[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