Glasgow March 2006

Calibration Status

Martin Kotulla

CB Calibration Overview

Calibrations: Energy (photons)

0 – E calibrationJason Brudvik

Time (alignment)

Time walk

CB Energy sum and individual detector thresholds (M3, M2)20 MeV as an approximation

TAPS Calibration Overview

Calibrations: Time (TAPS)

Fabien Zehr

Energy (photons)relative alignment of the gain for short and long gateBenedicte Boillat

Pulsshape PSArelative strength of short vs long gateStefan Lugert

LED Trigger thresholds30MeV as an approximation

TAGGER - PID Calibration Overview

Calibrations: Time (TAGGER)

Richard Codling

Tagging Efficiency (photons)Alexander Nikolaev

PID E Richard Codling

PID TimeRichard Codling

CB Calibration Summary

Physics (first run 22.6.2004, last 7.4.2005)

targetLH2

beam time / h

CB Energy CB Time CB Time Walk

22.6. – 6.7. LH2 200 × (√) (×)20.7. – 2.8. LH2 300 √ (√) (×)3.8. – 16.8. LH2 “ (√) (√) (×)14.9. – 4.10. LH2 160 √ (√) (×)26.10.-4.11. LD2 (√) (√) (×)4.11.-15.11. LH2 160 √ (√) (×)

30.11.-13.12. LH2 180 √ (√) (×)10.1.-28.1. (28.1.- 31.1. LD2)

LH2 160 √ (√) (√) Basel

17.2.-7.3. Pb 300 × (√) (×)

7Li,C,O,

Ca160,30,60

,40 × (√) (×)

TAPS Calibration Summary

Physics (first run 22.6.2004, last 7.4.2005)

targetLH2beam

time / hTAPS Energy TAPS Time TAPS PSA

22.6. – 6.7. LH2 200 √ × ×20.7. – 2.8. LH2 300 √ √ √3.8. – 16.8. LH2 “ √ √ √14.9. – 4.10. LH2 160 √ √ √26.10.-4.11. LD2 √ √ ×4.11.-15.11. LH2 160 √ √ ×

30.11.-13.12. LH2 180 (√)! √ ×10.1.-28.1. (28.1.- 31.1. LD2)

LH2 160 √ √ ×

17.2.-7.3. Pb 300 × √ ×

7Li,C,O,C

a160,30,60,

40 √ √ √

Tagger - PID/MWPC Calibration Summary

Physics (first run 22.6.2004, last 7.4.2005)

Target beam

time / hTagger Time

Tagging Eff. PID E PID Time

22.6. – 6.7. LH2 200 √ (√) √ √20.7. – 2.8. LH2 300 √ (√) √ √3.8. – 16.8. LH2 “ √ (√) √ √14.9. – 4.10. LH2 160 √ (√) √ √26.10.-4.11. LD2 √ (√) √ √4.11.-15.11. LH2 160 √ (√) √ √

30.11.-13.12. LH2 180 √ (√) √ √10.1.-28.1. (28.1.- 31.1. LD2)

LH2 160 √ (√) √ √

17.2.-7.3. Pb 300 √ (√) √ √

7Li,C,O,C

a160,30,60,

40 √ (√) √ √

Invariant Masses

check of energy calibration: TAPS photon cluster energy needs to be scaled (CB as well for Monte Carlo)

check of 0 , ()resolution (different kinematics!)CB-CB: 19.5 MeV TAPS-CB: 20.5 MeV

benchmarks (energy resolution, time resolution)

CB-CB TAPS-CB

Proton ID in TAPS

TAPS proton signature: time difference TAGGER - TAPS

E vs ToF plot to identify protons in TAPS

kin E / MeV

ToF / ns

p

Proton ID CB

CB proton signature: E-E

reliable Monte Carlo

p

Other

status: framework: John Annand

effective response and energy loss (single 0 channel)TAPS region >10° and CB tunnel region (<26°)Evie Downie (Marc Unverzagt, Sven Schumann, Viktor Kashevarov)

TAPS code particle identificationRalf Gregor / Fabien Zehr

lin. pol. lookup tables Ken Livingston

Other

Data Quality (to be done): run classification

good data filesfiles with significant losses of the system

detector classificationgood data filesruns with broken individual detektors

Monte Carlo Code: TAPS Veto detectors

Giessen

CB tunnel region (Viktor)

Cross sections: Comparison to Monte Carlo responseEfficiency

Energy

relative gain alignment: identical shape and orientation of the BaF2 crytals

energy deposition of minimum ionizing cosmic myons used for alignment

pedestal very stable

MIPpedestal pulser

TIME I

TAPS time calibration: relative alignment of the TAPS individual time

relative alignment TAPS vs Tagger

promptpeak

time of flightparticles

TIME IITAPS time calibration: 0 decay photon sources:

single 0 : no acceptance within the <40° cone or : small yield of two photons in TAPS

„resolution“ by time difference within a cluster (time for shower spread!) FWHM < 800 ps

PSA

BaF2: 2 scintillating light components, a fast and a slow: short gate VS long gate

polar coordinates

particle identification

long / MeV

short / MeV radius / MeV

angle / °