[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: pair spectrometer (fwd)



Hrachya,

I agree with your criticism of the particular 16+16 scheme that I suggested, but the principle remains.  I suggest that we adopt the following constraint for the design: 
  • Keep the number of counters on the right and left close to equal, for the best granularity.
One can always obtain the same final resolution for any choice of left/right multiplicity combination.  The two issues are orthogonal, one is the left/right multiplicity, and the other is the choice of counter positions and widths for optimal trade-off of acceptance and resolution.  To overcome the limitation of energy resolution at high photon energy end of the spectrum that you point out in your comments below, for my 16+16 configuration, simply slide the FSF range up to 3.6 - 4.0 GeV instead of 3.0 - 3.4 GeV, and then move the WSF counters down in energy by 0.75 GeV.  That way, the highest WSF counter is in exactly the same spot as it is in your solution, the FSF counters coincide with the top end of your FSF design, and the resolutions there will be the same.  You will always be able to point out differences here and there; the numbers are not exactly the same everywhere.  My point here is not to do all of the detailed optimization, but simply to point out that by starting with symmetric numbers of counters, we reduce our costs for a given specified resolution and segmentation.  Of course one can obtain roughly equivalent resolutions using any choice of left/right multiplicities, if costs are not a concern.

Richard Jones

I didn't miss the subject proposed as you believe.I was just trying  to analyze the profit of transfer to symmetric configuration.

 - Your statement  is true, the maximal granularity is reachable in symmetric sharing of counters number at fixed acceptance. Probably you wanted to read  this sentence.

- In step after thee is the  question  what is the profit of symmetrization. Most evident  is  to decrease the number of counters for the same granularity. But in symmetric configuration the  analyzed momentum range in WSF arm is shifted up that is important and crucial at Bremsstrahlung end. The FSF strips are becoming thinner and more subjected to resolution affection.

-  Resolution in symmetric  config. is becoming better  as  photon's energy goes down below 8 Gev, while is close or  even worser than in  non-symmetric configuration above 8GeV where higher  analyzed momenta in WSF arm is used. De-convolution of overlap and restore of un-affected CB  spectrum needs to be studied with MC simulation.

3. Increase in efficiency due to higher granularity is not expected below *GeV due to app. the same product of resolution and granularity. Above 8GeV an increase is expected due to a bigger energy bins/resolution as a result of beam spot size.

$. Mechanical construction of non-symmetrical configuration and adjustment is easier  for non-symmetrical case.


Summarizing the possible transfer to a symmetric configuration at fixed number of counters in FSF+WSF arms, the transfer allows a gain in resolution and granularity below 8 GeV, while above 8GeV resolution is dominated by the beam spot size and increase in granularity gives no profit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
5.The full scale advantage  of high granularity selection   may be realized through the use of  active PS converter on the base of one layer of 0.5-0.8mm thick WLS fibers.

Hrachya