1 / 2

MuonGeoModel and MuonSurfaces

MuonGeoModel and MuonSurfaces. MuonGeoModel-00-02-80 : For TGC, RPC and CSC 2 (one for the phi view, one for the eta view) plane surfaces are associated to each gas gap; Rectangular bounds are used for RPC, Trapezoidal Bounds (Rotated Trapezoidal Bounds) for phi (eta) surfaces in TGC and CSC;

korene
Download Presentation

MuonGeoModel and MuonSurfaces

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. MuonGeoModel and MuonSurfaces MuonGeoModel-00-02-80: For TGC, RPC and CSC 2 (one for the phi view, one for the eta view) plane surfaces are associated to each gas gap; Rectangular bounds are used for RPC, Trapezoidal Bounds (Rotated Trapezoidal Bounds) for phi (eta) surfaces in TGC and CSC; • Transforms are defined in such a way that • for a phi strip Trk::localPosition is (x[varying with strip #], 0=const Local Eta) • for a eta strip Trk::localPosition is (y[varying with strip #], 0=const Local Phi) This (MuonGeoModel-00-02-80) is a follow up of the most urgent requirements of generic track fitters discussed on the common tracking meeting of Oct 17, 2006 – slides from Ed (pages 11-13): two surfaces approach http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=7400 • In the previous discussion the possibility to benefit of the use of LocalParameters (where the parameter definition is strictly necessary, no need to rely on conventions like phi is first or the measurement is first) was raised … for several reasons, it was felt the proposal was not convincing enough ! SinStereo: a somewhat less urgent business discussed in the same meeting TGC phi strips are not parallel to each other but almost pointing: The various proposals are collected in http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=7400 (pages 8-10) • sinStereo as a methid of TrkDetElementBase • Rotated error matrix • Disc surface with trapezoidal bounds for TGC: phi strip position represented by phi and 1D error matrix (this was considered the most elegant solution) 7-2-2007 Common Tracking Meeting

  2. MuonGeoModel and MuonSurfaces I’ve been trying to move for TGC from plane surfaces with trapezoidal bounds to Disc Surfaces with trapezoidal bounds The difficulties are: • Disc surfaces have never really been used as surfaces associated to detector elements (however, they are used a lot in the description of cylinders in the Muon Tracking Geometry by Sharka – sw needed for holes-on-track, for example) • Some extra development is needed in DiscSurface to allow the Disc reference point (center of the cylindrical symmetry) to be different that the center of the surface • Some extra discussion is needed because the LocalPosition of a phi strip will be given by (R=constant, phi[varying with strip #]) i.e. the measurent will again come in second slot : a preliminary collection of options and considerations (by Ed, Andy, Markus, Wolfgang) • modifying the order of local coordinates for discs (R,phi)->(phi,R) looks un-natural and it would impact on a lot of central tracking software • Working with LocalPositions for TGC in the form (R, phi) will need detector dependent new code for ROT creators and local-pattern-recognition • A new kind of surface: trapezoidal surface, meeting just from the design the requirements and constraints coming from really-trapezoidal surfaces ??? 7-2-2007 Common Tracking Meeting

More Related