MUST2 SAMURAI_2018 S3-LEB-LPC SUPERNEMO MUGAST EXPAND SCALP GALATRON HiCARI VELO
  MUGAST, Page 109 of 132  Not logged in MUGAST
Status ExpNbr Date Author Type Category Target-Sourcedown Subject
Fixede775s Fri Feb 28 22:58:31 2020 Franck, SylvainONLINEGeneralCD2MUGAST Spectra Run 153
Run 153 (target #2 CD2+Au)

MUGAST Spectra reset at start of run (~ 20h)
Attachment 1: RUN153_ElabThetaLab.png
RUN153_ElabThetaLab.png
Attachment 2: RUN153_impact.png
RUN153_impact.png
Attachment 3: RUN153_tac.png
RUN153_tac.png
Attachment 4: RUN153_tof.png
RUN153_tof.png
Ongoinge775s Sat Feb 29 07:35:21 2020 mugast : ValerianAGATAGeneralCD2AGATA is not responding
Since ~4:30am AGATA is not responding, everyhting was frozen. Unclear if it comes from disk problem or other...
Ongoinge775s Sat Feb 29 14:27:48 2020 mugast ; ValerianOFFLINESoftwareCD2Issues in the EX reconstruction

mugast ; valerian irene wrote:
We are currently working on the EX reconstruction which is off for detector 1, 3 and 7... One of our guess might be that there is an issue with the position of the detectors which gives error in theta... As the energy calibration is ok. Joined are :

- the Excitation energy for good detectors compared to all detectors,
- the theoretical kinematic line for the 3.57 state for each detectors,
- the excitation energy as a function of the laboratory angle (for this last spectra a clear dependency is visible for telescopes 1,3 and 7)
- the 3D view, which doesn't show clear problem in position...


Testing changing the beam impact :

-Kine for beam impact = (0,0,0) for reference
-Kine for beam impact = (0,0,-5mm)
-Kine for beam impact = (0,0,+5mm)

-Ex vs ThetaLab for beam impact = (0,0,0) for reference
-Ex vs ThetaLab for beam impact = (0,0,-5mm)
-Ex vs ThetaLab for beam impact = (0,0,+5mm)
Red lines corresponds to Ex = 3.570 MeV and Ex = 4.070 MeV

To try to correct the problem i also offseted the beam in X and Y, but this doesn't solve the problem quite the opposite as it make the result worse for other detectors also... The fact that it is better at lower angle and worse at higher angle might mean that the detectors angles are tilted compared to the
surveyors measurments... I also tried to use the CAO positions for MG3 (see Detectors/mugast.detector) but it didn't solve the problem.
Attachment 1: Kinematics_for_each_detectorsBeamZ0.pdf
Kinematics_for_each_detectorsBeamZ0.pdf
Attachment 2: Kinematics_for_each_detectorsBeamZminus5.pdf
Kinematics_for_each_detectorsBeamZminus5.pdf
Attachment 3: Kinematics_for_each_detectorsBeamZplus5.pdf
Kinematics_for_each_detectorsBeamZplus5.pdf
Attachment 4: ExvsTheta_each_detectorsZ0.pdf
ExvsTheta_each_detectorsZ0.pdf
Attachment 5: ExvsTheta_each_detectorsZminus5.pdf
ExvsTheta_each_detectorsZminus5.pdf
Attachment 6: ExvsTheta_each_detectorsZplus5.pdf
ExvsTheta_each_detectorsZplus5.pdf
Pinnede793s Wed Mar 10 13:10:14 2021 AdrienBEAMGeneralCD2Kinematical line from Ti contamination
In black the Kinematical line for states known to be populated strongly in 47Ti(d,p).
In blue range of the states of interrest.

The contamination is in a different region and should not cause any issue.
Attachment 1: KineTiK.pdf
KineTiK.pdf
Attachment 2: Kine.cxx
void AddTiStates(double E);

void Kine(){
  
  
 NPL::Reaction K("47K(d,p)48K@362");
  
 // K states
 auto g = K.GetKinematicLine3();
 g->SetLineColor(kAzure+7);
 g->SetLineWidth(3);
 g->Draw("ac");
 K.SetExcitationHeavy(4);
 g = K.GetKinematicLine3();
 g->SetLineColor(kAzure+7);
 g->SetLineWidth(2);
 g->SetLineStyle(1);
 g->Draw("c");

 AddTiStates(0); 

 AddTiStates(0); 
 AddTiStates(0.969); 
 AddTiStates(2.2292); 
 AddTiStates(2.419); 
 AddTiStates(3.223); 
 AddTiStates(3.332); 
 AddTiStates(3.622); 
 AddTiStates(4.388); 
 AddTiStates(4.458); 
 AddTiStates(4.719); 
 AddTiStates(4.852); 
 AddTiStates(5.151); 
   
  }

void AddTiStates(double E){
  
 NPL::Reaction Ti("47Ti(d,p)48Ti@362");
   // Ti states
 Ti.SetExcitationHeavy(E);
 auto g = Ti.GetKinematicLine3();
 g->SetLineWidth(1);
 g->SetLineStyle(2);
 g->Draw("c");


  
  }
Fixede793s Wed Mar 10 16:31:50 2021 OttoRunRUNGeneralCD2Run49
*************************
Run : 49
*************************

Start at 2021-03-10 16:31:31.923710

Beam in the room; restarting daq after changing trigger.
target: CD2 0.5mg
Trigger are MUGAST/MM

Stop at 2021-03-10 16:53:12.237279
Stop comment: stopping to change GMT windows
Fixede793s Wed Mar 10 17:00:06 2021 OttoRunRUNGeneralCD2Run50
*************************
Run : 50
*************************

Start at 2021-03-10 16:59:44.368649

Beam in the room; restarting daq after changing trigger.
target: CD2 0.5mg
Trigger are MUGAST/MM
changing width of the FAG to 1us

Stop at 2021-03-10 17:12:21.612357
Stop comment: stopping to get in and change the cats delay
Fixede793s Wed Mar 10 17:25:22 2021 OttoRunRUNGeneralCD2Run51
*************************
Run : 51
*************************

Start at 2021-03-10 17:24:45.316220

Beam in the room; restarting daq after changing trigger.
target: CD2 0.5mg
Trigger are MUGAST/MM
changed width of the FAG to 400ns
Removed extra 100ns delay from cats validation

Stop at 2021-03-10 18:14:26.996869
Stop comment: stop for VAMOS data analysis. Coherence check

Stop at 2021-03-10 20:46:36.348405
Stop comment: stopped the run to add cats% in the trigger
Fixede793s Wed Mar 10 19:23:37 2021 mugastOFFLINEGeneralCD2Kinematics and Ex - RUN051
Preliminary analysis results, Backward angles.

MM5 position are incorrect
Attachment 1: RUN51_ELabThethaLab_Ex.png
RUN51_ELabThethaLab_Ex.png
Attachment 2: RUN51_ELabThethaLab_Ex_Egamma.png
RUN51_ELabThethaLab_Ex_Egamma.png
Pendinge793s Wed Mar 10 20:36:19 2021 NigelBEAMGeneralCD2Beam centering - MUST2 hit pattern

We made a quick check of the beam centering by inspecting the MUST2 (forward angles) hit pattern (plot attached). It appears that the beam is probably somewhat off centre in the horizontal direction.

It has been decided to run overnight like this and then see with Bertrand if the centering can be improved (will need to send hit pattern spectrum to PCP in order for Bertam to do this).

Fixede793s Wed Mar 10 20:53:55 2021 OttoRunRUNGeneralCD2Run52
*************************
Run : 52
*************************

Start at 2021-03-10 18:16:20.382279

Beam in the room; restarting daq after changing trigger.
target: CD2 0.5mg
Trigger are MUGAST/MM
changed width of the FAG to 400ns
Removed extra 100ns delay from cats validation
Fixede793s Wed Mar 10 21:02:03 2021 OttoRunRUNGeneralCD2Run53
*************************
Run : 53
*************************

Start at 2021-03-10 21:00:45.001418

Production run.

Beam: 4.5e5 pps
target: CD2 0.5mg
Trigger are MUGAST/MM/CATS%

Stop at 2021-03-11 09:40:34.970341
Stop comment: run stopped to enter and check position 0 ATC6 trip
Fixede793s Wed Mar 10 22:19:22 2021 Adrien, Freddy, Wilton and NigelOFFLINEGeneralCD2Offline analysis of run 51 and 52 using ganil files
We noted that the gamma ray efficiency calculated from file converted from AGATA was close 100%. We concluded that the conversion program was reauiring a gamma ray to be present.

This is confirm by analysis of the ganil dta file that show 10 time more count that the agata one.

Here is a kinematical plot of the run 51 and 52 analysised from ganil file.

There is a 1.5MeV state present that disappear in the agata coincidence. This is to be investigated with more data. Is it an isomer state? from 48K? 48Ti?
Attachment 1: RUN5152_ELabThethaLab.png
RUN5152_ELabThethaLab.png
Fixede793s Thu Mar 11 01:24:47 2021 Ablaihan, LouisRUNGeneralCD2run 53 screenshots
Screenshots of the run 53
Beam intensity is ~ 7.4 10^5 pps in CATS and 5.3 10^5 in VAMOS
~75% transmition
Dt is ~ 3%
Attachment 1: run53_Scalers.png
run53_Scalers.png
Attachment 2: run53_MM_Impact.png
run53_MM_Impact.png
Attachment 3: run53_Times.png
run53_Times.png
Attachment 4: run53_VAMOS_MWpng
Attachment 5: run53_MM_TY.png
run53_MM_TY.png
Attachment 6: run53_MM_TX.png
run53_MM_TX.png
Attachment 7: run53_MG_TY.png
run53_MG_TY.png
Attachment 8: run53_MG_TX.png
run53_MG_TX.png
Attachment 9: run53_MM_ErawY.png
run53_MM_ErawY.png
Attachment 10: run53_MM_ErawX.png
run53_MM_ErawX.png
Attachment 11: run53_MG_ErawY.png
run53_MG_ErawY.png
Attachment 12: run53_MG_ErawX.png
run53_MG_ErawX.png
Attachment 13: run53_MG_E_TOF.png
run53_MG_E_TOF.png
Attachment 14: run53_MM_dEE.png
run53_MM_dEE.png
Attachment 15: run53_MM_E_TOF.png
run53_MM_E_TOF.png
Attachment 16: run53_MG_impact.png
run53_MG_impact.png
Fixede793s Thu Mar 11 02:50:14 2021 Ablaihan, LouisBEAMGeneralCD2VAMOS transmition
at 2h50 beam intensity reached 1.1x10^6 pps in CATS for 6.5x10^5 pps in VAMOS. The transmition decreased to 60% without any shift of the beam position. Does it come from a loss of efficiency of VAMOS at high counting rate?
Fixede793s Thu Mar 11 03:37:45 2021 LouisOFFLINEGeneralCD2Offline analyis run 53
1) Some angular distribution were extracted (without any efficiency corrections) with gate on Ex btw 0 and 2 MeV (where p orbitals are populated) and btw 2 and 4 MeV (where f orbitals are populated). More counts are observed btw 110 and 120 degrees in Lab angle with the 0-2MeV gate compared to the 2-4MeV gate which is expected from the AWBA calculus. Kinematic cuts the large angles at high excitation energies. Geometrical efficiency is needed to compare this angular range. Looks like we well distinguish L=1 and L=3 transfers.

2) Some gamma spectra obtained with Ex gate btw -1 and 1, 1 and 3, 3 and 5 MeV.

3) Some strange horizontal lines are observed in the E-TOF id in MUST2. The spectra was obtained with gate on the promt signal in vamos so it can not be the beam intercepting directly must2...

4) the Ex vs Eg matrix
Attachment 1: AngDistrib.png
AngDistrib.png
Attachment 2: Eg_Ex.png
Eg_Ex.png
Attachment 3: ETofMM.png
ETofMM.png
Attachment 4: ExEg.png
ExEg.png
Attachment 5: Ex_Theta.png
Ex_Theta.png
Fixede793s Thu Mar 11 04:34:58 2021 ablaihan, louisCATSHardwareCD2CATS and VAMOS tripped
at 4h15 CATS and VAMOS tripped probably due to too high beam intensity (~1.2x10^6 pps). We switched them on again at 4h30. All the 6 CATS in Board2 in HV by 525 V instead of 530 V.

We did not stop the run to not risk to crash the RCC. Events btw 4h15 and 4h30 will therefore have no time.
Attachment 1: Scaler_run53_4h30.png
Scaler_run53_4h30.png
Fixede793s Thu Mar 11 04:38:31 2021 Ablaihan, LouisBEAMGeneralCD2Beam stopped due to a equipment tripped in CSS1
Beam stopped 4h30 due to a equipment tripped in CSS1. They are going to fix it. Estimated timing of the intervention ~10/20min.
Beam went back at 4h52 at 3.5x10^5 pps in CATS and 3.0x10^5 pps in VAMOS. transmision ~ 85%
Attachment 1: Scaler_run53_4h30.png
Scaler_run53_4h30.png
Fixede793s Thu Mar 11 05:12:36 2021 Ablaihan, LouisRUNGeneralCD2run 53 new screenshots
Attachment 1: run53_1_MMMG_T.png
run53_1_MMMG_T.png
Attachment 2: run53_1_MM_Impact.png
run53_1_MM_Impact.png
Attachment 3: run53_1_MG_impact.png
run53_1_MG_impact.png
Pendinge793s Thu Mar 11 09:02:20 2021 mugastBEAMHardwareCD2beam interruption
power supply trip on the accelerator beam is off for about 30min
Fixede793s Thu Mar 11 09:04:38 2021 adrienONLINEGeneralCD2Elastic scattering in MM5
looking at E vs strip number in MM5 we see clearly the pp and dd elastic scattering.
Attachment 1: run53_mm5_elastic.png
run53_mm5_elastic.png

ELOG Home Page