Fixed, e775s, Fri Feb 28 22:58:31 2020, Franck, Sylvain, ONLINE, General, CD2, MUGAST Spectra Run 153 
|
Run 153 (target #2 CD2+Au)
MUGAST Spectra reset at start of run (~ 20h) |
|
Ongoing, e775s, Sat Feb 29 07:35:21 2020, mugast : Valerian, AGATA, General, CD2, AGATA is not responding
|
| Since ~4:30am AGATA is not responding, everyhting was frozen. Unclear if it comes from disk problem or other... |
|
Ongoing, e775s, Sat Feb 29 14:27:48 2020, mugast ; Valerian, OFFLINE, Software, CD2, Issues in the EX reconstruction 6x
|
| 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. |
|
Pinned, e793s, Wed Mar 10 13:10:14 2021, Adrien, BEAM, General, CD2, Kinematical 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. |
|
Fixed, e793s, Wed Mar 10 16:31:50 2021, OttoRun, RUN, General, CD2, Run49
|
*************************
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 |
|
Fixed, e793s, Wed Mar 10 17:00:06 2021, OttoRun, RUN, General, CD2, Run50
|
*************************
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 |
|
Fixed, e793s, Wed Mar 10 17:25:22 2021, OttoRun, RUN, General, CD2, Run51
|
*************************
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 |
|
Fixed, e793s, Wed Mar 10 19:23:37 2021, mugast, OFFLINE, General, CD2, Kinematics and Ex - RUN051
|
Preliminary analysis results, Backward angles.
MM5 position are incorrect |
|
Pending, e793s, Wed Mar 10 20:36:19 2021, Nigel, BEAM, General, CD2, Beam 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).
 |
|
Fixed, e793s, Wed Mar 10 20:53:55 2021, OttoRun, RUN, General, CD2, Run52
|
*************************
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 |
|
Fixed, e793s, Wed Mar 10 21:02:03 2021, OttoRun, RUN, General, CD2, Run53
|
*************************
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 |
|
Fixed, e793s, Wed Mar 10 22:19:22 2021, Adrien, Freddy, Wilton and Nigel, OFFLINE, General, CD2, Offline 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? |
|
Fixed, e793s, Thu Mar 11 01:24:47 2021, Ablaihan, Louis, RUN, General, CD2, run 53 screenshots 16x
|
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% |
|
Fixed, e793s, Thu Mar 11 02:50:14 2021, Ablaihan, Louis, BEAM, General, CD2, VAMOS 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? |
|
Fixed, e793s, Thu Mar 11 03:37:45 2021, Louis, OFFLINE, General, CD2, Offline 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 |
|
Fixed, e793s, Thu Mar 11 04:34:58 2021, ablaihan, louis, CATS, Hardware, CD2, CATS 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. |
|
Fixed, e793s, Thu Mar 11 04:38:31 2021, Ablaihan, Louis, BEAM, General, CD2, Beam 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% |
|
Fixed, e793s, Thu Mar 11 05:12:36 2021, Ablaihan, Louis, RUN, General, CD2, run 53 new screenshots
|
|
|
Pending, e793s, Thu Mar 11 09:02:20 2021, mugast, BEAM, Hardware, CD2, beam interruption
|
| power supply trip on the accelerator beam is off for about 30min |
|
Fixed, e793s, Thu Mar 11 09:04:38 2021, adrien, ONLINE, General, CD2, Elastic scattering in MM5
|
| looking at E vs strip number in MM5 we see clearly the pp and dd elastic scattering. |
|