View source for Optics Meeting Feb 14 2024 1100AM ET

Back to [[Main_Page|Main Page]] >> [[Optics_Meetings | Optics Meetings]]

>> [[Optics_Meeting_Feb_21_2024_1100AM_ET | following meeting]]

>> [[Optics_Meeting_Feb_7_2024_1100AM_ET | previous meeting]]

=Agenda=
# Initial update on magnetic field study (Kate) [https://dilbert.physics.wm.edu/Tracking/97]

=Attendance=
Bill, Kate, David, Paul, Chuan S., Kent, Sayak, Darjean, Klaus, Hanjie, Mike D., Juliette

=Minutes=
# (David) - update from Targets group on the plans for our solid targets: see [https://dilbert.physics.wm.edu/Tracking/96]. We will have three thin (0.25 mm) 12C optics targets, one each at the two ends of the lH2 target and one at the center. Only one will be in the beam at a time. Also have a suite of other thicker 12C and 27Al targets which can be used for studying radiative effects.
# (Kate) - has updated the G4 GDML files to reflect this new optics target geometry.
# (Kent, all) - discussion at a spectrometer working group meeting has suggested that it may be possible to run the  spectrometer magnets at much lower B-field than we had been led to understand (we have been assuming +10% to -20% was the allowed range). Mike tells us that the power supply will become noisier and less efficient at lower fields, but the prototype power supply in the Test Lab has been run at 50% of nominal current. As each of the 5 subcoils will be supplied by a different power supply, there may be interlock issues if we wanted to turn off one subcoil, or outside of some nominal range. Engineering (Dave Kashy) had apparently also indicated that there may be thermal effects that could shift the coil positions from nominal at lower I. However that may be an additional reason to take some data at lower fields, i.e. to study this effect. Certainly we plan on doing smaller scans of B-field (like +- 2%) for optics matrix element study, like is done for the HRS in a "delta-p" scan. Note that we haven't done much to explore this in simulation, and we have not tried any studies of the effect of one set of subcoils being turned off or lowered in current differently than the others, but this might be of use. 
#(Kate) - had a meeting with Juliette and David to plan out additional simulation studies in order to see how we can best learn about magnet coil offsets from tracking data (GEM r,r', phi, phi' for various sieve holes). Have a set of simulations planned.

=Meeting link information=

See email invitation, or contact David Armstrong, Kate Evans, or Jennifer McAllister for Zoom link