[Moller_intdet] [EXTERNAL] Re: Detector meetings restart

[Michael Gericke]

Hello again,

Since the new simulation group meeting has been set for Thursdays from 
2:00 pm to 3:00 pm ET, every other week.
I propose we set the integrating detector group meeting for Tuesdays 
from 3:00 pm to 4:00 pm in weeks that are
alternating with the simulation meeting. That would mean that we meet 
for the first time this year on Tuesday the 19th
of January, at 3:00 pm ET. Unless I hear strong opposition to this in 
the next hour or so, let's do that.

Thanks,

Michael


On 1/12/2021 9:52 AM, Michael Gericke 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=sAcmfDnmgp80OHNp8BT9B0ppMns-xHhof47DzJMhOgs&m=yYlZl_VKDmHn_aWsFUnDuUDweHLDZ2wqYSpeKQ8qcyc&s=AGoE9vNlavVBBoVrB_b-W-nPV-3l1iIMX7razXXQvMs&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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moller_intdet mailing list
> Moller_intdet at jlab.org
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/moller_intdet