Difference between revisions of "Π polarizability Meeting Apr 15, 2020"
(Created page with "=Meeting Info.= == Meeting Time And Location == 9:00 EST (JLab time) CC L207 ==Connecting== <div class="toccolours mw-collapsible mw-collapsed"> You can connect using [https...")
|(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)|
|Line 57:||Line 57:|
== Minutes ==
== Minutes ==
Latest revision as of 10:40, 15 April 2020
Meeting Time And Location
9:00 EST (JLab time)
You can connect using BlueJeans Video conferencing (ID: 949 429 419). (Click "Expand" to the right for details -->):
- Make sure you have created a BlueJeans account via your JLab CUE account using this link:
- http://jlab.bluejeans.com (You should only need to do this once)
- Meeting ID: 949 429 419
- (you may need to type this in, depending how you connect)
- If connecting via Web Browser: click this link (no passcode is needed):
- If connecting via iOS or Android App:
- Use your JLab e-mail address to log in and then enter the meeting ID given above to join the meeting
- If connecting via Phone: Dial one of the following numbers and then enter the meeting ID above and hit "#" or "##"
- Dial: (408) 740-7256 (US or Canada only)
- or, List of International Numbers
- If connecting via Polycom unit:
- Dial 184.108.40.206 or bjn.vc
- Enter meeting ID above
- Previous meeting: Apr 8, 2020
- Update on Engineering/Design
- Data Analysis - Andrew
- BH sensitivity to form factors (Rory)
- Preparations for Jeopardy
- Instructions for Jeopardy (Rory)
- Other business
- Next meeting
Attendees: Albert F., Andrew S., Elton S., Iliya L., Mark I., Rory M., Nick B., Vambow
- Tim sent e-mail a few days ago asking about alignment requirements of absorbers and chambers
- is +/-4mm good enough
- what about reproducibility if platform must be moved
- General consensus was that 4mm will not be accurate enough given the size of the beam spot and holes.
- Some top-of-the-head estimates that we'll need at least +/-2mm and possibly even better
- Elton noted that +/-1mm will probably be pretty difficult but we'll need to discuss it with Tim
- Iliya suggested a different spec. for the upstream Pb absorber than other components may be an option since that will be stopping most of the low energy beam halo
- Rory will respond to Tim's e-mail and ask if we can schedule a meeting next week to discuss it
- Andrew has made some progress in calculating the acceptance of e+e- events as a function of invariant mass.
- expanded cut on θ to be >0.75o as opposed to previous cut of >0.1o
- acceptance peak dropped to below 1.0 (previously it had been >3)
- discussed the possibility of floating point round off errors, but unable to clearly identify that as source.
- Some work has started on MVA
- Suggested schedule from Bob M. was to keep new proposals due June 1st (no change) and give Jeopardy proposals an extra 2 weeks (June 15th).
- Schedule not finalized yet and will depend on negotiations between PAC members and lab management
- Rory will set up LateX document with outline so we can start working on it.