This is zoom in on the eta=1 gap between BTOW & ETOW.

Dashed green line (barely seen) are drawn at true edge of the active barrel and endcap towers at eta=0.99 and eta=1.086, respectively.

 

Looks like barrel last eta bin has tower extending up to the eta=1.0 line instead of having them only 0.04 wide in eta and ending at eta=0.99. 

 

 

Fig 1

---

For the Endcap the eta=0.086 lines goes  through the middle of the edge of every megatail, as designed and implemented ~8 years ago, shown on the plot below  (black line)

Fig 2

---

 To display Fig 1 the following lines were used:

 

macro a0

mess plot BTOW+ETOW corner

 nex;dcut CAVE x  0.0 -75.0 -58.0 0.3 0.3

  daxis 0 0 0 80  

  gkine  1 5  10.  10.   0.99 0.99  1.5708  1.5708  [z0] [z0]   ;trig

  gkine  1 5  10.  10.   1.086 1.086  1.5708  1.5708  [z0] [z0]   ;trig

  gkine  1 5  10.  10.   2.0 2.0  1.5708  1.5708  [z0] [z0]   ;trig

 

  gkine  1 8  10.  10.   2.5 2.5  1.5708  1.5708  [z0] [z0]   ;trig

  gkine  1 8  10.  10.   4.0 4.0  1.5708  1.5708  [z0] [z0]   ;trig

  mess zVertex= [z0] cm

return

---

Fig 3 Real module end view

 

---

Fig 4 Geant model Y2007 module end view.

Dashed lines are drawn at phi =87.0, 90.0, 93.0 deg for mu+ & mu- with PT=100 GeV/c

 code used:  

 

 nex;dcut CAVE z 5.0 10.0 -110.0 0.5 0.5

 

 gkine  1 5  100.  100.   0.00 0.00  1.57079  1.57079  0. 0.   ;trig

  gkine  1 5  100.  100.   0.00 0.00  1.51844 1.51844   0. 0.   ;trig

  gkine  1 5  100.  100.   0.00 0.00  1.62316 1.62316  0. 0.   ;trig

 

 gkine  1 6  100.  100.   0.00 0.00  1.57079  1.57079  0. 0.   ;trig

  gkine  1 6  100.  100.   0.00 0.00  1.51844 1.51844   0. 0.   ;trig

  gkine  1 6  100.  100.   0.00 0.00  1.62316 1.62316  0. 0.   ;trig

 

---

BSMD cell is made out of Alu (magenta) and filled with Ar90%/C02(10%) gas (blue)
starsim> next ; draw CSME 20 80 20 20 -50 3. 3.

 

---

 

Stephen fixed it all, see his BTOW/BSMD Geometry Changes or PDF at the Attachment 

 

---

 

Hi Stephen,
This is the weight of new geant geometry of the barrel module, calculated with 3 different methods using VMC.

/HALL_1/CAVE_1/CALB_1/CHLV_1/CPHI_1     Weight3 = 1003.82[kg]
/HALL_1/CAVE_1/CALB_1/CHLV_1/CPHI_1     Weight2 = 997.961[kg]
/HALL_1/CAVE_1/CALB_1/CHLV_1/CPHI_1     Weight1 = 997.961[kg]

   Double_t weight3 = vol->Weight();
   Double_t weight2 = vol->Weight(0.1,"a");
   Double_t weight1 = vol->Weight(1e-2,"");

Method 1 & 3 should give identical output - I get what I get.
Lets drop method 3 (the default) --> we get 998 kg from VMC

This is pretty close to your estimate 993 kg.
Do you think this 5 kg per module is in the noise of your (or VMC) estimation?

Jan


On Sep 15, 2008, at 9:52 PM, Stephen Trentalange wrote:



Hello Jan,

Here is my weight estimate:

W_Pb = 10.2 cm * 24.12 cm * 275.3 cm * 11.34 g/cm3 = 7.68   10**5 g
W_Sc = 10.2 cm * 24.12 cm * 275.3 cm *  1.2  g/cm3 = 0.813  10**5 g
W_Fp = 0.75"*8.975"*102"*2.54^3* 2.7 g/cm3         = 0.304  10**5 g
W_Cp = 0.75*9.7*112.4*2.54^3*2.7g/cm3              = 0.362  10**5 g
W_Bp = 1.25*10*114.75*2.54^3*2.7g/cm3              = 0.635  10**5 g
W_e0 = 9.544*12.1*0.15*2.54^3*8g/cm3               = 0.023  10**5 g
W_e1 = 0.023/0.707                                 = 0.033  10**5 g
W_SMD= o.2*8.93*106*2.54^3*2.7g/cm3                = 0.084  10**5 g

Total  = 993 kg


Stephen

 

---

---

---

Update: November1, 2008: StEmcGeom class

defines  tower at eta bin 1 to be 7mm to long in Z  and module at eta bin 20 is 1.4 cm to short in Z.

Second table shows alternative (old) eta-boundaries between towers leading to agreement with measurement with accuracy better than 2mm.

I used the technical drawing attached at the bottom of this blog  (tech-drawing-tiles.pdf) to measure tile size.

table 1 & 2

table 3: Similar prediction for 21 layer