AtlasPublicTopicHeader.png

ApprovedPlotsTileCalibrationCesium

Introduction

This page lists the public plots produced within the Tile Calorimeter calibration group. The results obtained using the Cesium calibration system are presented. All plots for this page will be taken from ApprovedPlotsTileCalibration#Cesium

Approved Tile Calorimeter Cesium Calibration Plots


Down-drift in different cells in three longitudinal layers as a function of cell position in eta between February 2015 (start of Run 2) and February 2018

Contact: Sanya.Solodkov@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch

Date: July, 2018

drift_2015_2018_00_16.png
drift_2015_2018_00_16.eps
drift_2015_2018_00_16.C

Down-drift in different cells in three longitudinal layers as a function of cell position in eta between February 2015 (start of Run 2) and October 2018 (end of pp collisions in Run 2). It is the maximal drift detected during Run 2.

Contact: Sanya.Solodkov@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch

Date: January, 2019

drift_2015_2018.png
drift_2015_2018.eps
drift_2015_2018.C

Down-drift in different cells in three longitudinal layers as a function of cell position in eta between February 2015 (start of Run 2) and January 2019 (start of LS2). One can see 2-3 percents recovery in Layer A between October 2018 and January 2019 (see previous plot).

Contact: Sanya.Solodkov@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch

Date: January, 2019

drift_2015_2019.png
drift_2015_2019.eps
drift_2015_2019.C

Run 1 Cesium plots

First plot:

Evolution of Tile Calorimeter response to Cesium source as a function of time in 3 different longitudinal layers. Only measurements with magnetic field are shown. First point is slightly above 1 because all points are normalized to the measurement without magnetic field (not shown on the plot). Error bars represent RMS of the distribution of Cesium integrals in given longitudinal layer. Black line represents Cesium decay curve (~2.3%/year). Yellow band – precision of Cesium calibration system (0.3%).

Second plot:

Deviation of measured response to Cesium source from expected values, if the response would follow Cesium decay curve (-2.3%/year). Three longitudinal layers are shown separately. Only measurements with magnetic field are shown.

Third plot:

RMS over mean of the distribution of Cesium response in 3 longitudinal layers as a function of time. Three longitudinal layers are shown separately. In Layer A RMS increases faster with time due to different drift of cells at different eta positions.

Contact: Sanya.Solodkov@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch

Date: July, 2018

cs_stability_run1.png
cs_stability_run1.eps
cs_stability_run1.C

cs_deviation_run1.png
cs_deviation_run1.eps
cs_deviation_run1.C

cs_rel_stab_run1.png
cs_rel_stab_run1.eps
cs_rel_stab_run1.C

Run 2 Cesium plots

First plot:

Evolution of Tile Calorimeter response to Cesium source as a function of time in 3 different longitudinal layers. First point is slightly above 1 because all points are normalized to the measurement without magnetic field (not shown on the plot). Measurements taken without magnetic field are corrected for magnetic field effect (up to 0.7%). Measurements in July and August 2015, in May 2016, in August and October 2018 were done during data taking. Other measurements were done during shutdowns (December-March). Error bars represent RMS of the distribution of Cesium integrals in given longitudinal layer. Black line represents Cesium decay curve (~2.3%/year). Yellow band – precision of Cesium calibration system (0.3%).

Second plot:

Deviation of measured response to Cesium source from expected values, if the response would follow Cesium decay curve (-2.3%/year). Three longitudinal layers are shown separately. The first point corresponds to equalization of the calorimeter in February 2015 without magnetic field. Second point – first measurement with magnetic field. Measurements taken without magnetic field are corrected for magnetic field effect (up to 0.7%). Maximal down-drift in cells in Layer A over 4 years (Feb 2015 - Jan 2019) is about -15%, (for cells A13 at eta=1.25), but average over all cells in Layer A is only -10%.

Third plot:

RMS over mean of the distribution of Cesium response in 3 longitudinal layers as a function of time. Three longitudinal layers are shown separately. In Layer A RMS increases faster with time due to different drift of cells at different eta positions.

Contact: Sanya.Solodkov@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch

Date: January, 2019

cs_stability_run2.png
cs_stability_run2.eps
cs_stability_run2.C

cs_deviation_run2.png
cs_deviation_run2.eps
cs_deviation_run2.C

cs_rel_stab_run2.png
cs_rel_stab_run2.eps
cs_rel_stab_run2.C

Run 1 + Run 2 Cesium plots

First plot:

Evolution of Tile Calorimeter response to Cesium source as a function of time in 3 different longitudinal layers. All cells were equalized at the beginning of Run 1 in June 2009 (not shown on the plot) and at the beginning of Run 2 in February 2015 Measurements taken without magnetic field are corrected for magnetic field effect (up to 0.7%). Error bars represent RMS of the distribution of Cesium integrals in given longitudinal layer. Black line represents Cesium decay curve (~2.3%/year). Yellow band – precision of Cesium calibration system (0.3%).

Second plot:

Deviation of measured response to Cesium source from expected values, if the response would follow Cesium decay curve (-2.3%/year). Three longitudinal layers are shown separately. Measurements taken without magnetic field are corrected for magnetic field effect (up to 0.7%). The initial equalization was done in June 2009 (not shown on the plot) and then repeated in February 2015, before start of Run 2.

Third plot:

RMS over mean of the distribution of Cesium responses in 3 longitudinal layers as a function of time. Three longitudinal layers are shown separately. In Layer A RMS increases faster with time due to different drift of cells at different eta positions.

Contact: Sanya.Solodkov@cernNOSPAMPLEASE.ch

Date: January, 2019

cs_stability_run12.png
cs_stability_run12.eps
cs_stability_run12.C

cs_deviation_run12.png
cs_deviation_run12.eps
cs_deviation_run12.C

cs_rel_stab_run12.png
cs_rel_stab_run12.eps
cs_rel_stab_run12.C

Old Cesium public plots

First plot shows evolution of Tile Calorimeter response to a radioactive Cs-137 gamma source as a function of time in 4 partitions. LBA and LBC correspond to the central barrel while EBA and EBC are the two extended barrel cylinders . The activity of the 3 radioactive sources used to calibrate the 3 cylinders are different that's why we observe 3 family of points, all of them being normalized to the activity of Cesium source in barrel cylinder in June 2009. All measurements shown on the plot were performed in the presence of magnetic field (Toroid + Solenoid) , while initial equalization of the calorimeter was done without magnetic field. Black lines represent the Cesium decay curve (-2.3%/year), error bars on the plot represents RMS of the distribution for all the channels in a given partition (~ 3000 channels in each barrel and ~2000 channels in each extended barrel). The RMS of the first measurement, after the High voltage equalization is ~ 0.3% when few channels with wrong or unstable HV values were excluded. Since June 2009 the High voltage applied to the channels was not changed and observed variation of response is taken into account in offline reconstruction by applying proper calibration constants.
The RMS/mean of first plot is shown on the second plot
Third plot shows deviation of measured Cesium signals from expected values, if the response would follow the Cesium decay curve (-2.3%/year). Only measurements with magnetic field are shown. The initial equalization was done in June 2009 without magnetic field. The first points deviate from zero, showing an increase of response in the presence of magnetic field, ~0.6% in the barrel and ~0.3% in the Extended barrel cells. (more details on effect of magnetic field are shown on the plots below). Average up-drift of about 0.8%/year was observed in 2009-2010. It is a bit smaller in bottom part of the barrel partition: average over 10 bottom barrel modules is about 0.5%/year. Up-drift effect disappeared in 2011 and sizable down-drift is seen now when beam is on and signal recover slowly when beam is off (during technical stops).
Last three plots show the same deviation of measured Cesium signals from expected values in sample A, BC and D separately. The biggest down-dirft is in the innermost part of the calorimeter - in sample A (up to -8%/year observed in August 2011), while in sample D of the barrel partition down-drift is negligible.
Cesium calibration constants for year 2010 were calculated using runs taken in February 2010 and then in June 2010 with magnetic field ON and they are applied offline to all the cells in the calorimeter, so that final EM scale is restored to the value measured at the testbeam. Calibration constants for 2011 are updated every month, from every Cesium run taken in the pit in the presence of magnetic field.

Contact: Sanya.Solodkov@cern.ch

cs_stability.png
[eps]
cs_rel_stab.png
[eps]
cs_deviation.png
[eps]
cs_deviation_sample_A.png
[eps]
cs_deviation_sample_B.png
[eps]
cs_deviation_sample_D.png
[eps]
Variation of Tile Calorimeter response in 2011 measured in Cesium calibration runs averaged over all cells in a given sample. First measurement (on 18-Feb-2011) is taken as a reference. In first two samples signal goes down during “beam on” periods and recovers during “beam off” periods

Contact: Sanya.Solodkov@cern.ch

cs_deviation_sample_A_2011.png
[eps]

cs_deviation_sample_B_2011.png
[eps]
cs_deviation_sample_D_2011.png
[eps]

Variation of Tile Calorimeter response over period of 6 years measured in Cesium calibration runs averaged over all cells in a given sample. Big gap between February 2013 and July 2014 corresponds to maintenance campaign during long shutdown. For the period 2009-2013 only measurements with magnetic field are shown. Measurements in July 2014, August 2014, November 2014 and 7th February 2015 were done without magnetic filed. 8th February 2015 - first attempt to recalibrate all the cells, 25th February 2015 - second round of equalization (deviation from expected value became almost zero). 24th March 2015 - first measurement with magnetic field and because of magnetic field there is small deviation from zero (up to 0.7% in certain cells). All remaining points in 2015 are measurements with magnetic field on June 11th, July 17th, August 27th, November 3rd and December 9th.

Contact: Sanya.Solodkov@cern.ch

cs_deviation_sample_A_2009_2015.png
[eps]
cs_deviation_sample_B_2009_2015.png
[eps]
cs_deviation_sample_D_2009_2015.png
[eps]

Maximal change of the signal in Tile Calorimeter cells in 2011 as a function of eta in three longitudinal samplings. Signal is measured in Cesium calibration runs. Every point represents average of 64 cells (over phi). Maximal change was observed between Feb 18th and August 11th measurements
Contact: Sanya.Solodkov@cern.ch
drift_2011_0_8_max.png
Maximal change of the signal in Tile Calorimeter cells in 2012 as a function of eta in three longitudinal samplings. Signal is measured in Cesium calibration runs. Every point represents average of 64 cells (over phi). Maximal change in sample B and D was observed between March 18th and June 18th measurements, while for sample A maximal change was observed between March 18th and November 6th measurements
Contact: Sanya.Solodkov@cern.ch
drift_2012_Mar_Jun.png
[PDF] drift_2012_Mar_Nov.png
[PDF]
Change of the signal in Tile Calorimeter cells between December 2012 (end of 8 TeV proton-proton period) and August 2014 (end of maintenance during long shutdown) as a function of eta in three longitudinal samplings. Signal is measured in Cesium calibration runs. Every point represents average of 64 cells (over phi). Correction for magnetic filed effect was applied because measurement in December 2012 was done in the presence of magnetic field, while measurement in August 2014 was done without magnetic field
Contact: Sanya.Solodkov@cern.ch
drift_2012_Dec_2014_Aug.png
[PDF]
Example of deviation of Cesium integrals from desired values (in %) in all 4 partitions immediately after HV equalization in June 2009.
Second plot shows deviation from expected integral values for all the runs without magnetic field in 2008 and 2009. Both histograms contains cells from all 4 partitions
RMS in run immediately after equalization is about 0.3%, while RMS for all the runs is 0.4%.
Contact: Sanya.Solodkov@cern.ch
cs_dev_day0.png
[eps]
cs_dev_all.png
[eps]
The first plot presents the ratio of responses to Cesium source with and without magnetic field as a function of eta for all the cells in Atlas.TileCal. At full magnetic field (toroidal + solenoidal) one can observe the 0.6-0.7% signal increase in Barrel (central part of calorimeter).
The second plot shows the same ratio as a function of phi for all cells D3 of LB. No regular pattern is observed.
Contact: Andrei.Karyukhin@cern.ch
cs-5.png
[eps]
cs-6.png
[eps]
For long term various stability tests a special test bench system has been developed and mounted on the surface in building 175. Two fully equipped calorimeter modules are installed there (one barrel and one extended barrel module). Regular cesium, cosmic, charge injection runs take place on this test bench.
The first plot represents the cesium response in time for LBC65 module. Two other plots show the deviation of cesium response (shown on first plot) from expected one (cesium decay curve).
Contact: Andrei.Karyukhin@cern.ch
LBC65_stab.png
[eps]
LBC65_dev.png
[eps]
LBC65_dev_hist.png
[eps]


Major updates:
-- PawelKlimek - 2019-11-13

Responsible: PawelKlimek
Subject: public

Edit | Attach | Watch | Print version | History: r4 < r3 < r2 < r1 | Backlinks | Raw View | WYSIWYG | More topic actions
Topic revision: r4 - 2020-05-25 - MichaelaMlynarikova
 
    • Cern Search Icon Cern Search
    • TWiki Search Icon TWiki Search
    • Google Search Icon Google Search

    Atlas All webs login

This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright &© 2008-2020 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
or Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? use Discourse or Send feedback