I don't see how cutting on the CC would solve the gap problem. Cutting
on NC position might be quite helpful.
On Tue, 2 Nov 2004, Chris Crawford wrote:
> hi john,
> i'm pretty sure the big spike around TOF 12 corresponds to the gap
> between TOF's 3,4. i just talked with chi about the possibility of
> adding a couple of variables "swl,swr", which would be floats between
> 0-16, projections of the wc track to the relative position where it
> crosses the tof's. (3.5=middle of TOF 3) with this in hand, we could do
> the sort of thing you are thinking about. i just need the extra time
> (or help?) to add this.
> another improvement would be to cut on the CC or NC (especially for
> the right sector!)
> --chris
>
> John Calarco wrote:
>
> >Hi Tancredi, Chris,
> >
> > When we originally tuned up the TOFs (gain setting and matching)
> >efficiencies were essentially 99% as measured with the start counter
> >and small paddles behind the TOFs. This certainly measures the
> >efficiency near the TOF center. Chris, in your analysis, can you
> >make cuts to constrain the tracks with no TOF to project to near
> >the center of the missing TOF, or is that not possible? Can the
> >cosmics runs be used to gain any info on this?
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
-- John R. Calarco Dept. of Physics Univ. of New Hampshire Durham, NH 03824 phone: (603)862-2088 FAX: (603)862-2998 email: calarco@unh.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Feb 24 2014 - 14:07:32 EST