====== Etude pour RPC 2018 ======
===== Piedestaux =====

==== Toutes les pistes simulatanees apres alignement FE1_24CH_10 ====

On ne s'occupe que du FE5 , i.e TDC8 , DIF 2058

Alignment pistes separees a 515 DAC count

Run piste branchees => 739032

Run pistes debranchees => 739033

===== Calibration =====

On reprend les resultats avec FE2 (celui qui est mort)
Injection cote large


^run ^ Injection (mV) ^ cote large ^ Etroit ^
|737872|500|559|550|
|737873|400|541|534|
|737874|350|532|525|
|737875|300|522|516|
|737876|250|513|505.5|
|737877|225|507|502|
|737878|200|502|497|

<code>

{
  TCanvas *c1 = new TCanvas("c1","A Simple Graph with error bars",200,10,700,1200);
  gStyle->SetMarkerStyle(8);
  gStyle->SetMarkerSize(.5);
  gStyle->SetOptFit();
  
  c1->GetFrame()->SetBorderSize(12);
  c1.Divide(1,2);
  Float_t ic[7]={200,225,250,300,350,400,500};
  Float_t dic[7]={1,1,1,1,1,1,1};
  Float_t thrHR[7]={502,507,513,522,532,541,559};
  Float_t dthrHR[7]={1,1,1,1,1,1,1};
  Float_t thrLR[7]={497,502,505.5,516,525,534,550};
  Float_t dthrLR[7]={1,1,1,1,1,1,1};
  c1.cd(1);
  TGraphErrors *gr = new TGraphErrors(7,ic,thrHR,dic,dthrHR);
  gr->SetName("gr");
  gr->SetTitle("Turn on DAC (High Radius) vs Injection");
  gr->SetMarkerColor(4);
  gr->SetMarkerStyle(21);
  gr->Draw("ap");
  gr->Fit("pol1");
  gr->GetXaxis()->SetTitle("Injection (fC)");
  gr->GetYaxis()->SetTitle("Turn On (DAC unit)");
  c1.cd(2);
  TGraphErrors *grl = new TGraphErrors(7,ic,thrLR,dic,dthrLR);
  grl->SetTitle("Turn on DAC (Low Radius) vs Injection");
  grl->SetName("grl");
  grl->SetMarkerColor(3);
  grl->SetMarkerStyle(22);
  grl->Draw("ap");
  grl->Fit("pol1");
  grl->GetXaxis()->SetTitle("Injection (fC)");
  grl->GetYaxis()->SetTitle("Turn On (DAC unit)");
  
  c1->Modified();

  c1->Update();
}

</code>
<imgcaption calib_ipnl_fe2_150_calib | Turn -on (DAC VTH) en fonction de l'injection >
{{ :fe2_150k_calib.png?500 |}}

</imgcaption>

On met le seuil a **494**

**(494-471)/0.1845 = 125 fC /2 => 62.5 fC de seuil par canal**


^ run ^ Injection(fC) ^ N trg ^ N 2 ^ N 14 ^ Eff ^ deFF ^ Eff XY ^ deff XY ^ dt (ns)  ^ RMS dt (ns) ^
|737880|160|7748|6618|2007|85.42| 0.40|25.90| 0.50|-17.30|0.336|
|737881|170|4103|4020|2651|97.98| 0.22|64.61| 0.75|-17.36|0.307|
|737882|180|5100|5096|4476|99.92| 0.04|87.76| 0.46|-17.40|0.310|
|737883|190|4829|4829|4672|100.00| 0.00|96.75| 0.26|-17.42|0.291|
|737884|200|3361|3361|3216|100.00| 0.00|95.69| 0.35|-17.46|0.277|
|737885|210|3268|3265|3227|99.91| 0.05|98.75| 0.19|-17.49|0.228|
|737886|220|3408|3403|3313|99.85| 0.07|97.21| 0.28|-17.49|0.193|
|737887|250|3096|3096|3095|100.00| 0.00|99.97| 0.03|-17.52|0.203|




On des burst de bruits.... ce qui explique les fluctuations

Si on met le seuil a 496 et 200 mV

^ run ^ Injection(fC) ^ N trg ^ N 2 ^ N 14 ^ Eff ^ deFF ^ Eff XY ^ deff XY ^ dt (ns)  ^ RMS dt (ns) ^
|737892|210|3095|3095|3034|100.00| 0.00|98.03| 0.25|-17.45|0.288|
|737888|200|3093|3093|3008|100.00| 0.00|97.25| 0.29|-17.46|0.298|
|737889|190|3094|3092|2718|99.94| 0.05|87.85| 0.59|-17.39|0.316|
|737890|180|3094|3041|2040|98.29| 0.23|65.93| 0.85|-17.37|0.308|
|737891|170|3097|2611|699|84.31| 0.65|22.57| 0.75|-17.31|0.347|

<imgcaption calib_ipnl_fe2_150_71_eff | Efficacite de detectiron du cote de l'injection (orange) et oppose (bleu) >
{{ :calib_ipnl:fe2_150k_piste71_eff.png?500 |}}

</imgcaption>
<code>
{
  TCanvas *c1 = new TCanvas("c1","A Simple Graph with error bars",200,10,700,700);
 
 
  Float_t ic[5]={170,180,190,200,210};
  Float_t dic[5]={1,1,1,1,1};
  Float_t NTR[5]={3097,3094,3094,3093,3095};
  Float_t NHR[5]={2611,3041,3092,3093,3095};
  Float_t NLR[5]={699,2040,2718,3008,3034};

  Float_t eff1[5],deff1[5],eff2[5],deff2[5];
  for (Int_t i=0;i<5;i++)
    {
      eff1[i]=NHR[i]/NTR[i];
      if (NHR[i] != NTR[i])
	deff1[i]=sqrt(eff1[i]*(1.-eff1[i])/NTR[i]);
      else
	deff1[i]=sqrt(2/NTR[i]);
       eff2[i]=NLR[i]/NTR[i];
      if (NLR[i] != NTR[i])
	deff2[i]=sqrt(eff2[i]*(1.-eff2[i])/NTR[i]);
      else
	deff2[i]=sqrt(2/NTR[i]);
    }
  
  TGraphErrors *grl = new TGraphErrors(5,ic,eff2,dic,deff2);
  grl->SetTitle("Efficiency vs Injection (Cut 494 DAC)");
  grl->SetName("grl");
  grl->SetMarkerColor(4);
  grl->SetMarkerStyle(22);
  grl->Draw("ap");

  TGraphErrors *gr = new TGraphErrors(5,ic,eff1,dic,deff1);
  gr->SetName("gr");

  gr->SetMarkerColor(2);
  gr->SetMarkerStyle(21);
  gr->Draw("p");
  grl->GetXaxis()->SetTitle("Injection (fC)");
  grl->GetYaxis()->SetTitle("Efficiency ");
  c1->Modified();

  c1->Update();
}

</code>
Resolution la plus mauvaise observee ~ 0.3/8.6 => 5 cm 

Su la <imgref calib_ipnl_fe2_150_71_eff> on observe:

  * Seuil minimal de detection electronique => 90 fC, Q injected 180 fC

  * Seuil minimal de mesure X,Y  Q injected 200 fC

Les résultats sont quasiment identiques à ceux mesurés avec le Board 3 (FE #4)

Et pour la resolution

<code>
{
  TCanvas *c1 = new TCanvas("c1","A Simple Graph with error bars");
 
 
  Float_t ic[11]={160,170,180,190,200,210,220,230,250,500,1000};
  Float_t dic[11]={1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1};
  Float_t res[11]={0.402,0.377,0.326,0.292,0.252,0.228,0.220,0.239,0.192,0.077,0.051};

  Float_t dres[11];
  for (Int_t i=0;i<11;i++)
    {
      dres[i]=0.01;
    }
  
  TGraphErrors *grl = new TGraphErrors(11,ic,res,dic,dres);
  grl->SetTitle("Time resolution on difference vs Injection");
  grl->SetName("grl");
  grl->SetMarkerColor(4);
  grl->SetMarkerStyle(22);
  grl->Draw("ap");
  grl->GetXaxis()->SetTitle("Injection (fC)");
  grl->GetYaxis()->SetTitle("Resolution (ns) ");

  c1->Modified();

  c1->Update();
}
</code>
===== Etude de l'injection FE#5 =====

Injection cote HR
^ run ^ Injection ^ HR Turn On ^ LR Turn On ^
|739043 | 800 |737 | 618 |
|739044 | 700 |684.9 | 597.5 |
|739045 | 600 |639.5 | 578.2 |
|739046 | 500 |605.2 | 563.5 |
|739047 | 400 |579.7 | 549.7 |
|739048 | 350 |568 | 543.4 |
|739049 | 300 |556.2 | 536.5 |
|739051 | 250 |546.4 | 531.5 |
|739052 | 225 |540| 527 |

 --- //[[laurent.mirabito@gmail.com|DAQ user]] 2018/01/30 09:20//

''__**100 kOhm sur l'alim au lieu de 150 k**__''