Privacy and Security Notice

proton absorption

 Proton absorption
-----------------------
0.  A list of elastic ocincidence runs. The first four settings have empty target runs.

1. Look at runs 47354-6 . Central SOS momentum is  1.74 GeV/c  and central angle is  50 degrees.  Central HMS momentum is  4.3343 GeV/c  and central angle is  18 degrees. The beam energy is 5247 GeV. Ntuples are in this directory. The prescale factor for the singles is one.

2. The cuts were scer_npe>.2 , -15<ssdelta<20. and ssshtrk>1.2   ( In this case ssshtrk is the total energy, NOT energy/momentum. In the coin ntuple ssshtrk is E/p ). At first I did not have the empty target run, a plot  shows W with the above cuts (solid line) and W ( dashed line) with an additional cut of abs(ssytar) < 1 to try and reduce target wall contribution.

3. Kinematic matching at this setting is almost perfect in the horizontal angle.  A SOS yptar  of -0.06 radians relative to central SOS angle matches to an HMS yptar of +0.025 radians relative to central HMS angle.  For the  vertical angle the mismatch  is the ratio of momentum so HMS is smaller by a factor of 1.74/4.33 . This is shown in a  plot of HMS xptar ( vertical axis) versus yptar ( horizontal axis) with a cut on SOS ( scer_npe>.2 , -15<ssdelta<20. , ssshtrk>1.2 and abs(ssytar)<1 ) plus a cut of 0.9 < W < 1.0 GeV.

4. To the above cuts  I added a cut of abs(ssyptar)<.05 to insure that the SOS singles elastic ep event should have hit the HMS. First plots of W and plots of SOS xptar ( vertical axis) versus  yptar with these cuts for the two event types. One can see that there are not many elastic ep SOS singles events ( bottom W plot).  Plots of W with these cut on W of 0.9 to 1.0  show the total number of coincidence  is 1463 and the total number of singles is 71 so the total = 1463+ 71=1676 and the ratio = 4.2% .

5. I replayed the empty target run (47357) and I looked at the runs using a kumac.  To get the charge and correction factor the LH2 and the empty target run I run the script get_summary.tcl in the kumac. This needs to get scaler files from the work directory. The empty target run is the thick dummy target which is 7.31 thicker than the walls of the LH2 target.

6.  With no cut on ssytar but having cuts of scer_npe>.2 , -15<ssdelta<20. , ssshtrk>1.2 and abs(ssyptar)<.05,  I subtracted the dummy run from LH2 runs. Plot of W for LH2 and dummy targets with the y-axis being corrected yield = count*nf with nf = correction factor/charge  with the dummy divided by an additional 7.31 . For coincidence LH2 nf = 0.0041 and for dummy nf=0.0050 and for singles LH2 nf = 0.0037 and for dummy nf= 0.0046 . Plots of W with cut of 0.9 to 1.0 show number of coincidence = 2009 and number of single = 205 for the LH2 ( top two histograms) and for the dummy number of coincidence = 9 and  number of single = 93 . So the total number of ep elastic coincidences is 2009-9*.005/.0041 = 1998.0 and the number os ep elastic singles is 205-93*.0046/.0037 = 89 . So percentage loss in the coincidence is  the ratio 89/(1998+89) = 4.3% . This is close to the number with the cut on SOS ytar of < +- 1cm. When I apply a cut  of SOS ytar < +-1cm to the dummy target data no events pass the cut.