Difference between revisions of "GlueX Start Counter Meeting, December 15, 2011"
(→Minutes) |
m (Text replacement - "www/halldweb1/" to "www/halldweb/") |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
==Slides== | ==Slides== | ||
| − | Talks can be deposited in the directory <code>/group/halld/www/ | + | Talks can be deposited in the directory <code>/group/halld/www/halldweb/html/talks/2011-4Q</code> on the JLab CUE. This directory is accessible from the web at https://halldweb.jlab.org/talks/2011-4Q/ . You have to be a member of the "halld" Unix group to put files in this directory. |
=Minutes= | =Minutes= | ||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
==Scintillator shaping and polishing== | ==Scintillator shaping and polishing== | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | Werner was not happy with the scintillator shaped and polished and then re-polished by Plastic Craft. Two came back from re-polishing slightly better, two came back worse. He started looking for another vendor and has identified two candidates so far, [http://www.mcnealplasticmachining.com McNeal Enterprises] and [http://www.enfplastics.com/ E&F Plastics]. He sent drawings to both, and both say that they can do the job. E&F proposes to mill all thirty counters out of a single solid piece of scintillator. (Plastic Craft presses the scintillator.) Responses from both companies have been prompt. The quotes come in at about $200 per piece. Subsequently, Werner sent a "good" and "bad" scintillator to each; the "good" for re-re-polishing, the "bad" any destructive studies they care to do. | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | two | + | |
| − | + | ||
| − | E&F | + | |
| − | + | ||
| − | E&F | + | |
| − | $200 per | + | |
| − | sent a good and | + | |
| − | they | + | |
==Re-measurement of Plastic Craft samples== | ==Re-measurement of Plastic Craft samples== | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | Eric re-measured the two "good" scintillators after re-polishing by Plastic craft. He sees about 500 ps resolution from the far end and about 300 ps from the near end, a slight improvement from what was measured before re-polishing. These are unwrapped pieces, using SiPM read-out. | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ==SiPM read-out geometry== | |
| − | + | We looked at [[Media:Sym 30 front combined.pdf|drawings from Werner]] and [https://halldweb.jlab.org/talks/2011-4Q/SC_12_15_11.pptx some from Chuck] showing concepts for placement and mounting of "custom" arrays of 3×3 mm SiPM's. Werner would prefer a configuration where no light guide is needed. | |
| − | + | Beni noted that with no light guide, there will be non-linearity when hits are near the read-out end due to short-attenuation-length photons being detected. He also repeated Eugene Chudakov's point that some modularity in the mounting would be convenient if SiPM's ever had to be replaced. | |
| − | + | Mark reported that the drawings on the wiki page have been sent to Hamamatsu, but no response has been received yet. | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | There was a basic question that came up: are the SiPM's individual surface-mount components that we place on a circuit board ourselves or are they packaged in the 1×5 configuration by Hamamatsu? More homework is obviously needed. | |
Latest revision as of 21:27, 31 March 2015
GlueX Start Counter Meeting
Thursday, December 15, 2011
10 am EST
JLab: CEBAF Center, Room L207
Contents
Agenda
- Announcements
- Review minutes from previous meeting
- Prototype Report
- SiPM configuration
- Contract Status
- Simulation Status
Communication Information
Video Conferencing
- ESNet: 8542554 (non-standard)
- EVO:
- Meeting URL: http://evo.caltech.edu/evoNext/koala.jnlp?meeting=e9eIeivevnaeaBIsaaI9
- Phone Bridge ID: 11 7685
Slides
Talks can be deposited in the directory /group/halld/www/halldweb/html/talks/2011-4Q on the JLab CUE. This directory is accessible from the web at https://halldweb.jlab.org/talks/2011-4Q/ . You have to be a member of the "halld" Unix group to put files in this directory.
Minutes
Present:
- FIU: Werner Boeglin, Puneet Khetarpal, Eric Pooser
- JLab: Chuck Hutton, Mark Ito (chair), Beni Zihlmann
Scintillator shaping and polishing
Werner was not happy with the scintillator shaped and polished and then re-polished by Plastic Craft. Two came back from re-polishing slightly better, two came back worse. He started looking for another vendor and has identified two candidates so far, McNeal Enterprises and E&F Plastics. He sent drawings to both, and both say that they can do the job. E&F proposes to mill all thirty counters out of a single solid piece of scintillator. (Plastic Craft presses the scintillator.) Responses from both companies have been prompt. The quotes come in at about $200 per piece. Subsequently, Werner sent a "good" and "bad" scintillator to each; the "good" for re-re-polishing, the "bad" any destructive studies they care to do.
Re-measurement of Plastic Craft samples
Eric re-measured the two "good" scintillators after re-polishing by Plastic craft. He sees about 500 ps resolution from the far end and about 300 ps from the near end, a slight improvement from what was measured before re-polishing. These are unwrapped pieces, using SiPM read-out.
SiPM read-out geometry
We looked at drawings from Werner and some from Chuck showing concepts for placement and mounting of "custom" arrays of 3×3 mm SiPM's. Werner would prefer a configuration where no light guide is needed.
Beni noted that with no light guide, there will be non-linearity when hits are near the read-out end due to short-attenuation-length photons being detected. He also repeated Eugene Chudakov's point that some modularity in the mounting would be convenient if SiPM's ever had to be replaced.
Mark reported that the drawings on the wiki page have been sent to Hamamatsu, but no response has been received yet.
There was a basic question that came up: are the SiPM's individual surface-mount components that we place on a circuit board ourselves or are they packaged in the 1×5 configuration by Hamamatsu? More homework is obviously needed.
