Calibration of Calibration of Analog Alignment SensorsAnalog Alignment Sensors

Status – February 2005Status – February 2005

M. Hohlmann, G. Karagiorgi, M. Ripert

Florida Tech

USCMS EMU meeting – UC Davis, Feb 25/26, 2005

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 2

Progress overviewProgress overview

Total in System

Calibrations completed

To do

R-sensors 84 12 72

Z-sensors, resistive

Z-sensors, optical

72

12

12

-

60

12

Clinometers 48 - 48

Note: All R- and Z-sensors for ME+2 are now calibrated

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 3

Calibration procedureCalibration procedure• Moved calib. bench to new lab; recommissioned• Subject each sensor to 5 calibration runs• Remove sensor mounts between runs to reestablish

absolute initial distance with reference bars • Distance ranges covered by calibrations

R1: 45.8 - 52.8 cm

R2: 22.9 - 32.0 cm; R2-Towers: 22.9 - 31.5 cm

Z: 2.9 - 4.3 cm

• Measure V(x), Vref for 80-110 data points per run

• Perform linear fits for V(x) and V(x)/Vref

• Calculate average slopes & intercepts w/ errors

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 4

R-sensors R-sensors

4 types of prod. plates

2 types of prod. towers

R-sensor: wire extension pot.

R-sensor

Z-sensors

Linear mover

dowel pins for DCOP sensors

Stand

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 5

R: Absolute Sensor R: Absolute Sensor Response vs. Distance V(x)Response vs. Distance V(x)

χ2 = 0.00985828

Fit line: V(x) = ax + b

V(x) = 2.0548x – 96.068

σ(a) = 0.000657

σ(b) = 0.0325

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 6

Calibration recordCalibration record

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 7

R: Sensor-to-sensor variation R: Sensor-to-sensor variation of slopesof slopes

Gauss fit:

mean = 2.0435 V/cm σ = 0.0175 V/cm

= 0.86 % σ

mean

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 8

R: Sensor-to-sensor variation R: Sensor-to-sensor variation of slopes – zoomed inof slopes – zoomed in

Gauss fit – R1:

mean = 2.0601 V/cm σ = 0.0044 V/cm

= 0.22 % σ

mean

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 9

R: Rel. errors on slopesR: Rel. errors on slopes

Gauss fit:

mean = 0.021 % σ = 0.015 %

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 10

R: Sensor-to-sensor variation R: Sensor-to-sensor variation of y-interceptsof y-intercepts

= 1.12 %

Gauss fit – R2:

mean = 52.9980 V σ = 0.5924 V

σ

mean

= 0.41 %

Gauss fit – R1:

mean = 96.2098 V σ = 0.3955 V

σ

mean

Abs ( )

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 11

R: Rel. errors on y-int.R: Rel. errors on y-int.

Gauss fit:

mean = 0.030 % σ = 0.017 %

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 12

R: VR: Vrefref variation variation

= 0.012 %

Gauss fit:

mean = 11.1591 V σ = 0.0012 V

σ

mean

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 13

R: Slopes of V(x)/VR: Slopes of V(x)/Vrefref fits fits

= 0.16 %

Gauss fit – R1:

mean = 0.1845 cm-1

σ = 0.0003 cm-1

σ

mean

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 14

Z-sensor response V(x): Z-sensor response V(x): Slight non-linearity confirmedSlight non-linearity confirmed

χ2 = 0.328559

Fit line: y = ax + b

y = -10.302x – 43.955

σ(a) = 0.0241

σ(b) = 0.09

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 15

Z: Sensor-to-sensor variation Z: Sensor-to-sensor variation of slopesof slopes

Gauss fit:

mean = 10.3520 V/cm σ = 0.0649 V/cm

= 0.63 % σ

mean

Abs ( )

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 16

Z: Rel. errors on slopesZ: Rel. errors on slopes

Gauss fit:

mean = 0.032 % σ = 0.016 %

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 17

Z: Rel. errors on y-int.Z: Rel. errors on y-int.

Gauss fit:

mean = 0.019 % σ = 0.007 %

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 18

Z: Slopes for V/VZ: Slopes for V/Vrefref fits fits

= 0.62 %

Gauss fit:

mean = 0.9273 cm-1

σ = 0.0058 cm-1

σ

mean

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 19

Clinometer calibrationClinometer calibration

Mechanics finalized Mirror

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 20

Clinometer calibrationClinometer calibration4

3

2

1

0

Sen

sor

Res

po

nse

[V

]

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6Angle [deg]

'Sensor Response [V]' y = 2.249 'fit_Sensor Response [V]'

Response is ΔV ~ 1V per 4 degrees

Readout for Level Position is ~ +2.25V

(nominal is +2.50 V)

Production clinometer

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 21

Clin.: Cross-calibrationClin.: Cross-calibration

6

5

4

3

2

1

An

gle

(d

eg)

0.50.40.30.20.1Distance cm

Phi_geometry 'Phi_geometry1' Phi_measured fit_Phi_geometry

[ ]Translation

Needs better understanding – under study…

Angle from directLaser measurement

Angle from geometriccalculation – method 1

Angle from geometriccalculation – method 2

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 22

Comment on Comment on Alignment SoftwareAlignment Software

• Contacted Muon Barrel alignment colleagues

(Pedro Arce & Teresa Rodrigo) & Mike Case

• Not much apparent progress on alignment databases (calibration data; COCOA alignment output data for ORCA muon reco)

• CMS databases appear to be ill-defined for alignment purposes at the moment

• Will stay in the loop with barrel colleagues…

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 23

Summary & OutlookSummary & Outlook

• Calibration of R-sensors and Z- sensors well

under control. Keep on calibrating…

• R- and Z-sensors for ME+2 ready for

shipping and installation on disk

• Clinometer calibration needs some more

studies before routine calibrations can start

• Dig deeper into software side of alignment…

02/26/2005 M. Hohlmann - EMU meeting at UC Davis 24

Loosely related newsLoosely related news

We’re moved in !!!