Difference between revisions of "BCAL Beam Test Plots, November 20, 2006"
From GlueXWiki
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
; How does this look over the entire tagger spectrum? | ; How does this look over the entire tagger spectrum? | ||
[[Image:Energysum_1.gif|480px]] | [[Image:Energysum_1.gif|480px]] | ||
− | + | The 0.151 MeV/Ch is for a tagger photon (digregard this). The others are for energy deposit in the scintillator. | |
<br> | <br> | ||
; What if we look at MC 8 vs North 8 with Tagger Energy cuts? | ; What if we look at MC 8 vs North 8 with Tagger Energy cuts? |
Revision as of 19:36, 17 November 2006
First go
- Gain Correction:
- Establish the means of each cell in the Monte Carlo and find the ratio wrt MC Cell 8
- Find the current ratio of each ADC in the beamtest data wrt to North 8
- Correct the ADC ratio to match the Monte Carlo Ratios
- The ratio of MC Cell 8 to North 8 defines the MeV/Channel
- How does this look over the entire tagger spectrum?
The 0.151 MeV/Ch is for a tagger photon (digregard this). The others are for energy deposit in the scintillator.
- What if we look at MC 8 vs North 8 with Tagger Energy cuts?
- Very Strange: Apparent Energy Dependence
- How do we see what's going on?
- Cuts: Trig==8 (MOR and BCal OR), Nphotons==1
- Possibly there are e+e-, maybe. Need to check the veto but it doesn't seem to be in the Root Trees
- Cut out the lower hump from the ADC sum.
This seems to remove the "junk" from the left of the spectra, and will flatten out the MC8/North8 ratio. But what is the "junk?