Adding FT3 detector for ALICE3 EndCaps simulation by rpezzi · Pull Request #5526 · AliceO2Group/AliceO2

rpezzi · 2021-02-22T16:43:06Z

This PR creates simple forward layer detector named FT3 to get started with ALICE3 endcaps simulation. This is a follow up to PR #3910. FT3 is based on the ITSMFT classes, much like the ALICE3 TRK detector. Each layer is made of a monolithic silicon disk with a thin sensitive layer for hit generation. Silicon chip thickness is tuned to match the layer x/X0 to allow a minimal evaluation of material budget effects. Detector layout follows latest Werner's presentation. Alternatively there is a function to build a parametrized detector with equidistant layers (needs recompilation to switch). Detector layout is not yet configurable without recompilation.

The detector is symmetric at forward and backward directions.

One should get a file o2sim_HitsFT3.root by running
$ o2-sim -m FT3 -e TGeant3 -g boxgen -n 10 --configKeyValues 'BoxGun.pdg=13 ; BoxGun.eta[0]=-5.0 ; BoxGun.eta[1]=5.0; BoxGun.number=500'

Created simple forward layers to get started with ALICE 3 endcaps simulation. Based on the ITSMFT classes, much like the ALICE TRK detector.

mconcas

Hi @rpezzi, thanks a lot for the PR. To me this looks a positive PR, just one minimal comment about some methods that seem to be not needed (I am removing their counterparts in ITS3 and TRK as well).
I am out of curiosity trying it locally, also to see how things behave in a simulation that includes new beampipe and TRK.
~~As soon as the fullCI is green to me this can be merged~~
As soon as we add also the backwards part of the detector this can be merged.

rpezzi · 2021-03-01T22:21:52Z

The detector has been named FT3 and has been mirrored with forward / backward symmetry. Removed unused methods.
This is how the detector geometry looks like

By the way, pythia events generate hits in all detectors as it should. My previous test was bogus with o2-sim default fairboxgen.

ktf

Ok for the changes in DataFormats/Headers

FT3 is now composed of symmetric forward and backward layers. This commit also removes unused methods.

mconcas

For what concerns the Upgrades part this is fine.

rpezzi · 2021-03-03T07:37:26Z

CI is happy! This PR should be good to go.
For reference, ALIBUILD_O2_TESTS=1 aliBuild ... does not run checkcode test. Instructions to run checkcode are here. Unfortunately local output was not as readable as the CI. Will keep trusting CI for codecheck.

mconcas · 2021-03-03T08:56:02Z

@sawenzel if it is ok with you on the simulation part I think we can merge, thanks.

sawenzel · 2021-03-04T13:35:26Z

    for (int d = DetID::First; d <= DetID::Last; ++d) {
 #ifdef ENABLE_UPGRADES
-      if (d != DetID::IT3 && d != DetID::TRK) {
+      if (d != DetID::IT3 && d != DetID::TRK && d != DetID::FT3) {


at some moment it will make sense to talk about a better isolation of Run3 and upgrade detectors.
Something like predefined list in separate DetIDs ..

mconcas · 2021-03-09T10:17:03Z

fullCI seems to be glitched, is there a way to re-trigger the build? @TimoWilken

davidrohr · 2021-03-09T10:29:00Z

It will rerun automatically after some time

TimoWilken · 2021-03-09T10:35:31Z

@mconcas David is right, but I've marked the build yellow so it re-runs sooner.

rpezzi · 2021-03-10T09:19:26Z

Hi @TimoWilken, @mconcas the error currently reported on fullCI is not related to this PR, it is on QC. Last week all CI checks run OK, just before CI broke. I wonder if one could merge this or mark the build yellow again? Thanks.

davidrohr · 2021-03-10T09:22:19Z

@Barthelemy : QC is again breaking the FullCI with

2021-03-10 03:29:39.372635     QC infologger initialized
2021-03-10 03:29:39.372700     Using config file 'json:///mnt/mesos/sandbox/sandbox/o2-fullci/sw/INSTALLROOT/214c1a6170927dfd0353c030bb72131f1fc93c71/slc8_x86-64/QualityControl/v1.11.0-1/etc/analysisDirect.json'
2021-03-10 03:29:39.372773     Creating a standalone QC topology.
2021-03-10 03:29:39.372803     Generating Data Sampling

 *** Break *** segmentation violation

The run is from this morning 3pm. Could you check? I though this was fixed?

rpezzi · 2021-03-10T09:31:21Z

@davidrohr @Barthelemy , note that PRs ##5553 and #5532 ran OK this morning, both on alibuild02, while this PR ran at alientest06.

TimoWilken · 2021-03-10T10:34:29Z

@Barthelemy if this issue is fixed in QC v1.12.0, should we use that here? If so, that needs to be changed in alidist. (These checks are still using v1.11.0.)

Barthelemy · 2021-03-10T12:21:01Z

It is worked around in QC v1.12 but the alidist PR is itself blocked: alisw/alidist#2887

davidrohr · 2021-03-10T12:37:31Z

@TimoWilken @Barthelemy : I am actually wondering, didn't we at some point switch to testing QualityControl/dev instead of the version in alidist?

TimoWilken · 2021-03-10T13:18:28Z

@davidrohr, I think it was the other way around -- we test QC against O2@dev. The fullCI checks both currently test against the QC version from alidist (so v1.11.0 right now).

davidrohr · 2021-03-10T22:40:27Z

@davidrohr, I think it was the other way around -- we test QC against O2@dev. The fullCI checks both currently test against the QC version from alidist (so v1.11.0 right now).

Not so sure. Didn't we have the discussion in WP3 for which packets to test the dev branch? And we decided for Readout / etc. to stick to the alibuild version, but for QC we switched to dev. I actually remember seing a PR to change the QC target to dev, but I don't find it any more. Perhaps I am also remembering just wrong...

davidrohr · 2021-03-10T22:42:22Z

OK, forget about it, you were right... alisw/ali-bot#931

Barthelemy · 2021-03-11T07:14:17Z

I don't mind either ways.

rpezzi · 2021-03-12T08:31:14Z

Thanks for the info. How should we proceed with this PR? Notice that it has passed CI tests on March 3. After that all failures on subsequent runs were due to bogus tests.

mconcas · 2021-03-16T08:32:33Z

@TimoWilken @davidrohr Hi guys, sorry to bother you, I know you are very busy. Do we have any update on this? Thanks in advance.

TimoWilken · 2021-03-16T08:51:50Z

The fullCI error is unrelated. I've put in a PR to fix it -- #5713.

o2-dataflow is also unrelated -- the test in QC has been timing out for lots of PRs. @Barthelemy I assume this is a known problem?

Adding ALICE EC0 Detector (EndCaps)

b2e1015

Created simple forward layers to get started with ALICE 3 endcaps simulation. Based on the ITSMFT classes, much like the ALICE TRK detector.

rpezzi requested review from a team, marcovanleeuwen, mconcas, qgp and sawenzel as code owners February 22, 2021 16:43

Make clang-format happy

668d607

mconcas reviewed Feb 23, 2021

View reviewed changes

Comment thread Detectors/Upgrades/ALICE3/EC0/simulation/src/Detector.cxx

Make codecheck happy

4564081

rpezzi changed the title ~~Adding EC0 detector for ALICE3 EndCaps simulation~~ Adding FT3 detector for ALICE3 EndCaps simulation Mar 1, 2021

rpezzi force-pushed the ALICE3_EC0 branch from ca8a7da to c18890f Compare March 1, 2021 21:58

Naming ALICE 3 Forward Tracker (end caps): FT3

16763d2

rpezzi force-pushed the ALICE3_EC0 branch from c18890f to 6c5e9ca Compare March 1, 2021 22:03

mconcas reviewed Mar 2, 2021

View reviewed changes

Comment thread Detectors/Upgrades/ALICE3/FT3/simulation/include/FT3Simulation/FT3Layer.h Outdated

ktf previously approved these changes Mar 2, 2021

View reviewed changes

Adding symmetric tracker at forward and backward directions

b0bb0e3

FT3 is now composed of symmetric forward and backward layers. This commit also removes unused methods.

rpezzi dismissed ktf’s stale review via b0bb0e3 March 2, 2021 11:22

rpezzi force-pushed the ALICE3_EC0 branch from 6c5e9ca to b0bb0e3 Compare March 2, 2021 11:22

mconcas approved these changes Mar 2, 2021

View reviewed changes

sawenzel reviewed Mar 4, 2021

View reviewed changes

sawenzel approved these changes Mar 4, 2021

View reviewed changes

davidrohr merged commit 2101aa7 into AliceO2Group:dev Mar 16, 2021

Conversation

rpezzi commented Feb 22, 2021 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mconcas left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rpezzi commented Mar 1, 2021

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ktf left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mconcas left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rpezzi commented Mar 3, 2021

Uh oh!

mconcas commented Mar 3, 2021

Uh oh!

sawenzel Mar 4, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mconcas commented Mar 9, 2021

Uh oh!

davidrohr commented Mar 9, 2021

Uh oh!

TimoWilken commented Mar 9, 2021

Uh oh!

rpezzi commented Mar 10, 2021

Uh oh!

davidrohr commented Mar 10, 2021

Uh oh!

rpezzi commented Mar 10, 2021

Uh oh!

TimoWilken commented Mar 10, 2021

Uh oh!

Barthelemy commented Mar 10, 2021

Uh oh!

davidrohr commented Mar 10, 2021

Uh oh!

TimoWilken commented Mar 10, 2021

Uh oh!

davidrohr commented Mar 10, 2021

Uh oh!

davidrohr commented Mar 10, 2021

Uh oh!

Barthelemy commented Mar 11, 2021

Uh oh!

rpezzi commented Mar 12, 2021

Uh oh!

mconcas commented Mar 16, 2021

Uh oh!

TimoWilken commented Mar 16, 2021

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

7 participants

rpezzi commented Feb 22, 2021 •

edited

Loading

mconcas left a comment •

edited

Loading

mconcas left a comment •

edited

Loading