spenceraxani
commented
1 year ago Hi Oskarti,
I would probably stick with the default thresholds. My bet is that your SiPM PCB with the lower count rate is missing optical coupling. That would explain the rate difference and the energy levels. It’s roughly the scale I would expect as well.
Best,
Spencer
─ Dr. Spencer N. Axani @. @.>
Assistant Professor The University of Delaware 203 Sharp Lab 104 The Green, Newark, DE 19716 (608) 572-8426
On Sep 19, 2023, at 11:43 AM, Oskarti @.***> wrote:
Hi Spencer,
Sorry for bothering you, but can you help me? I've built 3 detectors however 2 are coming in at a rate of ~1.5 while the other is coming at ~0.7. (measurements were taken at about 14 meters above sea level.) I've identified that the problem is in the scincilltor or in the scincilltor PCB board and not in the main PCB. However even after re-taping the scincilltors and resoldering the scincilltor PCB board, I am still getting the same results. What do you suggest I should do?
The only difference that I can identify between the scincilltors is that the one coming in at a rate of 0.7 has more bubbles, but the amount is not significant. However, do you think this could possibly be the cause of the problem?
To lower the count rate to ~0.5 I am having to set the threshold to 93 for the 0.7 and 186 for the 1.5. Is this logical, or would this mess with the results?
I have also noticed that the ones clocking in at a rate of 1.5 tend to have higher energy levels. (This is just information unless proved to be useful.)
Thanks for giving me some of your time. -Oskarti
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/spenceraxani/CosmicWatch-Desktop-Muon-Detector-v2/issues/111, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AANF5O54PJRFH4ICVGRRRETX3G4QJANCNFSM6AAAAAA46QUDVM. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Hi Spencer,
Sorry for bothering you, but can you help me? I've built 3 detectors however 2 are coming in at a rate of ~1.5 while the other is coming at ~0.7. (measurements were taken at about 14 meters above sea level.) I've identified that the problem is in the scincilltor or in the scincilltor PCB board and not in the main PCB. However even after re-taping the scincilltors and resoldering the scincilltor PCB board, I am still getting the same results. What do you suggest I should do?
The only difference that I can identify between the scincilltors is that the one coming in at a rate of 0.7 has more bubbles, but the amount is not significant. However, do you think this could possibly be the cause of the problem?
To lower the count rate to ~0.5 I am having to set the threshold to 93 for the 0.7 and 186 for the 1.5. Is this logical, or would this mess with the results?
I have also noticed that the ones clocking in at a rate of 1.5 tend to have higher energy levels. (This is just information unless proved to be useful.)
Thanks for giving me some of your time. -Oskarti