Comparison of OM Responses at Different Sites
description
Transcript of Comparison of OM Responses at Different Sites
![Page 1: Comparison of OM Responses at Different Sites](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081603/56814747550346895db484fe/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Comparison of OM Responses at Different
Sites
Zh.-A. Dzhilkibaev, A. Gazizov and Ch. Spiering
![Page 2: Comparison of OM Responses at Different Sites](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081603/56814747550346895db484fe/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Response of OM to Muon Tracks
Uniform track
N = N + N
N – muon’s light
N – -el. light (8% N )
SitesLake Baikal (BAIKAL)Mediterranean (ANTARES)Antarctic ice (AMANDA)
![Page 3: Comparison of OM Responses at Different Sites](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081603/56814747550346895db484fe/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Optical Parameters
Absorption -
Scattering -
ScatteringFunction -
Inverse lightvelocity, ns/m -
Light wave-length: 350 nm – 600 nm
BAIKAL AMANDA ANTARES
~20 m ~100 m ~60 m
30–50 m ~3 m 50-70 m
0.85-0.9 0.9-0.95 ~0.85
4.68-4.5 4.59-4.44 4.73-4.55
![Page 4: Comparison of OM Responses at Different Sites](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081603/56814747550346895db484fe/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
absorption scattering
![Page 5: Comparison of OM Responses at Different Sites](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081603/56814747550346895db484fe/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
scattering function
![Page 6: Comparison of OM Responses at Different Sites](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081603/56814747550346895db484fe/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Refraction index Time differences(350 nm – 600 nm)
![Page 7: Comparison of OM Responses at Different Sites](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081603/56814747550346895db484fe/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Characteristics of OM
quantum efficiency angular sensitivity
![Page 8: Comparison of OM Responses at Different Sites](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081603/56814747550346895db484fe/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Influence of light velocity and absorption on OM time response (without scattering)
![Page 9: Comparison of OM Responses at Different Sites](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081603/56814747550346895db484fe/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
FWHM of the time distribution (without scattering)
![Page 10: Comparison of OM Responses at Different Sites](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081603/56814747550346895db484fe/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Dependence of OM response on its orientation
anisotropy Blind zone
BAIKAL ~50 4 %ANTARES ~50 25 % AMANDA ~ 4 -
![Page 11: Comparison of OM Responses at Different Sites](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081603/56814747550346895db484fe/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Time distributions
m m
mm
BAIKAL
AMANDA
ANTARES
![Page 12: Comparison of OM Responses at Different Sites](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081603/56814747550346895db484fe/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Integral time distributions
N(<)
=25 m, cos()=-1
=60 m, cos()=-1
=10 m, cos()=-1
![Page 13: Comparison of OM Responses at Different Sites](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081603/56814747550346895db484fe/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
=10 m, cos()=1
=25 m, cos()=1
=60 m, cos()=1
![Page 14: Comparison of OM Responses at Different Sites](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081603/56814747550346895db484fe/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Number of photoelectrons as a function of distance
![Page 15: Comparison of OM Responses at Different Sites](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022081603/56814747550346895db484fe/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
SUMMARY
R
1pe
Rs
BAIKAL ~10m ~20m anisot.
4%, blind
~2
(4% ~20)
AMANDA ~15m 55m isotrop. 1-100
ANTARES ~15m 40m anisotr.
25%, blind
1-5
(25% ~50)
nst,