Data

exp=mfxc00118:run=172 M2.1 - charge injection (CI) run

Request from Chris

O'Grady, Paul Christopher <cpo@slac.stanford.edu>
Thu 10/1/2020 11:28 PM
Hi Mikhail,
For my water-ring data I have to use pixels that are “close together”, so they get roughly the same water-ring signal.  That means I have constraints on which pixels I can use and [6,20,97] is too far away.
Would it be possible to get your folded AML_L charge-injection plots for these pixels?
“bad”: [6,170,103:105]
“good”: [6,180,103:105]
Thanks...
chris

CI data and fits for points

panel 6 170,103

line begin-end: (782,3263)-(1022,3327)

panel 6 170,104

line begin-end: (785,3155)-(1022,3208)


panel 6 170,105

line begin-end: (790,3233)-(1022,3279)


panel 6 180,103

line begin-end: (765,2937)-(1022,3034)


panel 6 180,104

line begin-end: (765,3210)-(1022,3313)

panel 6 180,105

line begin-end: (761,3106)-(1022,3209)

Comparing Above Charge Injection Results To Water Ring Data In AML_L

This plot produced by "python aml_new.py ~cpo/ipsana/epix_aml_93_badgoodpix_allevts.h5".  h5 file from "bsub -n 24 -q psanaq -o %J.log mpirun python max_det_epix_amllswitch.py exp=mfxp17518:run=93".

Notes:

  • first 3 plots are various bad pixels (in the module 6 bad asic) vs. various good pixels (in a nearby module 6 good asic)
  • fourth plot is a good pixel vs. a good pixel
  • the overlaid lines are charge injection result, including the approximate range covered by charge injection
  • in order to compare different pixels, the charge injection lines assumes that the same pulser DAC value injects the same charge into each pixel

Conclusions:

  • the charge-injection data looks significantly different than the water ring data for bad/good pixel comparison plots.  looks reasonable for good/good pixel comparison plots
  • if one believes the charge-injection gain measurements, this is evidence for a check-mark gain pattern in the bad asic:  lower gains at lower values, higher gains at higher values.
  • the water-ring data suggests that charge-injection gains should not be used for high-intensity
  • the check-mark isn't the whole story, since the water ring data in the bad asic does not match the charge-injection data (the charge-injection line does not pass through the middle of the water-ring points).

References






  • No labels