Difference between revisions of "BLTWG Meeting 7/24/2008"
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | * Time: 10:00 EST | |
| + | * Place: EVO | ||
| + | * Connecting: instructions are [[Tagged Beam Group Biweekly Meetings|here]] | ||
| + | * Present: Yang, Dan S, Jim, Tim | ||
| − | + | ===Agenda=== | |
| + | #Discussion about agenda for next meeting-Jim | ||
| + | #tagger magnet simulation-yang [http://nuclear.gla.ac.uk/~yang/Tagger/tagger_july.ppt] | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==notes by J Stewart == | ||
| + | |||
| + | The meeting had to be cut short because the close-out for CD3 was shifted from 1:30 to 11:00. | ||
| + | |||
| + | We started the meeting discussing the agenda for the next meeting. The proposal which we arrived at during this meeting is: | ||
| + | |||
| + | #Collimator Cave Extension - Sasha | ||
| + | #Pair Spectrometer - Hrachya | ||
| + | #Tagger Review Agenda + Pre-Brief Discussion -Jim | ||
| + | #Magnet simulation - Yang | ||
| + | |||
| + | Next Yang discussed his results for the modeling of the single magnet design. The talk linked to this page above contains 5 plots summarizing the performance of the magnet. The magnet was simulated at 1.5 T and the pole was contoured with the Rogowsky approximation discussed in the previous meeting. The first slide shows a projection of 81 tracks all having 3.16 GeV projected on the horizontal plane. The envelope is about 2mm wide. The second slide shows the vertical projection of the tracks. The focusing characteristics are similar to the two magnet design. Slide 3 summarizes the starting point of the rays used in the simulation. The three bands correspond to -4,0,and 4 times the critical angle. Slides 4 and 5 compare the vertical focusing of the magnet design with the vertical focusing and the Rogowosky contour. | ||
| + | |||
| + | We would like to go over the simulation results next meeting and look at numbers summarizing the differences between the designs. Yang's conclusions from the work done till now is that no major differences in the designs are seen. | ||
Latest revision as of 17:44, 24 July 2008
- Time: 10:00 EST
- Place: EVO
- Connecting: instructions are here
- Present: Yang, Dan S, Jim, Tim
Agenda
- Discussion about agenda for next meeting-Jim
- tagger magnet simulation-yang [1]
notes by J Stewart
The meeting had to be cut short because the close-out for CD3 was shifted from 1:30 to 11:00.
We started the meeting discussing the agenda for the next meeting. The proposal which we arrived at during this meeting is:
- Collimator Cave Extension - Sasha
- Pair Spectrometer - Hrachya
- Tagger Review Agenda + Pre-Brief Discussion -Jim
- Magnet simulation - Yang
Next Yang discussed his results for the modeling of the single magnet design. The talk linked to this page above contains 5 plots summarizing the performance of the magnet. The magnet was simulated at 1.5 T and the pole was contoured with the Rogowsky approximation discussed in the previous meeting. The first slide shows a projection of 81 tracks all having 3.16 GeV projected on the horizontal plane. The envelope is about 2mm wide. The second slide shows the vertical projection of the tracks. The focusing characteristics are similar to the two magnet design. Slide 3 summarizes the starting point of the rays used in the simulation. The three bands correspond to -4,0,and 4 times the critical angle. Slides 4 and 5 compare the vertical focusing of the magnet design with the vertical focusing and the Rogowosky contour.
We would like to go over the simulation results next meeting and look at numbers summarizing the differences between the designs. Yang's conclusions from the work done till now is that no major differences in the designs are seen.
