Difference between revisions of "LB SageBrushWork PostDefense"
Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
The time cut information is as follows | The time cut information is as follows | ||
− | 0-300 (Mixture) | + | 0-300 (Mixture) |
− | 300-360 (Co-60) | + | |
− | 400-640 ( Pure Se) | + | 300-360 (Co-60) |
− | 680-710 (Co-60) | + | |
− | 730-1020 (Mixture) | + | 400-640 ( Pure Se) |
− | 1030-1080 (Co-60) | + | |
− | 1100-1360 ( Pure Se) | + | 680-710 (Co-60) |
− | 1400-1440 (Co-60) | + | |
− | 1480-1775 (Mixture) | + | 730-1020 (Mixture) |
− | 1800-1840 (Co-60) | + | |
− | 1875-2150 (Pure Se) | + | 1030-1080 (Co-60) |
− | 2190-2220 (Co-60) | + | |
− | 2250-2550 (Mixture) | + | 1100-1360 ( Pure Se) |
− | 2590-2620 (Co-60) | + | |
− | 2650-2930 (Pure Se) | + | 1400-1440 (Co-60) |
− | 2950-3000 (Co-60) | + | |
− | 3050-3300 (Mixture) | + | 1480-1775 (Mixture) |
− | 3390-3350 (Co-60) | + | |
− | 3400-3690 (Pure Se) | + | 1800-1840 (Co-60) |
− | 3700-3750 (Co-60) | + | |
− | 3775-4050 (Mixture) | + | 1875-2150 (Pure Se) |
− | 4060-4100 (Co-60) | + | |
− | 4120-4400 (Pure Se) | + | 2190-2220 (Co-60) |
− | 4420-4470 (Co-60) | + | |
− | 4480-4770 (Mixture) | + | 2250-2550 (Mixture) |
− | 4790-4820 (Co-60) | + | |
+ | 2590-2620 (Co-60) | ||
+ | |||
+ | 2650-2930 (Pure Se) | ||
+ | |||
+ | 2950-3000 (Co-60) | ||
+ | |||
+ | 3050-3300 (Mixture) | ||
+ | |||
+ | 3390-3350 (Co-60) | ||
+ | |||
+ | 3400-3690 (Pure Se) | ||
+ | |||
+ | 3700-3750 (Co-60) | ||
+ | |||
+ | 3775-4050 (Mixture) | ||
+ | |||
+ | 4060-4100 (Co-60) | ||
+ | |||
+ | 4120-4400 (Pure Se) | ||
+ | |||
+ | 4420-4470 (Co-60) | ||
+ | |||
+ | 4480-4770 (Mixture) | ||
+ | |||
+ | 4790-4820 (Co-60) | ||
+ | |||
4840-5130 (Pure Se) | 4840-5130 (Pure Se) | ||
Revision as of 19:17, 27 August 2018
Time Cuts
The first step in the PAA process is to identify the time cuts used for the split run. This must be done for all samples (50%,10%,0.1%, and 0.04%) Let's do the 50% sample first
50% Sage/Se Mixture Time Cuts
The 50% Se/Sage mixture was measure on Detector B (unshielded, so watch the SNR) on 5/24/17 for a total of 2130.540 seconds. The outer pure witness Se was measure first, and sub-run was roughly 300 seconds for the samples of interest, and 60 seconds for the Co-60 flag. The root command used to draw the timing information was
TTree* tree = MPA;
MPA->Draw("evt.Chan:evt.Sec>>hist2","evt.ADCid == 1");
which produced the histogram below
This seems a little sloppy, lets try a 1D histogram instead to see if the cuts are more clear
ROOT Command: MPA->Draw("evt.Sec>>hist","ADCid==1","");
This produced the histogram below
This seems much cleaner and clearly shows the time cuts
10% Sage/Se Mixture Time Cuts
The 10% Se/Sage mixture was measured on Detector A (shielded) on 5/25/17 for a total of 5136.343 seconds. The mixture was measured first, and a sub-run was roughly 300 seconds for the Se samples and 60 seconds for the Co-60 flag. The root commands used were
TTree* tree = MPA;
MPA->Draw("evt.Chan:evt.Sec>>hist2","evt.ADCid == 0");
The time cut information is as follows
0-300 (Mixture)
300-360 (Co-60)
400-640 ( Pure Se)
680-710 (Co-60)
730-1020 (Mixture)
1030-1080 (Co-60)
1100-1360 ( Pure Se)
1400-1440 (Co-60)
1480-1775 (Mixture)
1800-1840 (Co-60)
1875-2150 (Pure Se)
2190-2220 (Co-60)
2250-2550 (Mixture)
2590-2620 (Co-60)
2650-2930 (Pure Se)
2950-3000 (Co-60)
3050-3300 (Mixture)
3390-3350 (Co-60)
3400-3690 (Pure Se)
3700-3750 (Co-60)
3775-4050 (Mixture)
4060-4100 (Co-60)
4120-4400 (Pure Se)
4420-4470 (Co-60)
4480-4770 (Mixture)
4790-4820 (Co-60)
4840-5130 (Pure Se)
0.1% Sage/Se Mixture Time Cuts
The 0.1% Se/Sage mixture was measured on Detector A (shielded) on 5/24/17 for a total of 2130.540 seconds. The mixture was measured first, and a sub-run was roughly 300 seconds for the Se samples and 60 seconds for the Co-60 flag. The root commands used were
TTree* tree = MPA;
MPA->Draw("evt.Chan:evt.Sec>>hist2","evt.ADCid == 0");
which produced the histogram below
This seems a little sloppy, so let's repeat the procedure for the 50% sample
ROOT Command:ROOT Command: MPA->Draw("evt.Sec>>hist","ADCid==0","");
This produced the histogram below
This is again much better than the 2D histogram.