The oscillating voltage on the longitudinal holding field supply appears 
to be a readout problem. Measured at the supply the voltage and current 
are quite steady. This was verified by AC and RJA
                                                                -    TZ
Karen Dow wrote:
>
> DAQ and Trigger (Karen) --
>
>     Missing ep and en coincidence events from yesterday (including 
> empty target runs) was solved.  Right sector paired TOFs were always 
> TRUE going into MLU.  In diagnosing this, had to disconnect a number 
> of cables.  After reconnecting everything, the problem was gone 
> (although all the cables had appeared properly seated to begin with).
>
>     A logic error was introduced into the trigger settings on 2/25/04 
> by Karen, when attempting to remove the logic that said "electron is 
> TOF AND Cerenkov or TOF AND neutron".  Instead, since then a sector 
> hit has been "TOF AND Cerenkov AND maybe neutron" OR "TOF AND no 
> Cerenkov and no neutron".  This is a problem anywhere we have neutron 
> detectors behind the TOFs (most of the right sector, and the back left 
> sector).  Effectively we have been discriminating against pions in 
> those regions, also against higher energy protons or deuterons that 
> don't get stopped in the TOFs.  For electrons, we have essentially 
> been requiring the Cerenkov in the trigger except where the TOF and 
> neutron bar acceptances don't match.  This explains the high R 
> Cerenkov efficiencies seen after adding L shielding on 2/24.  It also 
> might explain the low electron cross section at forward angles in the 
> Right sector, if the RC0 efficiency is low.  The error should not 
> cause any asymmetries.  Karen will fix it today.
>
>     Vitaliy notes many events in the upstream end of the Ohio walls 
> for the en trigger.  Suspect this end is not covered by the TOF, so 
> you can't use the TOF as a veto there in the hardware trigger.
>
>     Our deadtime comes from several sources.  It takes 800usec to read 
> out an event.  We do NOT use the buffering feature in the ADCs and 
> TDCs, so we have a deadtime that is linear with event rate.  There is 
> also a non-linear part as the rate increases, and the probability of 
> getting a second event in that 800usec goes up.  We could experiment 
> with buffering during the spring shutdown; you want to be careful that 
> your event fragments match up.  Finally, there is the wall we hit due 
> to the Ethernet bandwidth (at about 340 events/sec).  That wall can be 
> moved to higher rates by introducing ADC readout thresholds, or by 
> buying new PowerPC readout controllers.
>
>
> ABS (Genya) --
>
>     On 3/22, found that the top half of the transverse holding field 
> coil was shorted out.  This explains the measured tensor asymmetries 
> over the past 10 days.  The measured transverse and longitudinal 
> fields aren't balanced now, but the probe isn't in the ideal location.
>
>     Genya is away 3/26-3/29.  Vitaliy is the target expert for that 
> period.
>
>     The intensity is down 20% since the nozzle warmup.  It has been 
> taking longer after each warmup to regain intensity.  This is a sign 
> the nozzle should be replaced; will happen 3/30 when we're open to 
> fill the solenoids.  At least a full day job.
>
>     The tensor elastic asymmetry from overnight is nearly consistent 
> with zero (-2 +-4 and 6+-4, should be +12 and +30%).  Vector qe looks 
> fine.  Could the tensor - state really be vector?  Some checks will be 
> made today.  We may try pure longitudinal spin again.
>
>     Quasielastic tensor statistics are still limited, can't say 
> anything about the asymmetry there (Vitaliy).
>
> Neutron Bars (Michael via email) --
>
>     The time calibration macros are almost final, also the macros to 
> find the TDC offsets.  Eugene, Sebastian, Vitaliy and Michael are 
> working on this.  All timing parameters are collected in blast.sc_cal, 
> to be used when crunching.
>
>     The timing walk has been measured on all LADS except the 15cm 
> "right" wall.  Ohio also still needs to be done.  The technique varies 
> the flasher input to the splitter boxes, and Ohio&L15R are in the top 
> box with the photodiode.  Varying the input means the photodiode 
> doesn't fire the trigger.  Will work on that next Tuesday during the 
> regular hall access.
>
>     Also next Tuesday, will try the RC circuit to get rid of the 
> ringing in the phototube pulse that makes the time walk correction 
> discontinuous.
>
>
> Cerenkov (Baris) --
>
>     RC0 ADC looks narrow, seems to be a lower than expected number of 
> photoelectrons in that box.
>
>     One possibly bad tube (LC1 top?) to diagnose and replace next 
> Tuesday.
>
>
> Beam (Shannon, Townsend) --
>
>     Tried a lower injection rate last night for the fill (2Hz).  Fills 
> slower (10 seconds more) but better injection efficiency (by a factor 
> of 2).  No effect on detector rates, but may be better for wire 
> chambers since more beam gets into the ring instead of being splashed 
> around.
>
>     If the beam tune didn't have to satisfy the Compton, BQM rates 
> could be a factor of 3 lower with the slits out.  When we are done 
> changing the transverse holding field, Ops needs 1 day to tune best beam.
>
>     Longitudinal holding field voltage is oscillating +-10% since 
> yesterday.  Townsend will investigate.
>
> Compton (Bill) --
>
>     Circular light polarization correction is bigger than though 
> (Pockels Cell is damaged).  Electron polarization is a few % bigger 
> than reported, closer to agreement with the transmission polarimeter 
> at the front end (75% yesterday).  Adjusted transmission of laser 
> light yesterday so that only central part sees the electron beam, 
> polarization is 99+%.  During shutdown, will replace the Pockels Cell.
>
>     The beam tune to satisfy Compton and BLAST makes compromises in 
> the vertical steering (compensation for the transverse holding 
> field).  Perhaps adding steering coils will help; Townsend and Shannon 
> will look into that.
>
>
> General --
>
>     Collaboration meeting 4/2.
>
>     Analysis meeting 4/1?  Some outstanding analysis issues:
>
> 1) Tosca for Cerenkov shielding (Vitaliy)
> 2) Beam energy reconstruction -- do we get the beam energy?  Same in L 
> and R?
> 3) Resolution?
>
>
>
>
>                     Karen
>
>
>     
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Feb 24 2014 - 14:07:30 EST