[Halld-cal] [EXTERNAL] Re: BCAL timing in 2017 and 2018

Fri Jan 24 11:09:14 EST 2020

Hi Elton,

Thanks for looking into this.  I don't think that any TDC constants
would affect things since I believe we still aren't using TDC times in
the higher levels of reconstruction.

I wonder if /BCAL/tdiff_u_d is being used in the reconstruction.

See: halld_recon:src/libraries/BCAL/DBCALHit_factory.cc, lines 287-290

gxproj3 at ifarm1901 scripts> ccdb vers /BCAL/tdiff_u_d | grep mc
 79812  2017-06-13 14-08-53    2017-06-13 14-08-53     mc_generic
0L-inf
 79803  2017-06-12 14-03-25    2017-06-12 14-03-25     mc
30000L-40000L
 7685   2015-11-19 16-38-14    2015-11-19 16-38-14     mc
0L-inf

Cheers,
Sean

On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 10:54 AM Elton Smith <elton at jlab.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Sean and Mark,
>
> I have taken a quick look at BCAL timing constants that might be
> changing for the MC. See below. From what I can tell all constants have
> mc data sets covering from 0L-inf, except for timewalk_tdc and
> timewalk_tdc_c4. Could these be causing the problem?
>
>
>
> ifarm1802:gen_2pi_primakoff>printenv | grep -i connection
> SSH_CONNECTION=129.57.82.214 64865 129.57.70.23 22
> CCDB_CONNECTION=mysql://ccdb_user@hallddb.jlab.org/ccdb
> RCDB_CONNECTION=mysql://rcdb@hallddb.jlab.org/rcdb
>
>
>
> ifarm1802:gen_2pi_primakoff>ccdb vers BCAL/ADC_timing_offsets | grep mc
>   349    2014-09-17 22-25-24    2014-09-17 22-25-24 mc              0L-inf
>   269    2014-07-28 14-48-52    2014-07-28 14-48-52 mc              0L-inf
>   179    2014-06-17 15-19-20    2014-06-17 15-19-20 mc              0L-inf
> ifarm1802:gen_2pi_primakoff>ccdb vers BCAL/base_time_offset | grep mc
>   21638  2017-01-17 13-47-45    2017-01-17 13-47-45 mc              0L-inf
>   21637  2017-01-17 13-43-49    2017-01-17 13-43-49 mc              0L-inf
>   7553   2015-08-19 13-11-04    2015-08-19 13-11-04 mc              0L-inf
>   7543   2015-07-30 14-45-39    2015-07-30 14-45-39 mc              0L-inf
>   7532   2015-07-23 14-38-06    2015-07-23 14-38-06 mc_evio         0L-inf
>   7531   2015-07-23 08-49-26    2015-07-23 08-49-26 mc_6gev         0L-inf
>   7530   2015-07-23 08-49-12    2015-07-23 08-49-12 mc              0L-inf
>   336    2014-09-17 22-23-27    2014-09-17 22-23-27 mc              0L-inf
> ifarm1802:gen_2pi_primakoff>ccdb vers BCAL/timewalk_tdc | grep mc
> ifarm1802:gen_2pi_primakoff>ccdb vers BCAL/timewalk_tdc_c4 | grep mc
> ifarm1802:gen_2pi_primakoff>ccdb vers BCAL/channel_global_offset | grep mc
>   7684   2015-11-19 16-38-14    2015-11-19 16-38-14 mc              0L-inf
> ifarm1802:gen_2pi_primakoff>ccdb vers BCAL/TDC_offsets | grep mc
>   348    2014-09-17 22-25-21    2014-09-17 22-25-21 mc              0L-inf
>   268    2014-07-28 14-48-49    2014-07-28 14-48-49 mc              0L-inf
>   178    2014-06-17 15-19-14    2014-06-17 15-19-14 mc              0L-inf
>
>
>
> Elton Smith
> Jefferson Lab MS 12H3
> 12000 Jefferson Ave STE 4
> Newport News, VA 23606
> (757)269-7625
> (757)269-6331 fax
>
> On 1/24/20 9:57 AM, Sean Dobbs wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We ran out of time at the Calorimetry meeting, but I wanted to bring
> > this email that I sent last week up again, to see if anyone had any
> > thoughts (or maybe the issue was resolved offline?).  This seems
> > crucial for anyone analyzing data.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Sean
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 6:11 PM Sean Dobbs <sdobbs at fsu.edu> wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> The discrepancies that Jon Zarling has seen between runs in the
> >> 30000's and 40000's
> >> (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_JeffersonLab_HDGeant4_issues_138&d=DwIGaQ&c=CJqEzB1piLOyyvZjb8YUQw&r=c-_tH8evYLC4MjBfbp0hiQ&m=bg_IXzqYQJjEPLmMwJGH1St3kILY4fM4wKKQyqQZv6s&s=u8ONG-wYb3Dt1x9D-l1BBmRtbu1qw1-xCbph3Vst7h4&e= ) were brought up
> >> in today's HDGeant4 meeting.  Differences between run periods are
> >> surely due to some difference in the calibration constants used.
> >>
> >> I wonder if someone could remind me what the difference between how we
> >> did timing calibrations in 2017 and 2018 was?  I noticed that
> >> /BCAL/tdiff_u_d had non-zero values in the 30000's and was zeroed out
> >> in the 40000's.
> >> Frankly, I can't remember what was done right now and couldn't find
> >> out where it was written down.   This is relevant to the simulations
> >> since this table is applied when calibrating digihits, but isn't
> >> compensated for in mcsmear.  But maybe I'm not remembering an
> >> important piece to the puzzle...
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Sean
> >>
> >>
> >> ifarm1402.jlab.org> ccdb cat BCAL/tdiff_u_d:41509:mc | head -n 15
> >> +------------+
> >> | tdiff_u_d  |
> >> | double     |
> >> +------------+
> >> | 0.0        |
> >> | 0.0        |
> >> | 0.0        |
> >> | 0.0        |
> >> | 0.0        |
> >> | 0.0        |
> >> | 0.0        |
> >> | 0.0        |
> >> | 0.0        |
> >> | 0.0        |
> >> | 0.0        |
> >> <SNIP>
> >> ifarm1402.jlab.org> ccdb cat BCAL/tdiff_u_d:31001:mc | head -n 15
> >> +------------+
> >> | tdiff_u_d  |
> >> | double     |
> >> +------------+
> >> | 0.3226     |
> >> | 0.3226     |
> >> | 0.3226     |
> >> | 0.3226     |
> >> | 0.1294     |
> >> | 0.1294     |
> >> | 0.1294     |
> >> | 0.1294     |
> >> | -0.1444    |
> >> | -0.1444    |
> >> | -0.1444    |
>