*** Additional notes for pp 500, run 2009

Updated on Wed, 2009-08-05 12:33. Originally created by balewski on 2009-05-08 09:16.

RunLog DB (and perhaps subsequently other DBs used by FastOffline?) has the wrong magnetic
field (zero) for runs 10097105 - 10097115 (April 7th). , Fixed on May 7

close to final list of pp 500 fill/run/lumi. Same table but w/ unix time is in attachment A
Recent run list ver 3 is in attachment D

  F10383 beginGMT= 2009-03-18 04:39:31 runs: R10076134 R10076161 baseZdc/MHz: 0.037  0.032   LT=0.00  totLT=0.00
  F10398 beginGMT= 2009-03-20 07:25:52 runs: R10078076 R10079017 baseZdc/MHz: 0.068  0.061   LT=0.08  totLT=0.08
  F10399 beginGMT= 2009-03-20 18:56:50 runs: R10079027 R10079086 baseZdc/MHz: 0.109  0.001   LT=0.22  totLT=0.30
  F10402 beginGMT= 2009-03-21 06:03:50 runs: R10079129 R10079139 baseZdc/MHz: 0.134  0.117   LT=0.04  totLT=0.34
  F10403 beginGMT= 2009-03-21 13:40:49 runs: R10080019 R10080022 baseZdc/MHz: 0.124  0.117   LT=0.01  totLT=0.35
  F10404 beginGMT= 2009-03-22 00:47:22 runs: R10080039 R10080081 baseZdc/MHz: 0.097  0.067   LT=0.09  totLT=0.44
  F10407 beginGMT= 2009-03-22 13:50:23 runs: R10081007 R10081056 baseZdc/MHz: 0.090  0.067   LT=0.05  totLT=0.49
  F10412 beginGMT= 2009-03-23 15:51:17 runs: R10081096 R10082095 baseZdc/MHz: 0.150  0.058   LT=0.23  totLT=0.72
  F10415 beginGMT= 2009-03-24 15:42:29 runs: R10083013 R10083058 baseZdc/MHz: 0.103  0.072   LT=0.24  totLT=0.96
  F10426 beginGMT= 2009-03-25 11:24:55 runs: R10084005 R10084024 baseZdc/MHz: 0.122  0.095   LT=0.11  totLT=1.07
  F10434 beginGMT= 2009-03-26 14:31:56 runs: R10085016 R10085039 baseZdc/MHz: 0.095  0.069   LT=0.18  totLT=1.25
  F10439 beginGMT= 2009-03-27 10:39:46 runs: R10085096 R10086046 baseZdc/MHz: 0.105  0.046   LT=0.26  totLT=1.52
  F10448 beginGMT= 2009-03-28 12:34:27 runs: R10087001 R10087041 baseZdc/MHz: 0.121  0.073   LT=0.29  totLT=1.81
  F10449 beginGMT= 2009-03-28 23:42:07 runs: R10087051 R10087097 baseZdc/MHz: 0.130  0.072   LT=0.32  totLT=2.12
  F10450 beginGMT= 2009-03-29 10:37:42 runs: R10087110 R10088036 baseZdc/MHz: 0.111  0.067   LT=0.29  totLT=2.41
  F10454 beginGMT= 2009-03-29 21:32:36 runs: R10088058 R10088085 baseZdc/MHz: 0.110  0.069   LT=0.15  totLT=2.56
  F10455 beginGMT= 2009-03-30 08:49:01 runs: R10088096 R10089023 baseZdc/MHz: 0.122  0.075   LT=0.29  totLT=2.86
  F10463 beginGMT= 2009-03-31 09:58:44 runs: R10089079 R10090027 baseZdc/MHz: 0.137  0.068   LT=0.20  totLT=3.05
  F10464 beginGMT= 2009-03-31 15:15:32 runs: R10090037 R10090047 baseZdc/MHz: 0.067  0.036   LT=0.08  totLT=3.13
  F10465 beginGMT= 2009-03-31 23:59:06 runs: R10090071 R10090112 baseZdc/MHz: 0.111  0.056   LT=0.13  totLT=3.26
  F10471 beginGMT= 2009-04-02 14:15:46 runs: R10091089 R10092050 baseZdc/MHz: 0.123  0.059   LT=0.30  totLT=3.56
  F10476 beginGMT= 2009-04-03 10:22:29 runs: R10092084 R10093036 baseZdc/MHz: 0.136  0.074   LT=0.28  totLT=3.84
  F10478 beginGMT= 2009-04-03 18:34:45 runs: R10093057 R10093085 baseZdc/MHz: 0.125  0.102   LT=0.08  totLT=3.92
  F10482 beginGMT= 2009-04-04 10:13:27 runs: R10093110 R10094024 baseZdc/MHz: 0.143  0.095   LT=0.55  totLT=4.47
  F10486 beginGMT= 2009-04-05 03:53:17 runs: R10094063 R10094099 baseZdc/MHz: 0.103  0.071   LT=0.52  totLT=4.98
  F10490 beginGMT= 2009-04-05 20:12:17 runs: R10095019 R10095057 baseZdc/MHz: 0.146  0.091   LT=0.40  totLT=5.38
  F10494 beginGMT= 2009-04-06 11:04:26 runs: R10095120 R10096027 baseZdc/MHz: 0.131  0.080   LT=0.61  totLT=6.00
  F10505 beginGMT= 2009-04-07 15:18:54 runs: R10096139 R10097045 baseZdc/MHz: 0.140  0.077   LT=0.39  totLT=6.39
  F10507 beginGMT= 2009-04-08 03:36:02 runs: R10097086 R10097153 baseZdc/MHz: 0.151  0.097   LT=0.29  totLT=6.68
  F10508 beginGMT= 2009-04-08 12:53:58 runs: R10098029 R10098046 baseZdc/MHz: 0.117  0.097   LT=0.17  totLT=6.85
  F10517 beginGMT= 2009-04-09 14:33:12 runs: R10099020 R10099078 baseZdc/MHz: 0.123  0.080   LT=0.32  totLT=7.18
  F10525 beginGMT= 2009-04-10 11:23:25 runs: R10099185 R10100032 baseZdc/MHz: 0.168  0.090   LT=0.68  totLT=7.85
  F10526 beginGMT= 2009-04-10 21:38:21 runs: R10100049 R10100098 baseZdc/MHz: 0.169  0.112   LT=0.37  totLT=8.22
  F10527 beginGMT= 2009-04-11 08:53:44 runs: R10100164 R10101020 baseZdc/MHz: 0.161  0.100   LT=0.82  totLT=9.04
  F10528 beginGMT= 2009-04-11 15:59:06 runs: R10101028 R10101040 baseZdc/MHz: 0.168  0.140   LT=0.31  totLT=9.35
  F10531 beginGMT= 2009-04-12 05:38:14 runs: R10101059 R10102003 baseZdc/MHz: 0.166  0.101   LT=0.86  totLT=10.21
  F10532 beginGMT= 2009-04-12 17:37:32 runs: R10102031 R10102070 baseZdc/MHz: 0.155  0.097   LT=0.76  totLT=10.97
  F10535 beginGMT= 2009-04-13 09:37:11 runs: R10102094 R10103018 baseZdc/MHz: 0.151  0.084   LT=0.86  totLT=11.83
  F10536 beginGMT= 2009-04-13 17:47:30 runs: R10103027 R10103046 baseZdc/MHz: 0.128  0.082   LT=0.43  totLT=12.26
  low-lumi F10421, runs: 10083133,39,43  baseZdc=4.3kHz

BFC using NZS BSMD data needs this setup:
- chain->ls(3);
- StEmcRawMaker *emcRaw= (StEmcRawMaker *) chain->GetMaker("emcRaw");
- assert(emcRaw);
- StBemcRaw* bemcRaw = emcRaw->getBemcRaw();
- assert(bemcRaw);
- //based on "/afs/rhic.bnl.gov/star/packages/DEV/defines.h"
- int BSMDE=4, BSMDP=4;
- for(int i = BSMDE; i<=BSMDP; i++){
- bemcRaw->getControlTable()->CutOffType[i-1] = 0;
- bemcRaw->getControlTable()->CutOff[i-1] = -50;
- }
- printf(" BFC changed to read NZS data w/o pedestal subtraction nor ZS\n");
PPlot peds update:The actual path for the pedestal files used by PPlot at the moment is:
/a/pplot/files/eemc/defaultPanitkinSetup

At any moment you can see the pplots configuration specified in the
pplots config file:
~operator/pplots/.rootrc
on machine evp.starp

access to signed DCA:

I understand that in SL08c the SigmaDcaD and SigmaDcaZ are given by the
covariance matrix:
 Float_t SigmaDcaD = -999;
 Float_t SigmaDcaZ = -999;
    Int_t globind = track->index2Global();
    Int_t covind = -1;
    if (globind >=0 && muDst->globalTracks(globind)) {
      covind = muDst->globalTracks(globind)->index2Cov();
    }
    if (covind >=0 && muDst->covGlobTracks(covind)) {
      const float*covmat=muDst->covGlobTracks(covind)->errMatrix();
      SigmaDcaD = sqrt(covmat[0]);
      SigmaDcaZ = sqrt(covmat[2]);
    }

The above code works fine inside a loop over the primary track.

STAR geometry in 2009

TPC hit prametrization

//________________________________________________________________________________
void StiHitErrorCalculator::calculateError(Double_t _z,  Double_t _eta, Double_t _tanl, Double_t &ecross, Double_t &edip) const {
  static const Double_t tenMicrons = 1e-3;
  static const Double_t min2Err = tenMicrons*tenMicrons;
  static const Double_t max2Err = 1.;
  const Double_t *Coeff = ((StiHitErrorCalculator *) this)->coeff();
  Double_t dz = (200.-TMath::Abs(_z))/100.;
  if (dz < 0) dz = 0;
  Double_t cosCA = TMath::Cos(_eta);
  Double_t sinCA = TMath::Sin(_eta);
  if (cosCA<0.01) cosCA=0.01;
  Double_t tanCA = sinCA/cosCA;
  ecross=Coeff[0]+Coeff[1]*dz/(cosCA*cosCA) +Coeff[2]*tanCA*tanCA;
  if (ecross< min2Err) ecross = min2Err;
  if (ecross> max2Err) ecross = max2Err;
  Double_t tanDip=_tanl;
  Double_t cosDipInv2=1+tanDip*tanDip;
         edip=Coeff[3]+Coeff[4]*dz*cosDipInv2+Coeff[5]*tanDip*tanDip;
  if (edip< min2Err) edip = min2Err;
  if (edip> max2Err) edip = max2Err;
}

Re-fit of TPC errors, using Yuri's macro: Look on $STAR/mgr/fiterr.csh. Some comments inside.
But will be ready, it works many hours, because reconstruction runs many times.
In addition sometimes fit failed. In such cases manual intervention is needed, which
can do, unfortunatelly, only me. It is due to fit is very non linear and with constrains.

based on the Scott's spreadsheet ver2 (runListForWs-all-v2.csv), the following runs have no ETOW data:

Fill     run detectors
F10403 10080019 emc bsmd tpx
F10403 10080020 emc bsmd tpx
F10454 10088079 tof emc bsmd tpx
F10454 10088080 tof emc bsmd tpx
F10454 10088081 tof emc bsmd tpx
F10454 10088082 tof emc bsmd tpx
F10454 10088084 tof emc bsmd tpx
F10454 10088085 tof emc bsmd tpx
F10476 10092084 tof emc bsmd tpx
F10482 10093110 emc bsmd tpx
F10482 10093131 tof emc bsmd tpx
F10482 10094003 emc bsmd tpx
F10482 10094005 emc bsmd tpx
F10482 10094006 emc bsmd tpx
F10482 10094007 emc bsmd tpx
F10482 10094013 emc bsmd tpx
F10482 10094015 emc bsmd tpx
F10482 10094016 emc bsmd tpx
F10482 10094017 emc bsmd tpx
F10482 10094019 emc bsmd tpx
F10482 10094020 emc bsmd tpx
F10482 10094021 emc bsmd tpx
F10482 10094022 emc bsmd tpx
F10482 10094023 emc bsmd tpx
F10482 10094024 emc bsmd tpx
F10486 10094067 tof emc bsmd esmd tpx
F10517 10099020 emc bsmd tpx
F10527 10100164 tof emc bsmd tpx
F10531 10101059 tof emc bsmd tpx
F10531 10101060 tof emc bsmd tpx
F10535 10102098 tof emc bsmd tpx

Brain prepared bXIng pattern for 39 fills we need.
Jim S> about dead ETOW towers in 2009 run: Current red bases in HV system are

9P109 for a while now
1TD06
2TC04 since Feb
2TE09 noted as intermittant in March
3TD06
6TE04 since Feb
11TD05 since Feb
12TC03 intermittant for over a month saw green and yellow as checked now

BSMD strips exhibit strong relative gain variation:

1.3 M minB events from pp 500 and approximately adjusted the fit range to preserve integrals.
Here are examples of 4 strips from module 119 - they seems to have wide spread of gains:
strip slope relative_gains
17709P -0.040 +/- 0.0022  1.0 by definition
17710P -0.051 +/- 0.0032  1.24 +/- 0.1
17713P -0.053 +/-0.0032   1.33 +/- 0.1
17714P -0.059 +/-0.0033   1.48 +/- 0.1

Reasons for BSMD gain variation, by Gerard:I don't find it at all credible from first principles that BSMD hardware gains would vary only 10% ! Who says that??? Although HV adjustment can cancel some of the variation, since the granularity of HV setting is not so fine at first I would assume you don't take out much real variation by means of HV setting. And there should be some significant real variation due to wire diameter (maybe 25-50%), due to the preamp ASIC absolute capacitor variation (maybe 10-20%), due to systematic shifts in gain from parasitic capacitances of the connection wires and pickup strips (maybe 25-50%). All in all I would be very surprised to hear of better than 75-100% gain matching. Well, I could be wrong of course. But I hope that your physics goals do not *really* require 10% gain matching from the hardware, because I would be extremely skeptical that can be achieved. [Even in ESMD where the detector situation should be considered much 'cleaner', gain matching is probably 50% at best... No complaints there?]
Gerard

New predictions for A_L for W+,W- from deFlorian ,http://arxiv.org/pdf/0904.3821v1

For DSSV model predicted  mid-rapidity A_L (W+)=-0.35, beam pol P=0.35 --> eps=A_L*P=0.12.
If we have reasonable charge sign discrimination we need 625 W+ events for 3 sigma measurement.

If we can't resolve W+ from W- then the cross section weighted avr A_L(+ & -)  
is about 0.8* (-0.35) + 0.2(+0.1)=-0.26 --> eps=avrA_L*P=0.091 ,
we would need 1100 Ws of either sign to get 3 sigma measurement w/o charge sign discrimination.

For GRSV-std it gets worse.

Production doesn't use the scalers from the DB. It uses the scalers in the DAQ stream (in the files). recorded every 1 second. These are non-zero as it took me 10 minutes to confirm just now:

> root4star -b -q 'bfc.C(5,"pp2009a ITTF BEmcChkStat KeepTpcHit QAalltrigs btofDat Corr3 OSpaceZ2 OGridLeak3D","/star/data03/daq/2009/079/10079081s/st_physics_10079081_raw_1010001.daq")'

> root -l st_physics_10079081_raw_1010001.MuDst.root

MuDst.root.exe [2] MuDst.Scan("MuEvent.mRunInfo.mZdcCoincidenceRate")
***********************************
*    Row   * Instance * MuEvent.m *
***********************************
*        0 *        0 *     66646 *
*        1 *        0 *     66542 *
Location of TOF trays during pp 500 run
Vernier runs pp500:
10097097
10097098
10103044
10103046
10102067
10102068
Official pp500 run list for BFC production in July of 2009 : see attachment G.
sdsda

balewski's blog
Login or register to post comments

The STAR experiment

balewski's blog

User login

Navigation

*** Additional notes for pp 500, run 2009