ELOG MUGAST

VAMOS trip, requires help (FIXED @ 03:55)

CD2

We received a call from PCP telling us that VAMOS has tripped. Currents on all focal planes are 0. We tried stopping and restarting the FP_CATS0 - FP_CATS5, but this does not resolve the issue.

A picture of the VAMOS control screen is attached. Diego has been contacted.

EDIT:::
Diego has informed us that the focal plane current is not the issue. The problem instead is with G1.G.D4.P (dipole?) in VAMOS. This has tripped off (see second attached image). He has advised us to call Bertrand to fix this.

EDIT2:::
Bertrand called an operator, and the VAMOS count rate is now back up to normal. The whole process from crash to fix took ~half an hour

Attachment 1: PXL_20210312_020550869.jpg

Attachment 2: PXL_20210312_024401845.jpg

Beam profile and scaler at 08:00

Wed Jul 31 08:16:34 2019

Attachment 1: index.jpg

Attachment 2: scalers_run160_10.png

e786s

Tue Jun 25 02:46:32 2019

Offline analysis run 56

Offline analysis of run 56 has been perfomed. On plots, kinematics lines and excitation energy are shown using gate on 47K in vamos. Then agata spectra is shown using gate on 47K in VAMOS un valid event in MUGAST. One can (may be) distinguish a peak at 368keV...

Attachment 1: Kine_run56.png

Attachment 2: TripleCoinc_run56.png

e786s

Tue Jun 25 02:53:18 2019

No beam since 22h due to signal of neutron detectors. Then the diffuclty to set the beam due to thunders. Finally impossible to get back the beam because source sample is empty. No beam before tomorow 12h...

e786s

Wed Jun 26 20:46:20 2019

Attachment 1: Vamos10.png

Attachment 2: Vamos9.png

Attachment 3: Vamos8.png

Attachment 4: Vamos7.png

Attachment 5: Vamos6.png

Attachment 6: Vamos5.png

Attachment 7: Vamos4.png

Attachment 8: Vamos3.png

Attachment 9: Vamos2.png

Attachment 10: Vamos1.png

Attachment 11: Vamos.png

Attachment 12: MGToD3.png

Attachment 13: MGToD2.png

Attachment 14: MGToD1.png

Attachment 15: MMToD.png

Attachment 16: MGImpact.png

Attachment 17: MMImpact.png

Attachment 18: scaler.png

Sylvain, Fa�rouz, Chlo�, Damien & Iulia

Sun Apr 14 06:35:43 2019

RUN

Log & Scalers -- Run 122 at 06:40

CH2

Attachment 1: run122_1_scalers_v16.png

Attachment 2: run122_Vamos13_1.png

Attachment 3: run122_Vamos13_2.png

Attachment 4: run122_Vamos13_3.png

Attachment 5: run122_Vamos13_4.png

Attachment 6: run122_Vamos13_5.png

Attachment 7: run122_Vamos13_6.png

Attachment 8: run122_Vamos13_7.png

Attachment 9: run122_Vamos13_8.png

Attachment 10: run122_Vamos13_9.png

Attachment 11: run122_Vamos13_10.png

Attachment 12: run122_Vamos13_11.png

Attachment 13: run122_1_Mugast_13_1.png

Attachment 14: run122_1_Mugast_13_2.png

Attachment 15: run122_1_Mugast_13_3.png

Attachment 16: run122_1_Mugast_13_4.png

Attachment 17: run122_1_Mugast_13_5.png

Attachment 18: run122_1_Mugast_13_6.png

Attachment 19: run122_1_Mugast_13_7.png

Sat Jul 20 23:32:44 2019

Sylvain Fairouz

OFFLINE

Trying to understand AGATA g-ray yields

Marlene, Nicolas, Christian, Fairouz wrote:

goal: we want to check whether the yields of the 1297.7 keV (from 19Ne 1536, 3/2+, l=1 state) and 1340 keV (from 19Ne 1615, 3/2-, l=2 state) g-ray lines is compatible with what we expect from x-sec calculations

conditions: we consider runs 112, 115 and 116

observations:
N(1297) = 17 g-rays
N(1340) = 23 g-rays

remarks:
Given x-sec from mirror nucleus (Francois 15N(7Limt) paper) we expect N(1340) >~ N(1297)

ingredients:
1. beam normalization
We use the TAC_FPMW_HF as a proxy. During the same time we integrate the prompt peak and compare the integrated OR VAMOS scaler, we find Scaler(OR VAMOS)/N(TAC) = 193.
We use the comparison of the OR VAMOS (pps) and the beam profiler (pps), we find profiler/OR VAMOS = 1e4
We obtain (2.17e5 + 6.44e4 + 3.52e5)*193*1e4 = 1.2 e12 15O incident particles (at profiler position!)

2. target thickness -> known to be 1.25 mg/cm2 of LiF (RBS measurement)
N(Li) = 1.25e-3 / (19+7) * 6.02e23 at/cm2

3.efficiencies
AGATA @ 1.3 MeV -> 7.5 %
VAMOS intrinsic -> 67 % (Eff_Check.C macro applied to run 116)
MUGAST -> 50 % (lab, geometry), needed because MUGAST is the main trigger

4. 19Ne charge state
we assume 40 % for 9+

5. g-ray branching ratio -> taken from NNDC

6. cross-section
we calculate differential cross section for the 1536-keV 19Ne state (FRESCO, FR-DWBA)
-> at 0 deg, ds/dW =
-> integrated x-sec in VAMOS acceptance (4 deg (lab) -> 20 deg (cm)) = 445 micro barn (C2Sa = 1)
-> taking into account know spectroscopic factor form analog state -> 89 micro barn

Conclusion:
for the 1536-keV 19Ne state we obtain 30 g-rays, instead of 17.

Discussion:
This factor of two could be well within the mirror symmetry assumption. However it seems it is also the case for the 1615-keV 19Ne state, so would not it be a systematic error with a factor of two missing somewhere (beam transmission between the profiler and the target? deficiencies?)?

We have investigated quickly the 15N(7Li,t)19F reaction based on run 0072. (gamma spectrum corresponding to all run data and with doppler correction with beta 0.08 can be found in /data/mugastX/mugast/acquisition/root/Run72_19Fe_8p.root)

To simplify the analysis the TS were restricted from 46000s to 52000s (/data/mugastX/mugast/acquisition/root/Run72_19Fe_8p_TSGate.root). The beam intentisty was assumed constant and equal to 1.e8 pps (for a total of 6.e11 beam like particle)

The 3/2+ and 3/2- states in 19F produce respectively 1356keV and 1348keV gamma. Counts were estimated roughly with double gaussian fit to be equal to
I(1348) = 21.9 counts
I(1256) = 16.4 counts

Assuming all others parameters are comparable with the previous analysis the counting obtained seems consistent with the measured Salpha=0,2 in previous experiment, Everything seems ok based on this very rough first analysis

Sylvain Andres, Freddy, Adrien, Franck

Mon Jul 29 15:20:50 2019

BEAM

Beam profile after beam intensity obtimisation

LiF

Beam recover at around 15:00 after beam optimisation by PCP

Attachment 1: index.jpg

Wed Apr 17 16:53:53 2019

Run 137 : Eu calibration

Run stared 2019/04/17

EU efficiency Calibration

Wed Jul 31 14:07:24 2019

Beam profile & scalers

Attachment 1: 20190731_135809.jpg

Pinned

Run 152 - Scaler & screenshot + Beam profile

Sat Jul 27 04:12:57 2019

Attachment 1: Tab_8bis_run152_4.png

Attachment 2: IC_IC_run152_4.png

Attachment 3: REC_run152_4.png

Attachment 4: IC_run152_4.png

Attachment 5: MW_run152_4.png

Attachment 6: DC_E_run152_4.png

Attachment 7: DC_Y_run152_4.png

Attachment 8: DC_X_run152_4.png

Attachment 9: Tab_10_run152_4.png

Attachment 10: Tab_9_run152_4.png

Attachment 11: Tab_8_run152_4.png

Attachment 12: MG_IMPACT_MATRIX_run152_4.png

Attachment 13: SCALERS_run152_3.png

Attachment 14: index.jpg

Ongoing

Screenshots run 158 @ 22h05

Mon Jul 29 22:50:43 2019

Attachment 1: Vamos_tab9.png

Attachment 2: Vamos_tab8.png

Attachment 3: Vamos_tab7.png

Attachment 4: Vamos_tab6.png

Attachment 5: Vamos_tab5.png

Attachment 6: Vamos_tab4.png

Attachment 7: Vamos_tab3.png

Attachment 8: Vamos_tab2.png

Attachment 9: Vamos_tab1.png

Attachment 10: Mugast_tab10.png

Attachment 11: Mugast_tab9.png

Attachment 12: Mugast_tab8.png

Attachment 13: Mugast_tab7.png

Attachment 14: Mugast_tab6.png

Attachment 15: Mugast_tab5.png

Attachment 16: Mugast_tab4.png

Attachment 17: Mugast_tab3.png

Attachment 18: Mugast_tab2.png

Attachment 19: Mugast_tab1.png

Sun Jul 28 08:20:38 2019

Sylvain & Franco

RUN

Update on possible restart

The problem that caused the interruption was due to a failure in the cooling system.
The last update we've had is that we might have the beam back not before late afternoon.
We will keep you updated.

Pinned

Water tray of MUGAST air conditioner cooling system is almost full

Sat Jul 27 06:47:16 2019

During a room inspection it was notice that the water tray used as an output of the fan system which is cooling MUGAST electronic crates is almost full of water. The floor is dry but the we suspect a leakage from the air conditioner. To avoid to flood the floor we took some of the water and put in in the water tray of the fan system located in front of VAMOS.

One would probably need during the day to investigate the origin of this water.

Sat Jul 27 07:02:44 2019

Beam profile and scaler

Run 152 : Beam profile and scaler

Sat Jul 27 07:20:33 2019

Attachment 1: SCALERS_run152_5.png

Attachment 2: Tab_10_run152_5.png

Attachment 3: Tab_9_run152_5.png

Attachment 4: Tab_8_run152_5.png

Attachment 5: TAC_run152_5.png

Attachment 6: MG_ToF_run152_5.png

Attachment 7: MM_DeE_run152_5.png

Attachment 8: MM_ToF_run152_5.png

Attachment 9: MG_IMPACT_MATRIX_run152_5.png

Attachment 10: MM_INPACT_MATRIX_run152_5.png

Attachment 11: Tab_8bis_run152_5.png

Attachment 12: IC_IC_run152_5.png

Attachment 13: REC_run152_5.png

Attachment 14: TACS_run152_5.png

Attachment 15: IC_run152_5.png

Attachment 16: MW_run152_5.png

Attachment 17: DC_E_run152_5.png

Attachment 18: DC_Y_run152_5.png

Attachment 19: DC_X_run152_5.png

Attachment 20: 20190727_065100.jpg

Log & Scalers -- Run 122 at 17:45

Sat Apr 13 18:00:12 2019

Log for run 122 taken at 17h45

Attachment 1: run122_1_scalers_v9.png

Attachment 2: run122_Vamos7_1.png

Attachment 3: run122_Vamos7_2.png

Attachment 4: run122_Vamos7_3.png

Attachment 5: run122_Vamos7_4.png

Attachment 6: run122_Vamos7_5.png

Attachment 7: run122_Vamos7_6.png

Attachment 8: run122_Vamos7_7.png

Attachment 9: run122_Vamos7_8.png

Attachment 10: run122_Vamos7_9.png

Attachment 11: run122_Vamos7_10.png

Attachment 12: run122_Vamos7_11.png

Attachment 13: run122_1_Mugast_7_1.png

Attachment 14: run122_1_Mugast_7_2.png

Attachment 15: run122_1_Mugast_7_3.png

Attachment 16: run122_1_Mugast_7_4.png

Attachment 17: run122_1_Mugast_7_5.png

Attachment 18: run122_1_Mugast_7_6.png

Attachment 19: run122_1_Mugast_7_7.png

Attachment 20: run122_1_Mugast_7_8.png

Log & Scalers -- Run 122 at 19:45

Sat Apr 13 20:02:36 2019

Attachment 1: run122_1_scalers_v10.png

Attachment 2: run122_Vamos8_1.png

Attachment 3: run122_Vamos8_2.png

Attachment 4: run122_Vamos8_3.png

Attachment 5: run122_Vamos8_4.png

Attachment 6: run122_Vamos8_5.png

Attachment 7: run122_Vamos8_6.png

Attachment 8: run122_Vamos8_7.png

Attachment 9: run122_Vamos8_8.png

Attachment 10: run122_Vamos8_9.png

Attachment 11: run122_Vamos8_10.png

Attachment 12: run122_Vamos8_10.png

Attachment 13: run122_Vamos8_11.png

Attachment 14: run122_1_Mugast_8_1.png

Attachment 15: run122_1_Mugast_8_2.png

Attachment 16: run122_1_Mugast_8_3.png

Attachment 17: run122_1_Mugast_8_4.png

Attachment 18: run122_1_Mugast_8_5.png

Attachment 19: run122_1_Mugast_8_6.png

Attachment 20: run122_1_Mugast_8_7.png

Attachment 21: run122_1_Mugast_8_8.png

Log & Scalers -- Run 122 at 21:45

Sat Apr 13 21:47:40 2019

Attachment 1: run122_1_scalers_v11.png

Attachment 2: run122_Vamos9_1.png

Attachment 3: run122_Vamos9_2.png

Attachment 4: run122_Vamos9_3.png

Attachment 5: run122_Vamos9_4.png

Attachment 6: run122_Vamos9_5.png

Attachment 7: run122_Vamos9_6.png

Attachment 8: run122_Vamos9_7.png

Attachment 9: run122_Vamos9_8.png

Attachment 10: run122_Vamos9_9.png

Attachment 11: run122_Vamos9_10.png

Attachment 12: run122_Vamos9_11.png

Attachment 13: run122_1_Mugast_9_1.png

Attachment 14: run122_1_Mugast_9_2.png

Attachment 15: run122_1_Mugast_9_3.png

Attachment 16: run122_1_Mugast_9_4.png

Attachment 17: run122_1_Mugast_9_5.png

Attachment 18: run122_1_Mugast_9_6.png

Attachment 19: run122_1_Mugast_9_7.png

Attachment 20: run122_1_Mugast_9_8.png

Sat Jul 20 01:02:10 2019

Serge & Franco

OTHER