- genevb's home page
- Posts
- 2024
- 2023
- 2022
- September (1)
- 2021
- 2020
- 2019
- 2018
- 2017
- December (1)
- October (3)
- September (1)
- August (1)
- July (2)
- June (2)
- April (2)
- March (2)
- February (1)
- 2016
- November (2)
- September (1)
- August (2)
- July (1)
- June (2)
- May (2)
- April (1)
- March (5)
- February (2)
- January (1)
- 2015
- December (1)
- October (1)
- September (2)
- June (1)
- May (2)
- April (2)
- March (3)
- February (1)
- January (3)
- 2014
- 2013
- 2012
- 2011
- January (3)
- 2010
- February (4)
- 2009
- 2008
- 2005
- October (1)
- My blog
- Post new blog entry
- All blogs

# Ionic space charge density

Updated on Wed, 2015-06-24 14:21. Originally created by genevb on 2014-04-03 12:09.

In his calculation of expected space charge (local copy) in 200 GeV AuAu collisions in STAR, Howard concludes that, for the TPC, the generated space charge is as follows:

At a luminosity...

ℒ = 90 x 10

...we expect...

ρ = ρ(z,r)

ρ(0, 50 cm) = 1.9 x 10

So...

ρ / ℒ = ~2.1 x 10

_________________

C-AD reports that during Run 11 200 GeV AuAu operations, their delivered ℒ

For distortion corrections, we use the modeled average charge density over the full TPC volume...

<ρ

= 2π ∬

= ∬

Using our shape of...

ρ(z,r) = C (z

...where z[0, 208.707 cm] and [47.9 cm, 200.0 cm] respectively (the calculation is per TPC half). The z and r integrals can be separated...

<ρ

= C (21779.3 * 0.99513) / (208.707 * 18852.8)

= C * 0.005508

...and...

ρ(0, 50 cm) = C * 0.04394

So we can write the relationship...

ρ(0, 50 cm) = 7.977 * <ρ

In Run 11 200 GeV AuAu operations, we determined the following expression from the calibration...

<ρ

...where

Plotting the Run 11 200 GeV AuAu scaler rates (click on the below image for a larger version), I see that the maximum observed

Using the above calibrated equation, the observed <ρ

Thus, I calculate an observed value for:

ρ(0, 50 cm)

ρ / ℒ = ~5.7 x 10

__________________

I made a calculation of the cathode current expected from space charge in Run 13 510 GeV pp operations, with the conclusion that, while agreeing to within an order of magnitude, the current due to space charge ion neutralization should be larger than what was observed by a factor of at least 2x.

__________________

That means we see nearly 3x (~2.7 to be slightly more precise, but should be taken with ~10% error anyhow) the space charge per 200 GeV AuAu collision than Howard calculated. It's valuable to note that for Run 11 we had no inner silicon, so there wasn't some additional source of background to radically change the charged track production.

If it's really all due to a contaminant carrying the ionic charge instead of methane, then it's moving 3 times more slowly than the 250 cm/sec that Howard used for his calculations.

Yuri Fisyak suggests that Howard's input is flawed for two reasons:

__________________

-Gene

**Howard Wieman's calculations:**

In his calculation of expected space charge (local copy) in 200 GeV AuAu collisions in STAR, Howard concludes that, for the TPC, the generated space charge is as follows:

At a luminosity...

ℒ = 90 x 10

^{26}/ cm

^{2}sec

...we expect...

ρ = ρ(z,r)

ρ(0, 50 cm) = 1.9 x 10

^{-14}C/cm

^{3}

So...

ρ / ℒ = ~2.1 x 10

^{-42}C sec/cm

_________________

**My calculations from the SpaceCharge distortion corrections:**

C-AD reports that during Run 11 200 GeV AuAu operations, their delivered ℒ

_{peak}was ~50 x 10

^{26}/ cm

^{2}sec.

For distortion corrections, we use the modeled average charge density over the full TPC volume...

<ρ

_{SC}> ≡ ∭

_{{full TPC volume}}ρ(z,r,phi) r

*d*r

*d*z

*d*φ / ∭

_{{full TPC volume}}r

*d*r

*d*z

*d*φ

= 2π ∬

_{∀z,r}ρ(z,r) r

*d*r

*d*z / 2π ∬

_{∀z,r}r

*d*r

*d*z

= ∬

_{∀z,r}ρ(z,r) r

*d*r

*d*z / ∬

_{∀z,r}r

*d*r

*d*z

Using our shape of...

ρ(z,r) = C (z

_{GG}- |z|) [(3191/r

^{2}+122.5/r - 0.395) / 15823]

...where z

_{GG}= 208.707 cm, C is an overall magnitude coefficient, and z and r go over

<ρ

_{SC}> = C ∫

_{∀z}(z

_{GG}- |z|)

*d*z ∫

_{∀r}[(3191/r

^{2}+122.5/r - 0.395) / 15823] r

*d*r / ∫

_{∀z}

*d*z ∫

_{∀r}r

*d*r

= C (21779.3 * 0.99513) / (208.707 * 18852.8)

= C * 0.005508

...and...

ρ(0, 50 cm) = C * 0.04394

So we can write the relationship...

ρ(0, 50 cm) = 7.977 * <ρ

_{SC}>

In Run 11 200 GeV AuAu operations, we determined the following expression from the calibration...

<ρ

_{SC}>/ϵ

_{0}= (4.091 x 10

^{-8}V/cm

^{2}) (

*zdcsum*- 16320 Hz)

...where

*zdcsum*is the sum of the singles scaler rates from the east and west ZDCs.

Plotting the Run 11 200 GeV AuAu scaler rates (click on the below image for a larger version), I see that the maximum observed

*zdcsum*rate is in the neighborhood of 1 MHz, but it's not simple to decide what this number should be. We want to match the occasion(s) that C-AD used to determine ℒ

_{peak}, but the maxima vary from fill-to-fill, often below 1 MHz, and sometimes above it. This number is probably best taken with an error on the order of 10%.

Using the above calibrated equation, the observed <ρ

_{SC,peak}> was ~0.040 ϵ

_{0}V/cm

^{2}. Plugging in ϵ

_{0}= 8.854 x 10

^{-14}F/cm, we have <ρ

_{SC,peak}> = 3.54 x 10

^{-15}C/cm

^{3}.

Thus, I calculate an observed value for:

ρ(0, 50 cm)

_{peak}/ ℒ

_{peak}= (<ρ

_{SC,peak}> * 7.977) / ℒ

_{peak}

ρ / ℒ = ~5.7 x 10

^{-42}C sec/cm

__________________

**My calculations from the cathode currents:**

I made a calculation of the cathode current expected from space charge in Run 13 510 GeV pp operations, with the conclusion that, while agreeing to within an order of magnitude, the current due to space charge ion neutralization should be larger than what was observed by a factor of at least 2x.

__________________

**Summary:**

That means we see nearly 3x (~2.7 to be slightly more precise, but should be taken with ~10% error anyhow) the space charge per 200 GeV AuAu collision than Howard calculated. It's valuable to note that for Run 11 we had no inner silicon, so there wasn't some additional source of background to radically change the charged track production.

If it's really all due to a contaminant carrying the ionic charge instead of methane, then it's moving 3 times more slowly than the 250 cm/sec that Howard used for his calculations.

Yuri Fisyak suggests that Howard's input is flawed for two reasons:

- Howard uses a
*d*N/*d*η for primary tracks only. We've historically seen global track multiplicities about twice as high as primary track multiplicities per event, and global tracks are more relevant to the calculation. - Even with global tracks, there are many TPC hits that are not included on reconstructed tracks. These are likely due to tracks which we simply do not reconstruct well, such as very low pT secondaries.

__________________

-Gene

»

- genevb's blog
- Login or register to post comments