Open ggamezdiego opened 2 years ago
The optical library has now been updated in https://github.com/SBNSoftware/sbndcode/pull/245 and sbnd_data v01_11_00. The underlying problem with the geometry remains however and needs resolving to avoid issues with future library generation and/or full optical simulation.
Hi @gustavogx, @mrguzzo, just wondering if you have any update on this?
Update - this issue persists still and will need to be fixed if the need arises to run the full optical simulation.
The optical library generated with the new SBND geometry v02 presents unexpected values for the visibilities for some PMTs in the voxels intersecting with them. A sample of 30 PMTs in the TPC with X>0 and in the central APA-windows see a lot of more light than its symmetric situation for TPC with X<0:
To debug the issue, I have compared the result of the simulation for PMT-141 (a problematic one) and PMT 9 (a good one) (PMT layout below)
When I track the photons generated inside the PMT-141 (in the vacuum material), it typically results in the following: ID Pre_PV Pre_material Pos_PV Pos_material OpBoundary Process 884 vol_PMT_in_PV matVacuum volOpDetSensitive_PV LAr NoGeomBoundary OpDetReadoutScoringProcess 884 volOpDetSensitive_PV LAr volPMT_PV LAr NoGeomBoundary OpDetReadoutScoringProcess This means that those photons are being detected (and they should not! --> NO photon generated in a material different than LAr should survive/be tracked). It seems the photon does not see the boundary between the different volumes.
While the same simulation for the case of PMT-9 results typically in: ID Pre_PV Pre_material Pos_PV Pos_material OpBoundary Process 884 vol_PMT_in_PV matVacuum volOpDetSensitive_PV LAr NoRINDEX CoupledTransportation And in this case the photon is not detected/tracked, as should be!
I am using sbndcode v09_36_00 and geometry sbnd_v02_00.gdml (with wires). Without wires the issue is the same. My impression is that it could be related with the geometry. To test this, I have done the same simulation for PMT-141 with another version of the geometry v02, and the problem is not present! This other geometry is a version that @gustavogx gave to me “in private” some months ago, before the new v02 geometry was published in sbndcode.