Skip to content
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

Adding IDEA_o1_v02 and its vertex detector #273

Merged
merged 73 commits into from
Oct 3, 2023

Conversation

armin-ilg
Copy link
Contributor

@armin-ilg armin-ilg commented May 26, 2023

BEGINRELEASENOTES

  • Adding the IDEA_o1_v02 detector in key4hep, for the start just the vertex detector (vertex barrel + outer barrel) and the machine components, some place holder detectors otherwise.

ENDRELEASENOTES

To do's still:

  • Remove overlap between vertex support (imported from CAD) and vertex barrel
  • Cross check again all vertex dimensions
  • More detailed implementation of barrel (individual ARCADIA chips in vertex barrel, individual ATLASPix3 in outer barrel)
  • Add README.md

Longer term:

  • Add vertex digitisation (Armin)
  • Add silicon wrapper with timing information (Armin)
  • Add DRC, drift chamber, muon chambers

@armin-ilg armin-ilg marked this pull request as ready for review May 26, 2023 06:52
@andresailer
Copy link
Contributor

andresailer commented May 26, 2023

  • What are these "*.swp" binary files?
  • Could you flatten the history please? I.e.: No merge from lcgeo/master commits, please use rebase.

Copy link
Contributor

@BrieucF BrieucF left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @armin-ilg ! Thanks! Could you

  • move everything from FCCee/compact/FCCee_IDEA_o1_v01/ to FCCee/compact/IDEA/IDEA_o1_v01
  • Add a README.md under detector/tracker explaining briefly what the new detector builders do together with a link to a recent reference (a talk is ok) describing the detector we are trying to model? You can just add two "entries" in the README to describe the two new builders, more will come to describe the other ones.

detector/tracker/ZPlanarTracker_geo.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@BrieucF
Copy link
Contributor

BrieucF commented Jun 22, 2023

Can you add a test for the newly introduced detectors, as in https://github.com/key4hep/k4geo/blob/master/lcgeoTests/CMakeLists.txt#L67 ?

@BrieucF
Copy link
Contributor

BrieucF commented Jun 28, 2023

Hi Armin, I did not anticipate that we were going to have scripts and utilities here, but it is perfectly ok. I would then just propose a modification in the folder organization because the compact folder should contain compact files, not script. Could you organize things with: FCCee/IDEA/compact where you put only the xmls, FCCee/IDEA/scripts where you put the scripts that are specific to IDEA (maybe passing the specific compact file as an argument instead of hard coding it so that it will work also for o1_v02)? Regarding very generic utils like e.g. overlap.mac, I would put them in the k4geo/utils but it has also been introduced in PR#271 so you could just remove it from your PR and take the one introduced there.

@andresailer
Copy link
Contributor

@armin-ilg
Copy link
Contributor Author

  • What are these "*.swp" binary files?
  • Could you flatten the history please? I.e.: No merge from lcgeo/master commits, please use rebase.

.swp files are deleted.
I created a flattened branch (https://github.com/armin-ilg/lcgeo/tree/flattened), I can use that one for the merge request if you want.

@jmcarcell
Copy link
Contributor

jmcarcell commented Jul 17, 2023

It's better to continue here where there is already discussion. For flattening you can always force push to your branch and then not use merge and use rebase. At the end the commits will be squashed (if the squash button is pressed, which should) and then it doesn't really matter if the history is linear or not since it will just be another commit on top of the current one

@armin-ilg
Copy link
Contributor Author

Can you add a test for the newly introduced detectors, as in https://github.com/key4hep/k4geo/blob/master/lcgeoTests/CMakeLists.txt#L67 ?

Done

<detectors>
<detector id="0" name="VTXIBSupport" type="DD4hep_TestShape_Creator">
<check>
<shape type="CAD_MultiVolume" ref="${K4GEO}/share/k4geo/FCCee/IDEA/compact/IDEA_o1_v01/VertexSupport_o1_v01.obj" unit="mm"/>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You are saying, you cannot use a relative path here?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, just using ref="VertexSupport_o1_v01.obj" will only work if it's run inside of the FCCee/IDEA/compact/IDEA_o1_v01 folder. I can open a ticket in DD4hep for that if you think this should be fixed (would be useful I think)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes please open an issue. We must not depend on running in the same folder or having the full path.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

… The test will only run once the IDEA folder is in the nightly Key4hep software stack
@andresailer andresailer self-assigned this Sep 6, 2023
…lume names can be assigned. Furthermore changed DetElements in barrel constructor so that they can be properly accessed in k4RecTracker
… This is applied in the IDEA vertex detector. Other than this, also the width of the sensor support in the vertex barrel was corrected to be only 4.4 mm wide (instead of 8.8)
…ponents. Multiple components can be added per stave and the name will be used to name the corresponding assembly. Furthermore fixed the sensitive/periphery regions in VTXIB layers 2 and 3 to be correct
@andresailer
Copy link
Contributor

This is going to conflict with #282 for the IDEA_o1_v01

@BrieucF
Copy link
Contributor

BrieucF commented Sep 28, 2023

Actually there is conflict with #282 since both are putting thing in IDEA_o1_v01. I would propose to rename the version introduced here as IDEA_o1_v02 because #282 migrates the IDEA detector as it was in FCCDetectors (and it makes sense to call this version o1_v01) while you are using a modified vertex detector + modified beampipe. What do you think?

When this PR will be merged (I hope soon), I will start adding to IDEA_o1_v02 the detailed drift chamber and the new muon chambers!

@armin-ilg
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi. So I have done the last additions to the IDEA vertex. It's now also possible to do some very simple (and by far not final) digitisation using k4RecTracker (my fork is here) without needing to use the k4MarlinWrapper.

The IDEA vertex detector is now quite accurately described. In comparison to the MDI note, also the end-of-stave/ladder structures have been implemented. Only the large holder structure for the disks is missing.

Anything else that needs to be changed @andresailer ?

@andresailer
Copy link
Contributor

What Brieuc posted above again.

@andresailer
Copy link
Contributor

Also check yourself why the tests are failing please.

…pport as it will fail the test, since the CAD file cannot be found. After the IDEA detector is in a nightly release, then the CAD file will be found and we can include these lines in the xml again
@armin-ilg
Copy link
Contributor Author

Also check yourself why the tests are failing please.

Done. I commented the vertex inner barrel support for the moment, as this would prevent the test from passing.
(see previous problem)

Yes, just using ref="VertexSupport_o1_v01.obj" will only work if it's run inside of the FCCee/IDEA/compact/IDEA_o1_v01 folder. I can open a ticket in DD4hep for that if you think this should be fixed (would be useful I think)

@armin-ilg
Copy link
Contributor Author

What Brieuc posted above again.

@andresailer : So if I understand Brieuc's comment correctly

Actually there is conflict with #282 since both are putting thing in IDEA_o1_v01. I would propose to rename the version introduced here as IDEA_o1_v02 because #282 migrates the IDEA detector as it was in FCCDetectors (and it makes sense to call this version o1_v01) while you are using a modified vertex detector + modified beampipe. What do you think?
When this PR will be merged (I hope soon), I will start adding to IDEA_o1_v02 the detailed drift chamber and the new muon chambers!

this means that we can merge this PR now and then the other open PR will build on this IDEA version, right? So we can go ahead and merge this PR from your side @BrieucF ?

@BrieucF
Copy link
Contributor

BrieucF commented Sep 29, 2023

What Brieuc posted above again.

@andresailer : So if I understand Brieuc's comment correctly

Actually there is conflict with #282 since both are putting thing in IDEA_o1_v01. I would propose to rename the version introduced here as IDEA_o1_v02 because #282 migrates the IDEA detector as it was in FCCDetectors (and it makes sense to call this version o1_v01) while you are using a modified vertex detector + modified beampipe. What do you think?
When this PR will be merged (I hope soon), I will start adding to IDEA_o1_v02 the detailed drift chamber and the new muon chambers!

this means that we can merge this PR now and then the other open PR will build on this IDEA version, right? So we can go ahead and merge this PR from your side @BrieucF ?

Hi Armin, sorry I was not clear. No, we should first rename the folder IDEA_o1_v01 --> IDEA_o1_v02, rename IDEA_o1_v01.xml --> IDEA_o1_v02.xml and modify the relevant paths in affected scripts. Then it is good for merging on my side.

@armin-ilg
Copy link
Contributor Author

What Brieuc posted above again.

@andresailer : So if I understand Brieuc's comment correctly

Actually there is conflict with #282 since both are putting thing in IDEA_o1_v01. I would propose to rename the version introduced here as IDEA_o1_v02 because #282 migrates the IDEA detector as it was in FCCDetectors (and it makes sense to call this version o1_v01) while you are using a modified vertex detector + modified beampipe. What do you think?
When this PR will be merged (I hope soon), I will start adding to IDEA_o1_v02 the detailed drift chamber and the new muon chambers!

this means that we can merge this PR now and then the other open PR will build on this IDEA version, right? So we can go ahead and merge this PR from your side @BrieucF ?

Hi Armin, sorry I was not clear. No, we should first rename the folder IDEA_o1_v01 --> IDEA_o1_v02, rename IDEA_o1_v01.xml --> IDEA_o1_v02.xml and modify the relevant paths in affected scripts. Then it is good for merging on my side.

Ah, sorry for the confusion. Changed now!
(the Silicon wrapper will be added in a future PR, although I have a preliminary version already)

@andresailer andresailer changed the title [WIP] Adding IDEA detector to k4geo Adding IDEA detector to k4geo Oct 3, 2023
@andresailer andresailer changed the title Adding IDEA detector to k4geo Adding IDEA_o1_v02 and its vertex detector Oct 3, 2023
@andresailer andresailer merged commit 1dfca23 into key4hep:master Oct 3, 2023
4 of 5 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants