, good work.
George
Blake Leverington wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've posted the preliminary draft of the note on timing resolution for
> the BCal to the wiki. You can find it directly here:
> http://www.jlab.org/Hall-D/software/wiki/index.php/BCal_Timing_Resolution_Note
>
>
> I'm going home to sleep now. Send me all your comments or complaints.
>
> -Blake