afterglow studies
Post on 17-Jan-2016
31 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Afterglow StudiesEric Torrence
University of Oregon
183nd LMTF Meeting10 October 2013
2Eric Torrence September 2013
Overview
•Test afterglow model by single-bunch addition
-Originally studied by Mika
-Will need to be used for 25 ns operations
•Try to test assumptions in method
-Afterglow is universal with time and μ
-Afterglow is additive to the prompt luminosity signal(not true if there are migration effects)
•Look at expected afterglow levels in 2015(using 2012 templates)
•Look at 2012 25 ns fills
3Eric Torrence September 2013
Fills
•Single-bunch templates
-r200804 - 2 bunches, μ~20, first fill of 2012
-r206717 - 1 bunch, μ~50, high-mu test
•Test runs
-r212529 - 6 bunches in mini-train
-r214651 - 50 ns physics fill - during BCM noise period
-r215541 - 50 ns physics fill - after BCM noise period
-r216399 - 25 ns fill - 97 bunches
-r216432 - 25 ns fill - 373 bunches
Large range in mu, 3 months apart
4Eric Torrence September 2013
Details
•Looked only at OR algorithms (simpler), mainly:
-BcmH_EventOR
-BcmV_EventOR
-Lucid_HitOR
•No absolute calibrations applied, everything scaled to some relative luminosity
•Simple log formulas, no complicated Lucid mu dependence L = -ln(1-Rate)
5Eric Torrence September 2013
BCMV single-bunch response
r206717 - BcmVOR
Single-bunch, high μPeak = 1, used to normalize
relative responseAfterglow falls below noise
level after ~500 BCIDs
Colliding bunch
Afterglow
Noise
6Eric Torrence September 2013
BCMV single-bunch response
r206717 - BcmVOR
Single-bunch, high μ
Averaged over many LBs
AfterglowReflections
More plots in appendix...
7Eric Torrence September 2013
Stability over short time
QuickTime™ and aVideo decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
BCMV: http://physics.uoregon.edu/~torrence/BcmVOR.movLucid: http://physics.uoregon.edu/~torrence/r200804_LucORA.mov
8Eric Torrence September 2013
Stability over long times
r206717
r200804
BcmVOR
~ identical over x2 in muand three months!
9Eric Torrence September 2013
Lucid HitOR
r200804
No reflectionsShort-term falloff
Similar mid-term slopeLonger tail
(or just lower noise?)
10
Eric Torrence September 2013
Single-beam Templates
r200804BCM - 500 BCIDsto reach ~10-7 level
LucidHit - 1500 BCIDsto reach ~10-7 level
(ran into next bunch)
Constant backgroundsubtracted from -100 BCIDs
11
Eric Torrence September 2013
Maximum BCM afterglow
Just add 500 copies of this template (without peak), each shifted by 1 BCID
Asymptotic value 0.8% reached in ~200 BCIDs
12
Eric Torrence September 2013
Maximum Lucid Hit afterglow
Even with longer tail, less ‘integral’ afterglow (no reflections)
Asymptotic value 0.3% reached in ~300 BCIDs
13
Eric Torrence September 2013
50 ns limits
BCID-1 worksfor BCM in 2012!
(coincidental,only for BcmV)
Afterglow undercollisions ~ 10-3
Difference w/ BCID-1~ 1 x 10-3
(worse in 2011)
0.4% is half of 25 ns limit (expected)
colliding
bcid ± 1
14
Eric Torrence September 2013
Realistic 25 ns fill pattern
14
25ns_2604b_2592_2288_2396_288bpi12inj.sch
2604 bunches collidingin P1/5
Mostly saturated(except at
start-of-train)
15
Eric Torrence September 2013
Data subtraction procedure (per LB)•Start with raw luminosity by BCID for each lumi block
•Identify colliding bunches, and divide out average colliding luminosity from full distribution
-not strictly necessary, but useful for averaging over LBs
-also avoids need for calibration, everything relative...
•Build model of afterglow by adding up templates, one template per collision BCID, weighted by relative lumi
•Subtract this afterglow from raw luminosity in all BCIDs
•Iterate if desired (practically makes little effect)
•Measure residual background in abort gap (last 50 BCIDs)
•Subtract background as well to produce corrected lumi
16
Eric Torrence September 2013
Example
6 colliding bunches (normalized response)
500 BCIDtemplate length
constant term‘fit’ here
Raw Luminosity
After.+Bgd. Prediction
17
Eric Torrence September 2013
Example Zoomed
6 colliding bunches
rather excellent agreementbetween predicted and observed afterglow
undercollisions
18
Eric Torrence September 2013
Lucid artifacts
Finite Lucid template leads to (small)artifacts with few bunches
1500 BCIDs
constant term‘fit’ here
19
Eric Torrence September 2013
Lucid HitOR
Prediction close to luminous bunches looks right on(high μ template, 28 tubes)
20
Eric Torrence September 2013
Lucid - 50 ns fill
Works fine withfull fill pattern
Remember: simple logformula applied,
no mu dependence
21
Eric Torrence September 2013
BcmV noise comparison
During BCM noise period
After BCM noise period
<< 10-3 discrepancies
22
Eric Torrence September 2013
25 ns runs
Can’t prove afterglow under collisions is correct,but procedure seems to work fine
23
Eric Torrence September 2013
25 ns runs
Can’t prove afterglow under collisions is correct,but procedure seems to work fine
Same train length and gap expected in 2015
24
Eric Torrence September 2013
Lucid reduced HV
Lucid ran with reduced HV for most runs from r215433,includes all 25 ns runs
Template clearly not accurate
25
Eric Torrence September 2013
Lucid reduced HV 2
Scale up fast component (BCID+1, 2) by ~30%
Seems to work fine!
26
Eric Torrence September 2013
25 ns Lucid Hit OR
Use scaled template to look at 25 ns Lucid dataMuch larger afterglow (~2%) due to HV settings
normalized
background error
slight mismatch
27
Eric Torrence September 2013
25 ns comparison
Compare afterglow-subtractedrelative luminosity
collisions only
Shape looks familiar, butmagnitude is larger...
28
Eric Torrence September 2013
50 ns comparison
28
Similar to Benedetto’s plots?
Remember, no complicated Lucid corrections, just log formula
29
Eric Torrence September 2013
Trigger Counters•Special-purpose counters to look at 6 L1 items
before and after veto to study deadtime by BCID
•Can try to use before veto as a proxy for luminosity
•Triggers available- Counter 0 is trigger 93 L1_MU11
- Counter 1 is trigger 85 L1_EM30
- Counter 2 is trigger 102 L1_J50
- Counter 3 is trigger 128 L1_FJ75
- Counter 4 is trigger 118 L1_XE50
- Counter 5 is trigger 97 L1_J10
•Must be skeptical, many trigger-related issues with bunch train position...
•Trigger rates ~1% error per BCID (over many LBs)
Most linear with lumi
30
Eric Torrence September 2013
50 ns run
L1_EM30
L1_MU11
L1_MU11 low at start of train (retriggering?)L1_EM30 rises in early train (calo noise?)
31
Eric Torrence September 2013
50 ns run
L1_EM30
Now referenced to Lucid, L1_MU11 looks pretty OK...
32
Eric Torrence September 2013
25 ns run
Back end of bunch train seems to be more consistent with BcmV
33
Eric Torrence September 2013
25 ns run
Really had to draw any conclusions from this
34
Eric Torrence September 2013
Conclusions•Single-bunch template method seems to work for
2012
-Templates quite universal over all 2012
•Afterglow error using BCID-1 appears smaller than 2011for BcmVOR
•No evidence of anything weird in BCM noise period
•25 ns data shows larger (as expected) but manageable afterglow levels, Lucid larger due to HV settings
•First look at Lucid/BCM ratios is rather alarming, but probably lots to understand here
•Trigger rates don’t seem to help
35
Eric Torrence September 2013
Appendix A
Single-bunch plotsRun 200804
2 bunches, μ ~ 20
36
Eric Torrence September 2013
Lucid Hit OR
37
Eric Torrence September 2013
Lucid OR
38
Eric Torrence September 2013
Lucid OR A
39
Eric Torrence September 2013
Lucid OR C
40
Eric Torrence September 2013
Lucid AND
Raw rate only!
41
Eric Torrence September 2013
BcmH OR
42
Eric Torrence September 2013
BcmV OR
43
Eric Torrence September 2013
BcmH OR A
From Rates: A + C = OR + AND
44
Eric Torrence September 2013
BcmV OR A
From Rates: A + C = OR + AND
45
Eric Torrence September 2013
BcmH OR C
46
Eric Torrence September 2013
BcmV OR C
47
Eric Torrence September 2013
Appendix A
Single-bunch plotsRun 206717
1 bunch, μ ~ 40
48
Eric Torrence September 2013
Lucid Hit OR
49
Eric Torrence September 2013
Lucid AND
Raw rate only!
50
Eric Torrence September 2013
BcmH OR
51
Eric Torrence September 2013
BcmV OR
52
Eric Torrence September 2013
BcmH OR A
From Rates: A + C = OR + AND
53
Eric Torrence September 2013
BcmV OR A
From Rates: A + C = OR + AND
54
Eric Torrence September 2013
BcmH OR C
55
Eric Torrence September 2013
BcmV OR C
top related