-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 60
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Common MDI #381
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Common MDI #381
Conversation
update from master
I've changed the master compact file for IDEA_o1_v03 and ALLEGRO_o1_v03 to point to the common MDI folder for all the related elements, removed the files for LumiCal/beam pipe/beam instrumentation from the experiment folders and modified accordingly the DectDimensions.xml files. Should I do the same for CLD? If yes, which version? |
the file FFQuads_v01 (default include) now is not a sensitive element anymore. If for specific needs the hits in the quadrupoles need to be studied, FFQuads_v01_sens.xml is the sensitive version to be used instead. |
are these MDI models expected to be overlap-free yet? @Victor-Schwan and I think we are seeing several overlaps when using the overlap.mac macros in ddsim on both the MDI_standalone_o1_v01 and MDI_standalone_o1_v00 models. I attach the output of the overlap checker for the two standalone models. (search for "detected" and you'll see the overlaps). overlap_MDI_standalone_o1_v00.log overlap_MDI_standalone_o1_v01.log |
I propose applying g4 step limits to the interior of the beampipe, and the whole MDI region (in my experience this helps achieve accurate simulation of beamstrahlung (ie low pT charged particles) in non-uniform fields).
and adding the limits to the different MDI detectors, e.g. changing
to
should work OK, I think. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Are we sure this map contains only the fields from the anti-solenoid and assume a 0 detector field when produced? Otherwise we will "double count" the detector field there. By the way, "fieldMap" is very generic, can you find a more descriptive name for this file.
Hi @aciarma , Thank you for making this very complete PR! Here are few comments:
v01:
Please, let me know if I can help somehow. |
Added Lumical, quadrupoles and magnetic fields to the common MDI folder for FCCee.
- CLD (which version?)
- [OK] IDEA_o1_v03
- [OK] ALLEGRO_o1_v03