[Moller] [EXTERNAL] Re: Detector meetings restart

[James Fast]

Michael,
I will only miss once a month at the earlier time which is fine.

Jim

James Fast
MOLLER Project Manager
Jefferson Lab
757-230-6833
 

On 1/12/21, 10:52 AM, "Michael Gericke" <Michael.Gericke at umanitoba.ca> wrote:

    Good morning everyone,

    The doodle poll indicates that the best meeting time is 4:00 pm to 5:00 
    pm (EST) on Tuesdays. There is also
    3:00 pm to 4:00 pm on Tuesdays, with one if-need-be (Jim). So as not to 
    make this meeting too late for people on
    the east coast I would be inclined to say we meet at the earlier time, 
    unless there are significant objections.

    Either way, I suggest we alternate with the simulation meeting (same 
    week day), as we have done in the
    past. So I'll wait to see when that sequence starts to pick a start date 
    for this meeting.

    Cheers,

    Michael



    On 1/5/2021 12:06 PM, Michael Gericke wrote:
    > Dear Colleagues and Collaborators:
    >
    > I would like to restart and schedule regular integrating detector 
    > meetings and want to start with a doodle pool
    > that just identifies a day and time. Then we can decide how often we 
    > need to have this meeting and when to
    > start.
    >
    > Here is the link:
    >
    > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__doodle.com_poll_2qvp8hnkce7kbdbm-3Futm-5Fsource-3Dpoll-26utm-5Fmedium-3Dlink&d=DwICaQ&c=CJqEzB1piLOyyvZjb8YUQw&r=tiz8CevYk4g0CbBFxAIdgA&m=zapQnrEZSLHwpryN_9uaPfoIflCFHKwaxSCZHyERvoU&s=1nGz0EbBy9P3phqE-TEwiaVKFSIcUHRipa9yG4QFX0A&e= 
    >
    >
    > It has been a long time (my fault) since we have had dedicated 
    > detector meetings, but a lot has happened
    > in the intervening months.
    >
    > To a large extent, most of the progress related to the detectors has 
    > been on the simulation side, but mostly
    > in context of how the detectors fit within in the larger experiment 
    > (rates, backgrounds, shielding, mounting),
    > rather than how they function as modules (efficiency and stability).
    >
    > The larger scale simulation results about detector rates, backgrounds, 
    > and shielding needs, now need to be folded
    > in with the detector module design, which has been progressing 
    > (somewhat) on a parallel but partially disconnected
    > track. What may seem ideal in one setting may not work when viewed in 
    > another.
    >
    > We have also had several meetings regarding the detector electronics 
    > and hardware development toward the back-end
    > of the detectors (PMTs and bases). There has been a lot of movement 
    > toward finalizing the design for the bases, preamp
    > and the ADC board and it would be good to fold that in which the rest 
    > of the detector design as well (e.g. what is our
    > actual rate in the detectors and how well do the light guides de-focus 
    > the produced photons on the PMT cathode, etc.)
    >
    > Finally, the design of the light guide geometry and the associated 
    > design of the module mounting structure has been
    > done in some detail only for the Ring5 detectors, but even that design 
    > is far from complete. I think we need to push hard
    > on finalizing what we really need these light guides to look like and 
    > then make a final design of he corresponding mounting
    > structure. This aspect will require significant additional optical 
    > simulations that are somewhat separate from those usually discussed
    > in the biweekly simulation meetings and should therefore be discussed 
    > in a dedicated detector meeting (as we used to).
    > There exists a detector module mounting design, but whether that 
    > design is realistic mostly depends on the shape of the
    > light guides. We are starting to use 3D printing to make prototypes of 
    > the mounting structure, to see how things fit together.
    >
    > This is not an exhaustive list of things we need to look at, but is a 
    > summary of the major things we need to resolve. A longer
    > list also includes more specific, but labor intensive, aspects of the 
    > detector design, such as linearity tests and radiation damage
    > issues.
    >
    > If you are not on the detector meeting email list, but would like to 
    > get involved, please consider subscribing to the list.
    >
    > Best regards,
    >
    > Michael
    >
    >
    >
    >