Cocoa ME+1 vs PG.pptVIP

Cocoa ME+1 vs PG Data used 0T Distancemeter 16-Nov average DCOPS 11-Nov event Link from Celso 3.8T Distancemeter 1-4 Nov average DCOPS 27-Oct event Link from Celso PG PG within disk UR-0058 (2006) (Oleg cleaned it up) Supplementary UR-0103 (2008) PG of disk UR-0124 (after Craft) Fit Ring (average of all chambers) Position Deviations from Ideal Cocoa Fit Ideal vs DDD Only 6 entries. Cocoa Ideal minus DDD geometry Ring 3 only TODO: where did 8.415mm come from Method for Predicting Z from PG Get PG (X,Y,Z) wrt disk center from UR-0058 or UR-0103 Rotate disk as specified in UR-0124 Translate disk as specified in UR-0124 DCOPS from PG and Cocoa 0T FitSummary DCOPS Dowel positions: 0T Cocoa fit – predicted from PG Transfer: mean=0.67, rms=2.29mm 1/3_outer: mean=2.93, rms=3.83mm 1/3_inner: mean=-0.20, rms=1.37mm HSLM6 is not included RMS is large, and at least partly attributable to PG problems Deviations from Ideal Chamber mounting errors: should not exceed a few mm PG measurement errors: supposedly 300 microns but I don’t believe that anymore Cocoa fitting errors Real distortions because of the field Cocoa Estimated Errors Cocoa returns some estimated errors for quantities in the coordinate system of the mother volume (Cocoa uses a hierarchical system description) If I assume that off-diagonal entries are 0, I can transform this to the CMS coordinate system I have no sense of how well Cocoa estimates errors 3.8T Cocoa 1/3 Chamber Centers PG errors and chamber mismounts PG deviations from Ideal include PG error, typos, and wrong targets Real chamber mismount Overall shifts and rotations of the disk Subtract the overall shifts and rotations to get a better picture of the PG errors and mismount errors In what follows PG Chamber centers are derived from alignment pin locations PG vs DDD, ME+1/2 PG vs DDD, ME+1/3 PG to DDD summary Deviation of PG from standard geometry in the X/Y plane is at most 2.2mm for ME+1/2 and 2.6mm for ME+1/3. RMS for X de