Run plan for 201603¶
- 13 Sept 2016 - 28 Oct 2016 with 28 Sept and 12 Oct 2016 as maintenance days
- Colin does not want to do an absorber install as it will upset the magnet commissioning; it will likely result in delay to start up of 2016/03. We can do an absorber install if we get through the empty absorber running.
- This is all solenoid mode running; flip mode can be contemplated but would require some additional magnet commissioning work
- TOF calibration and detector alignment (they should not have moved)
ECE -- -- FC -- -- ECEwith ECE running at 3 T; this more-or-less re-establishes the baseline from 2016/02; we can do some optics work here with minimal coupling
ECE M2 M1 FC -- -- ECEwith ECE running at 3 T and FC, match coils optimised for transmission at 200 MeV/c; this is the "zero" data set for material physics and we do some optics work here also
ECE M2 M1 FC -- -- ECEwith ECE running at 3 T and FC, match coils optimised for transmission at 140/170/240 MeV/c; this is the "zero" data set for material physics
ECE M2 M1 FC -- -- ECEwith ECE running at 3 T and FC, match coils optimised for cooling at 200 MeV/c only. This gives us a chance to measure emittance reduction.
- Do we fiddle the magnet currents for material physics at different momenta?
- This can improve transmission; but can introduce a systematic error and stresses the magnets
- Is it worth doing a material physics measurement with different fields on the absorber?
- Stress the "thin absorber" approximation
- Can we do an emittance reduction measurement? Or should we hold out for M2D?
- What is the bias introduced by scraping and can it be managed by e.g. an amplitude analysis?
Also - need physics shifters
Updated by Rogers, Chris over 6 years ago · 12 revisions