Re: Background rates for CD3 geometry

[Matthew Shepherd <mashephe@indiana.edu>]

Great -- thanks!  (Item deleted from to-do list.)

On Jan 29, 2008, at 9:36 AM, David Lawrence wrote:

>
> Hi Matt (et al),
>
>   I have actually just in the last day or so used your bkgStudy code  
> to produce some rate plots for the FDC, CDC, and TOF using the old  
> and new geometries. The ones from the old geometry seem more or less  
> consistent with the result you showed at the Jan 16, 2007 offline  
> meeting. The new ones show a significant reduction due to the  
> reduced material in the tracking chambers. I believe these will be  
> sufficient for this week's review so don't kill yourself producing  
> new plots. At some point later on though, it would be good to  
> revisit this in a more systematic way.
>
> Regards,
> -David
>
> Matthew Shepherd wrote:
>>
>> Hi Elton,
>>
>> In principle it is not too much work to update them since the  
>> process is fairly well scripted.  I'm working on getting the jobs  
>> running now, but if I get hung up this may have to go on the back  
>> burner.  I'll let you know how progress is going.
>>
>> -Matt
>>
>>
>> On Jan 28, 2008, at 9:29 AM, Elton Smith wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> HI Matt,
>>>
>>> For the upcoming reviews we will need to update all the plots of  
>>> raw rates
>>> for the new geometry to compare with the rates that you produced  
>>> last
>>> year with the old geometry. This will be useful for the  
>>> calorimetry as
>>> well as DC reviews. Are you planning on getting updated rates or  
>>> how much
>>> effort is it to update them?
>>>
>>> Thanks, Elton.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Elton Smith
>>> Jefferson Lab MS 12H5
>>> 12000 Jefferson Ave
>>> Suite # 16
>>> Newport News, VA 23606
>>> elton@jlab.org
>>> (757) 269-7625
>>> (757) 269-6331 fax
>>>
>>> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Matthew Shepherd wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I've received detailed comments from Alex on this section  
>>>> including a
>>>> lot of typographical issues.  I hope to incorporate these sometime
>>>> today and circulate a new draft.  Feel free to read for scope and
>>>> content, but at this stage you may want to wait until the next  
>>>> draft
>>>> before doing a detailed markup.
>>>>
>>>> -Matt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 28, 2008, at 2:32 AM, Matthew Shepherd wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear calorimetry enthusiasts,
>>>>>
>>>>> You can find a fairly complete draft of the simulation section of
>>>>> the CDR that Mihajlo and I have worked on here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://dustbunny.physics.indiana.edu/~mashephe/simulation.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>> We will be putting on the finishing touches in a few noted places
>>>>> and merging with Alex.  I wanted to make the draft now available  
>>>>> for
>>>>> people to read and comment on content.  (As written it lacks some
>>>>> all-important concluding paragraphs which need to be carefully
>>>>> stated.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Also on our "to-do" list is to check into the pi^0 mass resolution
>>>>> in BCAL vs. FCAL.  Both have comparable energy resolutions but  
>>>>> much
>>>>> different pi^0 mass resolutions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> Matt
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
> -- 
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> David Lawrence Ph.D.
> Staff Scientist                 Office: (757)269-5567    
> [[[  [   [ [        Jefferson Lab                   Pager:   
> (757)584-5567   [  [ [ [ [ [    http://www.jlab.org/~davidl     davidl@jlab.org 
>          [[[  [[ [[ [[[
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>