Proton Calorimetry/Meetings/2021/04/28: Difference between revisions

From PBTWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 9: Line 9:
**Measured stack thickness and recorded sheet order for UCLH beam test.
**Measured stack thickness and recorded sheet order for UCLH beam test.
**Briefly tested cross-talk with UCLH setup – little to none observed.
**Briefly tested cross-talk with UCLH setup – little to none observed.
*Investigated source of noise "pulsing" observed during UCLH beam test, results record in [ this page].
*Investigated source of noise "pulsing" observed during UCLH beam test, results record in [http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/pbt/wiki/Proton_Calorimetry/Experimental_Runs/2021/Apr22 this page].
**Pulsing largely due to external electronic noise from 50Hz mains.
**Pulsing largely due to external electronic noise from 50Hz mains.
**CMOS sensor amplifies external noise.
**CMOS sensor amplifies external noise.
Line 21: Line 21:
*Completed analysis of photodiode data from [http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/pbt/wiki/Proton_Calorimetry/Experimental_Runs/2021/Apr15 UCLH beam test], results discussed in [http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/pbt/wikiData/presentations/2021/SS210428_UCLH_2.pptx this presentation].
*Completed analysis of photodiode data from [http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/pbt/wiki/Proton_Calorimetry/Experimental_Runs/2021/Apr15 UCLH beam test], results discussed in [http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/pbt/wikiData/presentations/2021/SS210428_UCLH_2.pptx this presentation].
**Due to signficant electronic noise, better not to do background subtraction.
**Due to signficant electronic noise, better not to do background subtraction.
**Best fit results came from not performing any correction of pulsing observed from electronic noise.
**Best fit results came by not performing any correction of pulsing observed from electronic noise.
**Fit results similar for high and low current results. Should be able to do direct comparisons with CMOS sensor.
**Fit results similar for high and low current results. Should be able to do direct comparisons with CMOS sensor.
**Wrote macro to read reference curves from UCLH. Emailed Andy asking for required x-axis offset to compare with measurements made in detector.
**Wrote macro to read reference curves from UCLH. Emailed Andy asking for required x-axis offset to compare with measurements made in detector.
*Will analyse CMOS sensor data for next week.
*Will analyse CMOS sensor data for next week.

Revision as of 09:36, 29 April 2021

Minutes for UCL Proton Calorimetry Meetings, 28th April

Present

Simon Jolly, Raffaella Radogna, Saad Shaikh

Saad Shaikh

  • Met with Simon last week to take detector measurements:
    • Measured stack thickness and recorded sheet order for UCLH beam test.
    • Briefly tested cross-talk with UCLH setup – little to none observed.
  • Investigated source of noise "pulsing" observed during UCLH beam test, results record in this page.
    • Pulsing largely due to external electronic noise from 50Hz mains.
    • CMOS sensor amplifies external noise.
    • Grounding detector enclosure significantly reduces noise, even in lab conditions.
  • Software developments:
    • Added argument to all plotting routines to set y-scale range. Setting to 0 sets the default range.
    • Added argument to averaged replay script to set the averaging rate (separate to frame rate).
    • Added argument to stepped replay script to choose which measurement to start from and the number of measurements to replay. Last measurement persists on screen.
    • Live plot and fit can now accept background and shoot-through measurements to plot calibrated data.
      • Calibrated data written to file accessed by Bortfeld page on web GUI.
  • Completed analysis of photodiode data from UCLH beam test, results discussed in this presentation.
    • Due to signficant electronic noise, better not to do background subtraction.
    • Best fit results came by not performing any correction of pulsing observed from electronic noise.
    • Fit results similar for high and low current results. Should be able to do direct comparisons with CMOS sensor.
    • Wrote macro to read reference curves from UCLH. Emailed Andy asking for required x-axis offset to compare with measurements made in detector.
  • Will analyse CMOS sensor data for next week.