Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ADC values too large #4

Open
DavidAdey opened this issue Nov 14, 2012 · 8 comments
Open

ADC values too large #4

DavidAdey opened this issue Nov 14, 2012 · 8 comments
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@DavidAdey
Copy link
Member

The values for x/yview_adc (which I think corresponds 1:1 to PE) seems too large, ranging from tens to thousands. The energy scale value seems Ok (70/MeV) so either the dE is wrong or the summing of the hits has a problem.

@ghost ghost assigned DavidAdey Nov 14, 2012
@tunnell
Copy link
Member

tunnell commented Nov 14, 2012

Could it be a proton or neutron stopping? 1000 is 14 MeV... is that crazy? I agree though that electrons would saturate. It should be PE. All it does it multiply what I think is energy in MeV by 70 (or something similar).

@DavidAdey
Copy link
Member Author

Maybe. I'd like to distinguish the hits by their PID, but that's a different issue. The obvious tracks look more sensible (1-4MeV / plane), so you're probably right. I'm just beginning to keep track of curious things so feel free to close the issue.

@tunnell
Copy link
Member

tunnell commented Nov 14, 2012

Track away.... we at least know that we need to cap out the ADC values. Maybe cap at 1024?

On 14 Nov 2012, at 17:11, DavidAdey <[email protected]mailto:[email protected]>
wrote:

Maybe. I'd like to distinguish the hits by their PID, but that's a different issue. The obvious tracks look more sensible (1-4MeV / plane), so you're probably right. I'm just beginning to keep track of curious things so feel free to close the issue.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/4#issuecomment-10374460.

@tunnell
Copy link
Member

tunnell commented Nov 14, 2012

Also: the PID isn't necessarily unique.

On 14 Nov 2012, at 17:11, DavidAdey <[email protected]mailto:[email protected]>
wrote:

Maybe. I'd like to distinguish the hits by their PID, but that's a different issue. The obvious tracks look more sensible (1-4MeV / plane), so you're probably right. I'm just beginning to keep track of curious things so feel free to close the issue.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/4#issuecomment-10374460.

@DavidAdey
Copy link
Member Author

With the ADC we first need to multiply the PE by the gain of the electronics (the sample SiPM plots in the LOI show about 30/PE). We can probably go higher than 10bits for the limit, but the details I'm not sure on.

@tunnell
Copy link
Member

tunnell commented Nov 14, 2012

How expensive do ADCs get? I thought after 10 or so they were pricey.

On 14 Nov 2012, at 18:05, DavidAdey <[email protected]mailto:[email protected]> wrote:

With the ADC we first need to multiply the PE by the gain of the electronics (the sample SiPM plots in the LOI show about 30/PE). We can probably go higher than 10bits for the limit, but the details I'm not sure on.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/4#issuecomment-10376666.

@DavidAdey
Copy link
Member Author

Yeah, that's what I mean by details. They do jump in price, but it depends on how its balanced against rate, channels, and so on. I'll ask around.

@DavidAdey
Copy link
Member Author

Ok, so the high values are too large - there's a correction to the linear scaling of light yield with energy.

On the ADCs, they will probably be 12bits but in effect only 10bits, with around 5 ADC counts per PE. Apparently this can be got around by using multiple chips with varying gains.

So, I've amended the light yield calculation, but will approximate the limit at 1000PE for now.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants