Status |
ExpNbr |
Date |
Author |
Type |
Category |
Target-Source |
Subject |
Fixed | e744s |
Thu Apr 11 00:57:34 2019 |
iulian | OTHER | Hardware | CH2 | CH2 target thickness |
target CH2 104 um (2nd position)
Brho 14N6+ CATS2 |
Fixed | e744s |
Thu Apr 11 02:25:06 2019 |
iulian | RUN | General | CH2 | target thicknesses measurement Online |
Online measurement of the target thickness:
Run 58
Cats2 in -> Brho 14N7+=0.9148 Tm
Run 59
Cats2 in
CH2 target place 2 in
-> Brho 14N6+=0.7473 Tm
Thickness found 105.2 um
Run 60
Cats2 in
CH2 target place 3 in
-> Brho 14N6+=0.7754 Tm
-> Brho 14N5+=0.8924 Tm
Thickness found 91 um
Run 61
Cats2 in
C target place 4 in
-> Brho 14N6+=0.8118 Tm
Thickness foun 35.85
Run 62
Cats2 in
CH2 target place 5 in
-> Brho 14N6+=0.8023 Tm
Thickness found 76.2 um |
Fixed | e744s |
Thu Apr 11 06:48:23 2019 |
iulian | RUN | Hardware | CH2 | TO DO list |
mugast wrote: | - 2 TACS are not working:
- T_Si_CATS1 (stop should be CATS n FAG --> to be checked). Also Ok now. Same problem as below
- T_Si_VAMOS (seen now in T_CATS1_CATS2) --> check the signals (if CATS is the START we should use CATS n FAG, if it is the stop it should be delayed by 800 ns , the delay is prepared)
The was a broken Cable from the delay to fan in fan out.
Still remains T_Vamos_Cats1 with no counts. I suspect the necesity to put a 2 us delay on Cats1, or to inverse it and pout Cats1 fag validated as start
|
|
Attachment 1: run275_tacs_mugast.png
|
|
Fixed | e744s |
Thu Apr 11 07:00:17 2019 |
iulian | BEAM | General | CH2 | ToDo List and plan for today |
To Do/Understand
1) T_Vamos_Cats1 in Mugast and T_FPMW_CATS2 in Vamos are not working. I suspect it is the same reason, meaning stop arrives before start. Longer delay or inverse putting Cats2-Fag validated.
2) MM3_E_TOF there is a 5 MeV threshold see below?
For today:
1) We give the beam back to them at 10 am.
2) Analyse the data from RUN 74 & 75 to see the excitation function for 1H(14N,p)
3) If we have the beam back, take more data merged with Agata. Intensity around 2e+5 pps to protect CATS2.
4) If Vamos/Mugast need debugging for reconstruction/validation they have priority.
Summary of the night :
1) Measured the target thicknesses for the targets: 1) Hole 2) CH2 105 um 3) CH2 100 um 4) C 70 um 5) CH2 73 um
2) The C target was not very homogeneous, meaning that was dramatically spreading the momentum distribution of the beam charge states.
3) Vamos debugging went forward, transmission was 95% with Cats2 in with 2e+4 pps beam intensity
4) At 4h30 started the statistic run with Vamos setted at a Brho of 0.437 Tm to completely remove 14N7+ and all others from the focal plane. The beam spot was about 50 mm pied a pied ... This makes imposible the use |
Attachment 1: run275_tacs_mugast.png
|
|
Fixed | e744s |
Thu Apr 11 17:38:28 2019 |
iulian | RUN | Hardware | Empty | Setting trigger Vamos and Cats |
Removed division %40000 on Cats and %1000 on Vamos.
Removed Cats2 from the beam |
Fixed | e744s |
Fri Apr 12 07:26:29 2019 |
iulian | RUN | General | CH2 | Run88 |
Please add all the spectra from the visualization into the elog and all the scales.... see runs before
OttoRun wrote: | *************************
Run : 88
*************************
Start at 2019-04-12 06:24:07.821497
Run Conditions:
- Operator: Louis
- Trigger: MG Backward, MG90, MUST2, CATS %1000 AGATA %100
- Target/Source: CH2 target 2
- Beam: 14O
- Intensity: ~ 3e+4
- Brho = 0.6912 Tm
- !CATS/VAMOS (CATS Efficiency)! : XXXX
Comment:
Start Target 2: 104 um
VAMOS is closed. |
|
Fixed | e744s |
Fri Apr 12 13:34:33 2019 |
iulian | OTHER | General | N/A | E744 Status |
1) Beam tuning during the night.
2) around 04h00 started runs at 4e+4
3) beam intensity decreased to 1e+4 @7h30 in the morning.
4) Vamos tuning at 8h
5) run low intensity at 12h30 et high intensity (1e+4) @13h.
6) @13h give the beam to PCP to increase the beam intensity. First IBE measurement
7) If beam I<5e+4 measure directly in Vamos
8) If beam I>5e+4 we have to cut in part the beam in Vamos or not use Vamos
|
Fixed | e744s |
Sat Apr 13 23:25:14 2019 |
iulian | RUN | General | N/A | Inconsistent info in the run message |
This inconsistency has been addressed
Adrien Matta wrote: |
Adrien Matta wrote: | Be careful to fill in correctly all info in the start run message.
There is inconsistency in run 121 comment (target 2) and list (target 3).
Thèse information will be used for the analysis. |
--> Well.. in entry 4175 it is written target 3...
... ... |
|
Fixed | e768s |
Thu Jul 18 19:40:11 2019 |
iulian | OFFLINE | General | LiF | Ex in 19F from run 72 |
Excitation energy spectra in 19F obtained by conditioning Z==9 and (A/Q*8-19)<0.3 in Vamos for
MG5
MG11
Trapezoidal detectors
All backward detectors |
Attachment 1: mg5_19F_Ex_run72_0.png
|
|
Attachment 2: mg11_19F_Ex_run72_0.png
|
|
Attachment 3: allMugast_deToF_Q9_and8_19FVam_run72_0.png
|
|
Attachment 4: allBackward_deToF_Q9_and8_19FVam_run72_1.png
|
|
Fixed | |
Fri Jul 19 11:46:51 2019 |
iulian | OFFLINE | General | LiF | Offline 112 |
Egamma vs M/Q*9 to check who is 19Ne
Ex in 19Ne all Mugast
Ex vs Egamma for 19Ne
Kinematics Lines drawn over Elab vs Tlab for 19Ne |
Attachment 1: run112_Egamma_mM_Q.png
|
|
Attachment 2: run113_Ex_19Ne.png
|
|
Attachment 3: run112_Ex_Egamma_19Ne.png
|
|
Attachment 4: run112_KinLines_19Ne.png
|
|
Fixed | e744s |
Fri Apr 12 13:53:56 2019 |
diego | OTHER | General | | intervention |
TAC FPMW_HF in VAMOS was still out of range for MUGAST physics
We increased the range from 1us to 2us and applied a delay of 200 ns to the stop of the TAC. |
Fixed | e744s |
Fri Apr 12 19:44:09 2019 |
diego | VAMOS | Software | | SetAlias script for VAMOS identification |
|
Attachment 1: SetAlias.C
|
char cond[1000];
TTree *t1;
void SetAlias()
{
gStyle->SetPalette(1);
t1 = (TTree*) gROOT->FindObject("AD")
;
t1->SetAlias("fExist_DC_Y","DC0_Y>-1500&&DC1_Y>-1500&&DC2_Y>-1500&&DC3_Y>-1500");
t1->SetAlias("fExist_IC","IC[0]>0&&IC[1]>0&&IC[2]>0&&IC[3]>0");
t1->SetAlias("mT","(T_FPMW_CATS2_C*-1 + 305.3 + -4*(MWTVN==8)-1*(MWTVN==9)-1*(MWTVN==10)-2.2*(MWTVN==11)-0.7*(MWTVN==12)-0.5*(MWTVN==15)-0.6*(MWTVN==16)-1.1*(MWTVN==17)+0.6*(MWTVN==18)-1*(MWTVN==6)-0.5*(MWTVN==5)-0.5*(MWTVN==4)-1.5*(MWTVN==3))*(T_FPMW_CATS1_C>10)");
t1->SetAlias("mD","D");
t1->SetAlias("mV","(mD)/mT");
t1->SetAlias("mBeta","mV/29.9792");
t1->SetAlias("mGamma","1./sqrt(1.0-mBeta*mBeta)");
t1->SetAlias("mM_Q","Brho/3.107/mBeta/mGamma");
t1->SetAlias("mM","(mE)/931.5016/(mGamma-1.)");
t1->SetAlias("mMr","mM_Q*((13.*qmq13+14.*qmq14+15.*qmq15+16.*qmq16))");
t1->SetAlias("mQ","mM/mM_Q");
//t1->SetAlias("mT1","(T_FPMW_HF_C*-1. + 559. + 3*(MWTVN==8))*(T_FPMW_HF_C>10)");
t1->SetAlias("mT1","1.5+((23.7593+1.03259*MWTV)*(MWTVN==0)+(-9.53168+1.0711*MWTV)*(MWTVN==1)+(-30.486+1.11554*MWTV)*(MWTVN==2)+(-31.1261+1.11624*MWTV)*(MWTVN==3)+(-62.99829+1.1569*MWTV)*(MWTVN==4)+(-47.9021+1.13413*MWTV)*(MWTVN==5)+(-14.3957+1.08086*MWTV)*(MWTVN==6)+(-24.6655+1.1058*MWTV)*(MWTVN==7)+(60.4375+0.981809*MWTV)*(MWTVN==8)+(4.44472+1.06168*MWTV)*(MWTVN==9)+(11.408+1.04492*MWTV)*(MWTVN==10)+(56.8282+0.990287*MWTV)*(MWTVN==11)+(59.6833+0.995356*MWTV)*(MWTVN==12)+(27.6344+1.02846*MWTV)*(MWTVN==13)+(6.02794+1.06554*MWTV)*(MWTVN==14)+(20.1561+1.0342*MWTV)*(MWTVN==15)+(51.0718+1.01008*MWTV)*(MWTVN==16)+(36.5605+1.0391*MWTV)*(MWTVN==17)+(-6.01158+1.09581*MWTV)*(MWTVN==18)+(37.6143+1.00939*MWTV)*(MWTVN==19)+(29.3289+1.01291*MWTV)*(MWTVN==20) + 3*83.4*(GATCONF_MASTER==8)-0*(GATCONF_MASTER==1)-2*83.4*(GATCONF_MASTER==4))");
t1->SetAlias("mT1","540-2*T_FPMW_CATS2_C");
t1->SetAlias("mE1","(IC[0]+IC[1]+IC[2]+IC[3]+IC[4])*(IC[0]>0.1&&IC[1]>0.1&&IC[2]>0.1&&IC[3]>0.1)");
// t1->SetAlias("mE1","(IC[1]+IC[2]+IC[3])*(IC[1]>1&&IC[2]>1&&IC[3]>1)");
t1->SetAlias("mdE0","IC[0]*(IC[0]>1)");
t1->SetAlias("mdE1","IC[0]*(IC[0]>1)+IC[1]*(IC[1]>1)");
t1->SetAlias("mD1","Path");
t1->SetAlias("mV1","mD1/(mT1)");
t1->SetAlias("mBeta1","mV1/29.9792");
t1->SetAlias("mGamma1","1./sqrt(1.0-mBeta1*mBeta1)");
t1->SetAlias("mM_Q1","Brho/3.107/mBeta1/mGamma1");
t1->SetAlias("mM1","1.3*(mE1)/931.5016/(mGamma1-1.)");
t1->SetAlias("mMr","mM_Q*((13.*qmq13+14.*qmq14+15.*qmq15+16.*qmq16))");
t1->SetAlias("mQ1","mM1/mM_Q1");
t1->SetAlias("ProjD","-174.*1.");
t1->SetAlias("Xt","TMW1_X+ProjD*tan(TP_Theta/1000.)");
t1->SetAlias("Yt","TMW1_Y+ProjD*tan(TP_Phi/1000.)");
t1->SetAlias("mT2","535.1-2*T_FPMW_CATS2_C-1.2*(MWTVN==11)-0.3*(MWTVN==12)-0.5*(MWTVN==10)-0.7*(MWTVN==9)-2.8*(MWTVN==8)+0.2*(MWTVN==7)-0.4*(MWTVN==5)-1.0*(MWTVN==4)-3.0*(MWTVN==3)-3.0*(MWTVN==2)-8.0*(MWTVN==1)");
//t1->SetAlias("mT2","mT1-TMWT1_MWT2_C+31");
// t1->SetAlias("mT2","mT1-4.83");
//t1->SetAlias("mD2","D-10.5/cos(TP_Theta/1000.)/cos(TP_Phi/1000.)");
t1->SetAlias("mE2","1.42*(IC[0]+IC[1]+IC[2]+IC[3]+0.3*IC[4])*(IC[0]>0.1&&IC[1]>0.1&&IC[2]>0.1&&IC[3]>0.1)");
t1->SetAlias("mdE2","(IC[0]+IC[1])*(IC[0]>0.1&&IC[1]>0.1)");
// t1->SetAlias("mE1","(IC[1]+IC[2]+IC[3])*(IC[1]>1&&IC[2]>1&&IC[3]>1)");
t1->SetAlias("mD2","Path");
t1->SetAlias("mV2","mD2/(mT2)");
t1->SetAlias("mBeta2","mV2/29.9792");
t1->SetAlias("mGamma2","1./sqrt(1.0-mBeta2*mBeta2)");
t1->SetAlias("mM_Q2","Brho/3.107/mV2*29.9792");
t1->SetAlias("mM2","(mE2)/931.5016/(mGamma2-1.)");
t1->SetAlias("mQ2","mM2/mM_Q2");
t1->SetAlias("mMrec","int(mQ2+0.5)*mM_Q2");
}
|
Fixed | com2019 |
Sat Apr 6 00:29:14 2019 |
clement | OFFLINE | General | CD2 | Experimental Kinematic Line from dp + gamma ????? |
Triangle is 870 keV |
Attachment 1: 20.png
|
|
Fixed | e744s |
Tue Apr 16 15:33:26 2019 |
beyhan, marion, dieter | VAMOS | General | | VAMOS settings fo C run |
|
Attachment 1: IMG_1643.jpg
|
|
Fixed | e744s |
Tue Apr 16 01:01:42 2019 |
beyhan, louis, serge, | OFFLINE | General | | different parameters evolution as function of intensity |
|
Attachment 1: mM2_change_122_vs_130_vs_131.pdf
|
|
Attachment 2: mM_Q2_change_122_vs_130_vs_131.pdf
|
|
Attachment 3: mM_Q2_change_122_vs_130_vs_131_zoom.pdf
|
|
Attachment 4: mV2_change_122_vs_130_vs_131.pdf
|
|
Attachment 5: mV2_change_122_vs_130_vs_131_zoom.pdf
|
|
Attachment 6: T_FPMW_CATS2_change_122_vs_130_vs_131.pdf
|
|
Fixed | e744s |
Tue Apr 16 00:04:08 2019 |
beyhan | OFFLINE | General | | ewire evolution vs beam intensity (normalized to CATS intensity) |
|
Attachment 1: EWIRE0_change_122_vs_130_vs_131.pdf
|
|
Attachment 2: EWIRE1_change_122_vs_130_vs_131.pdf
|
|
Attachment 3: EWIRE2_change_122_vs_130_vs_131.pdf
|
|
Attachment 4: EWIRE3_change_122_vs_130_vs_131.pdf
|
|
Fixed | e768s |
Fri Jul 19 14:44:30 2019 |
adrien | OTHER | Hardware | LiF | The diamond detector is not behaving properly |
On the image attached we can see the counting rate of the diamond (Red) going up linearly while Vamos (blue) staty stables.
This is understood as the diamond's graphite impurities charging up with the beam, so the baseline is moving up and we trigger more and more on noise. At some point I expect the counting rate to start dropping as the detector is no longer polarized. |
Attachment 1: dimaond_is_not_working.png
|
|
Fixed | e793s |
Sat Mar 6 13:10:07 2021 |
adrien | ONLINE | General | N/A | FSC screen shot of online at end of run |
every detetector have time on either X or Y except for MM5, which is at 90deg and used for elastic, so not a deal breaker. |
Attachment 1: FSC5-6march.png
|
|
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. |
Attachment 1: run53_mm5_elastic.png
|
|
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. |
Attachment 1: Scaler_run53_4h30.png
|
|