This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Next revision Both sides next revision | ||
group_secar2.0 [2018/09/11 17:14] wagner |
group_secar2.0 [2018/09/12 14:53] plastun |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 73: | Line 73: | ||
The consistency check for beam size calculation in Q7 shows:\\ | The consistency check for beam size calculation in Q7 shows:\\ | ||
X_calculated = 3.13mm, X_cosy_read_out = 3.16mm at the Q7 exit.\\ | X_calculated = 3.13mm, X_cosy_read_out = 3.16mm at the Q7 exit.\\ | ||
- | Emittance calculated from fit parameters ε= < | + | Emittance calculated from fit parameters ε= √(ac) / L< |
- | Start beam emittance= XX * AX= 0.2 π mm mrad, so the emittance grows by 3 orders | + | Start beam emittance= XX · AX= 0.2 π mm mrad, so the emittance grows from the start to the focal point.\\ |
+ | This emittance grow is possibly due to the optics aberrations. That is because the input COSY file does a 4th-order-calculation. Also the measured points don't fit the parabola ideally, i.e. the optics is non-linear.\\ | ||
- | [This emittance grow is possibly due to the optics aberrations. Input COSY file does a 4th-order-calculation. Also the measured points don't fit the parabola ideally, i.e. the optics is non-linear.]\\ | + | ===== DAY3===== |
+ | ==== Impact of Lenght Change in Quadrupole 2 ==== | ||
+ | The effective length of Q2 was reduced by 3% to 0.291m with the drift lenghts before and after increased by 0.0045m.\\ | ||
+ | This led to a mass resolution change from 445 to 102 for the standard particle of the script. | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||