Using tracks from OO200 data with both FF and RFF to look for any differences in track breaking (via location of the last point on tracks that end near the central membrane) between the two fields, or more specifically, between the two different TPC alignments. The hope is to see if this evidence of track breaking shows any sensitivity to differences in alignment.

I just grabbed a random run from each field and plotted both primary tracks as well as global tracks, the latter specifically to try to reach high pseudorapidities, closer to what we have in FXT data:

MuDst.Draw("PrimaryTracks.mLastPoint.mX2:PrimaryTracks.mLastPoint.mX1>>hpr(50,-200,200,50,-200,200)",
  "abs((PrimaryTracks.mLastPoint.mX3*sign(PrimaryTracks.mEta))+3)<4&&abs(PrimaryTracks.mEta)>0.3","zcol");
MuDst.Draw("GlobalTracks.mLastPoint.mX2:GlobalTracks.mLastPoint.mX1>>hgl(50,-200,200,50,-200,200)",
  "abs((GlobalTracks.mLastPoint.mX3*sign(GlobalTracks.mEta))+3)<4&&abs(GlobalTracks.mEta)>0.6","zcol");

I had to do this on a bunch of individual files, saving the histograms to file and then adding them together before plotting. Here are the results, which show a similar degree of track breaking around 9 o'clock. However, from the primary tracks there does appear to be some evidence of difference between the two fields, with track breaking closer to the 9-to-10 o'clock border in RFF, and closer to the 9-8 o'clock border in FF. The global t

	RFF	FF
Primary tracks, |η|>0.3
Global tracks, |η|>0.6

-Gene