Geometry [message #4244] |
Tue, 15 May 2007 17:09 |
StefanoSpataro
Messages: 2736 Registered: June 2005 Location: Torino
|
first-grade participant |
From: *physik.uni-giessen.de
|
|
Hi Ralf,
today I committed an update on the beampipe geometry, and I wanted to take a look into what is happening inside the region of the vertex detector (MVD_Rev14b_Corr+Dead.geo):
It seems that the forward disks (I think the dead layers) are completely full, and there is no space for the beampipe -> there is overlap between volumes.
I don't know exactly how the geometry will look like, but is it possible to open one hole so that at least we do not have overlap there?
We should even start to think on how to handle the vertical target pipe, we should open a hole (or better two) inside the MVD, EMC, DIRC and the magnet yoke...
-
Attachment: vertex.JPG
(Size: 54.43KB, Downloaded 1356 times)
[Updated on: Mon, 11 June 2007 15:46] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: MVD Development Discussion [message #4332 is a reply to message #4244] |
Fri, 25 May 2007 09:22 |
asanchez
Messages: 350 Registered: March 2006
|
first-grade participant |
From: *gsi.de
|
|
hi Ralph
I have taken a look into your updated
mvd directory, specially in the tst directory.
You told me once, that the microstrips can be
implemented by using the pixel class as well.
But i don't see any special selection for strips
calculation in CbmStsHitProducerIdeal(lx,ly,thresholod,noise).
When one call the CbmStsHitProducerIdeal(lx,ly,thresholod,noise)
in the /macro/mvd/runTSTAnaDigi.C, and specifies the values of lx, and ly, you define only pixel in this way, or I'm wrong ?.
If it is correct, where do you specify if you have double sided
layer or if you have only one strips layer?
Sorry if that are so naive questions.
thanks a lot
ALicia.S
|
|
|
|
|
|