MUST2 SAMURAI_2018 S3-LEB-LPC SUPERNEMO MUGAST EXPAND SCALP GALATRON HiCARI VELO
  MUGAST, Page 70 of 132  Not logged in MUGAST
Status ExpNbr Date Author Type Category Target-Source Subjectdown
Fixed  Tue Jul 23 17:09:43 2019 UK refugeesOTHERSocial Kipper issues.
Attachment 1: 3948.jpg
3948.jpg
Fixed  Tue Jul 23 23:22:56 2019 UK refugeesOTHERSocial Kipper issues.
I would mail you some but the postage is nuts those days!
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
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");


  
  }
Fixede744s Mon Apr 15 12:15:22 2019 Valerian and SylvainOFFLINESoftwareCH2Kinematic line 2p
Attachment 1: ELabThetaLab_new.png
ELabThetaLab_new.png
Attachment 2: Ecm2p_new.png
Ecm2p_new.png
Fixedcom2019 Sat Apr 6 08:23:09 2019 mugastOFFLINEGeneralCD2Kinematic Lines run 256 from 0 to 12 at 8 am

Kinematic lines (E_lab vs Theta_lab) for all angular range (first picture) and zoomed plot for backward angles (second picture).
Attachment 1: Kine256_0-256_12.pdf
Kine256_0-256_12.pdf
Attachment 2: KinematicsLineBackwardAngles.png
KinematicsLineBackwardAngles.png
Fixede793s Fri Feb 12 18:12:00 2021 AdrienS1HardwareN/AKapton change
Arnaud open today and change the Y Kapton (YA5) of the S1. Everything under vacuum/cooled again so I ran FSC, hopefully this will fix the issue we have with the Junction side.
Ongoinge775s Sat Feb 29 10:34:31 2020 mugast ; valerian ireneOFFLINESoftwareCD2-AuIssues in the EX reconstruction
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...
Attachment 1: Comparison_all_and_best_detector.png
Comparison_all_and_best_detector.png
Attachment 2: Kinematics_for_each_detectors.pdf
Kinematics_for_each_detectors.pdf
Attachment 3: ExvsTheta_each_detectors.pdf
ExvsTheta_each_detectors.pdf
Attachment 4: MUGAST_3D.pdf
MUGAST_3D.pdf
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
Ongoinge775s Sat Feb 29 15:53:12 2020 mugast ; ValerianOFFLINESoftwareCD2-AuIssues in the EX reconstruction

mugast ; Valerian wrote:

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.


By looking at the EnergyCalibrator.C, I saw that the extrapolation used to find the dead layer of aluminum is commented... This might be an answer to the problem...
Ongoinge775s Sat Feb 29 17:18:02 2020 mugast ; Valerian, Marlène , PierreOFFLINESoftwareCD2-AuIssues in the EX reconstruction

mugast ; Valerian wrote:

mugast ; Valerian wrote:

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.


By looking at the EnergyCalibrator.C, I saw that the extrapolation used to find the dead layer of aluminum is commented... This might be an answer to the problem...


WE HAVE A SOLUTION!!! It seems that the order of the detectors in mugast.detector matters!! Now we start with a dummy MG8, then MG1, MG2, ... And everything is fine!! We think that is because it was taking the wrong calibration files (to be checked).

Joined are (for run 128,137,138,139,151,152,153):
-Ex vs ThetaLab
-Ex for all detectors
-Egamma vs Ex
Attachment 1: ExvsTheta_each_detectorsOK.pdf
ExvsTheta_each_detectorsOK.pdf
Attachment 2: Ex_GOOD.pdf
Ex_GOOD.pdf
Attachment 3: EgvsEx_GOOD.pdf
EgvsEx_GOOD.pdf
Fixede744s Fri Apr 12 20:17:52 2019 mugastVAMOSGeneral Increasing Pressure VAMOS IC
We have increased the pressure of VAMOS-IC from 50 mbar to 55 mbar in order to stop the beam in the pad n4 and not having few MeV of remaining energy in the pad n5.
Votage related:
HV(IC_wires) = 495 V
HV(IC_pads) = 165 V
HV(IC_cathode) = 1232 V
Fixede744s Sat Apr 13 21:34:02 2019 Adrien Matta -> update IulianRUNGeneralN/AInconsistent info in the run message-fix explained in reply
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.

Iulian->
This discrepancy has been addressed
Ongoinge744s Sat Apr 13 21:57:48 2019 Adrien MattaRUNGeneralN/AInconsistent info in the run message

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...
... ...
Fixede744s Sat Apr 13 22:04:32 2019 Adrien MattaRUNGeneralN/AInconsistent info in the run message

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.


--> The misleading comment is preseved from run 103,
... the last #2 target was at run 110
... Iulian is removing the comments on #2 target that appear untill 121
Fixede744s Sat Apr 13 23:25:14 2019 iulianRUNGeneralN/AInconsistent 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...
... ...
Fixede744s Thu Apr 11 14:03:45 2019 ValerianCATSHardwareN/AIn case of a CATS2 tripped
Currently, CATS2 is inserted, if the window :

CATS2 has tripped appear, one should do the following :

  • Open a terminal
  • Type: HV
  • Username is : admin
  • Password is : admin
  • Press enter twice

The list of channels is going to appear.

  • Using the arrow of the keyboard, go down until you reach cats2
  • then go right until you reach Off
  • press space, the dectector should start ramping up
  • If it trips again, you can try to put voltage to cats1 (right above cats2)

Two possibility :

  • If cats1 trip it is the gas bottle that is empty call : 07 83 34 30 81 (Sebastien)
  • If cats1 doesn't trip try cats2 again, and if it trips lower the voltage of cats2

To lower the voltage of cats2 : go to the left until you reach the first cell after cats2 name and lower the voltage 10 volts and try to start cats2 again.

THEN CLOSE THE TERMINAL
Fixede768s Fri Jul 19 09:38:05 2019 mugastGRITGeneralLiFImpact matrix for MUGAST
Attachment 1: mugast_missing_strip.png
mugast_missing_strip.png
Fixede768s Mon Jul 22 21:30:36 2019 FrancoOFFLINEGeneralLiFIdentification in Mugast for Ne in VAMOS
Difference in identification in Mugast when gating on 19Ne and when gating on the two nearby isotopes (runs from 112 to 121).
Attachment 1: Mugast_19Ne.png
Mugast_19Ne.png
Attachment 2: Mugast_18Ne_and_20Ne.png
Mugast_18Ne_and_20Ne.png
Fixede768s Thu Jul 18 22:11:57 2019 FrancoOFFLINEGeneral Identification in Mugast
Attached the spectra obtained in Mugast for run_0072_0_agata.root.
The colored ones are obtained simply asking for multiplicity 1, the black points are obtained
asking also for Z=9 (F) and for A=20 in VAMOS with the condition abs(mM_Q2*8-20)<0.5.
Attachment 1: id_mugast_20Fblackpoints.png
id_mugast_20Fblackpoints.png

ELOG Home Page