Two reports for CMS week:
18Junel2010Alignment.ppt status of CSC endcap constants (almost there, had to redo the PG)
CMSWeekJunel2010Alignment.ppt proposal for mechanism for communicating between the hardware groups to automate production.
I cannot find anything wrong with the very simple calculation (using UR-0088) of the chamber centers for the even numbered CSC chambers at ME-4/1. The measurement was for roughly -56.94cm and the correction to find the DDD chamber center is 8.414 + .02 The .02 is the estimate for the target thickness from the survey group, and the 8.414 is the same surface to center used for all the CSC chambers. In this case we add them to the (negative) measurement from survey. Then we add the nominal disk center (-990cm) and voila: -1038.505 which is -1.166cm away from the nominal DDD chamber center of -1037.3391.1cm.
UPDATE: Reloaded these! Something went wrong last week. These now contain the correct angles.
endcapConstants.xml absolute chamber positions
localendcapConstants.xml positions relative to ideal.
endcapConstantsMYROTX.xml absolute chamber positions using my calculation of RotX.
localendcapConstantsMYROTX.xml positions relative to ideal using my calculation of RotX. In both sets above the average applied to the unmonitored comes from my calculation of RotX, so the better agreement between the measured and interpolated in the second case is irrelevant. What is relevant is the comparison with RotX from station to station, which is better when my RotX calculations are used.
I should justify my claim that one could use Z (actually Y) differences in SLM just as well as Z in CMS: The variation shown below is quite small
I'm puzzled. When I spot-checked the differences displayed in plot above for the Plus side, it seemed to make sense: Ideal-test, with (+) outward and (-) inward. But when I looked at the Minus side it didn't look right:
$ awk '{if($1==2&&$2==1&&$3==2&&$4==32)print $0}' ideal.sorted
2 1 2 32 237.63858032 -283.20663452 -685.36126709 0.00000000 0.00000000 -2.44346093
$ awk '{if($1==2&&$2==1&&$3==2&&$4==32)print $0}' combined.monitored.May2010
2 1 2 32 237.612 -283.828 -684.491 .002122 0 3.839057
$ awk '{if($1==2&&$2==1&&$3==2&&$4==32)print $0}' ideal.sorted combined.monitored.May2010 |awk '{x=$5;y=$6;z=$7;rx=$8;ry=$8;rz=$10;getline;print x-$5,y-$6,z-$7,rx-$8,ry-$9,rz-$10;}'
0.0265803 0.621365 -0.870267 -0.002122 0 -6.28252
While from the table the line reads:
2 1 2 32 0.42257632 0.45914469 0.66235352 -0.00258700 0.00000000 -0.00031397
I'm not sure what happened here. The difference is in the XML file with the relative coordinates. The absolute coordinate XML file has -.002122 for the RotX angle, as it should (the file from Cocoa uses a different convention), but all the other numbers in the XML file are the same.
The ME+4 numbers vary between monitored and unmonitored by about 12mm. This may be related to the PG issue at ME-4.
UPDATE: The inertGlobalPositionRcd.db seems to be innocuous
sqlite> .tables ALIGNMENTS POOL_CONT___LINKS POOL_OR_MAPPING_VERSIONS ALIGNME_M_ALIGN POOL_CONT___PARAMS POOL_RSS_CONTAINERS IOV POOL_CONT___SHAPES POOL_RSS_DB IOV_DATA POOL_OR_CLASS_VERSIONS POOL_RSS_SEQ METADATA POOL_OR_MAPPING_ELEMENTS coral_sqlite_fk sqlite> select * from ALIGNME_M_ALIGN; 0,0,0.0,0.0,0.0,1,0.0,0.0,0.0 1,0,0.0,0.0,0.0,2,0.0,0.0,0.0 2,0,0.0,0.0,0.0,3,0.0,0.0,0.0 3,0,0.0,0.0,0.0,4,0.0,0.0,0.0 sqlite> select * from ALIGNMENTS; 0 sqlite> select * from METADATA; inertGlobalPositionRcd,[DB=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000][CNT=cond::IOVSequence][CLID=3F16F0A9-79D5-4881-CE0B-C301DD84A7F1][TECH=00000B01][OID=00000003-00000000],0 sqlite> select * from IOV; 0,USER=jpivarski;HOSTNAME=??;PWD=/home/jpivarski/work/projects/CSCFirstalign-CMSSW_3_3_4/src;,0,5406678112883129120,4294967295," ",0,0 sqlite> select * from IOV_DATA; 0,0,1,[DB=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000][CNT=Alignments][CLID=2F16F0A9-79D5-4881-CE0B-C271DD84A7F3][TECH=00000B01][OID=00000004-00000000]
Modified 19-June-2010 at 01:15
http://hep.physics.wisc.edu/~jnb/cms/19Jun2010
| Previous notes | Next notes | Main slide directory |