- bouchet's home page
- Posts
- 2016
- 2015
- December (1)
- November (3)
- October (2)
- September (2)
- August (2)
- June (2)
- April (5)
- March (2)
- February (3)
- January (2)
- 2014
- December (2)
- November (2)
- October (3)
- September (2)
- August (3)
- July (1)
- June (3)
- May (6)
- April (6)
- March (1)
- February (2)
- January (1)
- 2013
- December (2)
- November (3)
- October (3)
- September (4)
- August (1)
- July (1)
- May (4)
- April (6)
- March (4)
- February (3)
- 2012
- 2011
- December (2)
- November (2)
- October (4)
- September (1)
- August (2)
- July (6)
- June (2)
- May (3)
- April (3)
- March (2)
- 2010
- 2009
- December (2)
- November (1)
- October (3)
- September (1)
- August (1)
- July (1)
- June (2)
- April (1)
- March (2)
- February (2)
- January (1)
- 2008
- My blog
- Post new blog entry
- All blogs
HFT pointing resolution
Comparison of the pointing resolution for THICK and THIN configuration.
I used MuDst files from :
- thick : /home/yfzhang/hft/upgr15/cd1/thick/StEvent/
- thin : /home/yfzhang/hft/upgr15/cd1/thin/StEvent/
- both have the following particles embedded : 20 D0, 30 Ds /evt with power-law pt, 30 Lc /evt with flat pt (fz) + hijing event
first pass : here
second pass : here : in these slides I used a double gaus fit instead of fitSlices, to get the pointing resolution.
It takes into account in a better way the tails seen in the DCA distibution
- some informations about the upgr15 geometry : radius, thickness, hit errors for PIXEL,IST and beam pipe : here
- toy model : use the definition of the pointing resolution + full MCS definition : here
Comparison of the pointing resolution for THICK/THIN geometry with the hand calculations by J. Thomas
(note : the hand calculation DO not have the log term in the MCS)
Comparison of the pointing resolution for THICK/THIN geometry with the hand calculations by J. Thomas (with corrected curves)
Some answers for CD23 homework (done for THIN configuration)
Groups:
- bouchet's blog
- Login or register to post comments