we can measure again.

(please write a detailed description if needed)

General remarks to the MOCADI simulations:

1. scraper size vertically > (p,g) spot at the scraping position --> (p,g) can be separated by truncating the backscattered Rutherford events in the energy.


2. replacing the atomic masses to nuclear masses does not change significantly the absolute positions of the (p,g) and the Rutherford. However, the (p,g) spot in the simulation seems bigger using the nuclear masses, than in the 124Xe experiment with a factor ~1.6.


3. going for lighter elements, the separation between (p,g) and Rutherford getting better, than slit can be placed even more far from the beam in x (radial) direction. For 124Xe the minimal distance from the beam axis is <4cm, for 73As it is <7.5cm.


4. in the simulations the scraping is mostly until x=-inf. However, if the scraping is incomplete in x, we can end up with underlying background events below the p,g peak (see the last slides)! The Rutherford cone gets bigger by going down with A,Z. For 91Nb the minimal width of the scraper: x>6cm, for 73As x>7cm. Therefore, I suggest to have a scraper width x=9cm. For the y, y=6cm should be safe.


5. for lighter elements, the (p,g) spot size increases: in the simulation for 73As it reaches the detector size. However, the (p,g) spot size might be overestimated, please read the 2. point.

A publication on scraping systems suggested by Siegbert. 
In the study they have used cylindrical "high-quality" slits. "High-quality" stands for well polished surface
with surface roughness <50nm. The material of the slit is Tungsten Carbide. 

initial BEAM input parameters for MOCADI are based on:
- https://web-docs.gsi.de/~weick/mocadi/download/esr-exl-test.in --> twist parameters (ratio of X/A and B/Y)
- M. Steck et al, Electron cooling experiments at the ESR, NIM A 532 (2004) 357-365 --> epsilon_x = 5·10^-7
m*rad, dp/p = 10^-4

Example input for 6AMeV 111Sn beam:

BEAM
1000000
6 , 0 , 110.8803121305 , 50
4
0.27386, 0.182573, 0, 0, 0
4
0.131477, 0.383186, 0, 0, 0
1
0.02, 0, 0, 0, 0


For more explanation please see the attached pdf.

This entry is the continuation of the cascade effects on the pg peak shape entry:

https://exp-astro.physik.uni-frankfurt.de:8080/E108/475

The main point is that having more cascade makes the impulse carried by one photon smaller --> recoil cone is
smaller --> pg peak gets more centered

When one wants to make an "all-inklusive" simulation the problem comes, that there are too many populated states
after CN* decay (many are just theoretical), also many cascades afterwards as well.
Instead, one can make a "statistical approach":
 1, take an average 1st populated state after the gamma emission of the CN*.
 2, take an average of the gamma energies after the p-capture. (it includes also the photons from the CM* to the
1st state after g emission with energy of [(E_CM - Q) - E_1st_state] --> should these be excluded from the avg.
gamma energy calculation?)
 3, the excited compound nucleus first decays to 1, then cascading down with the avg energy of 2,

    number_of_cascades = E_1st_state/E_avg_gamma. 

    For the 124Xe at 7AMeV using the TALYS code the above values are:
    E_1st_state = 6.74 MeV
    E_avg_gamma = 2.75 MeV
    number_of_cascades = 2.45

To reproduce the resulting avg. pg peak, I took a 2 and a 3 cascade simulations produced by MOCADI and mixed
them as 55% of the 2-cascade and 45% of the 3-cascade for this naiv, statistical model.
Then, to test the peakshape, I fit this mixed distribution to a part our measurement data at 7AMeV after a
sloppy Rutherford background removal (the background removal can be more improved, I used this as a quick method
for now). The calculated Chi^2/NDF ~ 3, which is not a super good value, but taking into account that this is a
strongly naiv model, and the background removal can be also improved, the chi^2/NDF value can be also
interpreted as promising.

The p,n channel opening for the 111Sn+p reaction is at 5.8895 MeV/u beam energy. Therefore, when choosing as 6MeV/u, 7MeV/u, 8MeV/u beam energies, there is not much kinetic energy left for the outgoing neutron --> there are "less" nuclear levels populated above groundstate in 111Sb, they can be handled explicitly. My simulations are based on TALYS results. The following steps did I made:

1, choose an energy for the 111Sn beam. for this example let it be 8AMeV. 

The p,n channel opening for 111Sn beam is at 5.8895 MeV/u beam energy. Therefore, when choosing 6MeV/u, 7MeV/u,
8MeV/u beam energies, there is not much kinetic energy left for the excitation of the 111Sb nucleus --> there
can be "less" nuclear levels populated above groundstate of 111Sb. These "less" states can be handled explicitly
(no continuum levels) with the TALYS code. I make the following steps to simulate the (p,n) products for a given
energy:

1, choose an energy for the 111Sn beam. for this example let it be 8AMeV. Then I use my energy calculator:

/u/lvarga/public/lab2cm_updated 111Sn 8

this gives the last output: " equvivalent (E_lab)^rel for p in talys = 8.06689 MeV ". This energy is the value
what i should put into TALYS as the p projectile energy. In TALYS we have only normal kinematics.

2, make the calculation with the TALYS code for outpopulation, outgamdis and outangle. For the first two cases,
an extra command is given: "maxlevelsbin n 30" to get discrete levels.

3, based on the outpopulation and outgamdis I create an excellsheet which tells me the probability of decay
happening after the n-emission.
   from outpopul, I can tell which level is populated in which % after the n-emission. (using the cross sections
and normalizing to the summed cross section)
   from outgamdis, I can tell that for a specific level after the n-emission what is the probability of the
decay afterwards. (using the cross sections given). 

4, regarding outangle, the cross sections are given for each 2. degree angle only. To get a continuous
dependency, I fit these with a 6. order polinomial function for each level. Later on, I use this polinomial
function for angular corrections.

5, for each decay scheme, I make a MOCADI code. For the target, instead of Hydrogen mass, I am using the proton
mass (otherwise, TALYS and MOCADI will not be compatible, ~511keV gap will remain in the CM energy, which of
course highly influencing the kinematics). For the nuclear masses, my calculator can be used:

/u/lvarga/public/atomic2nuclearMass 111Sn

It is important, that after the first n-emission I put a save point (which is the SAVE #1)for the later angular
corrections.

6, I mix the root file outputs from MOCADI based on the probabilities from my excell table. Also angular
corrections can be given using the (180-tof[1]) angle. There is not much difference however, but the computation
time increases dramatically.
//in the simulations at the PIN-diode position there is a scraping edge 3cm away from the beam.

I have made some simulations at 8AMeV, 7AMeV and 4AMeV energies for the main 118Te + p reaction channels. For the
Rutherford simulations credits to Yuanming! For each energy there are 3 simulations: without the scraper, with the
scraper (online), scraper (online) + E-truncation (offline). The scraper is treated as an "ideal scraper" meaning
that there is no scattering at the edges (maybe worth a GEANT4?). The slit position is at -3cm from the beam, the vertical
length is 7cm (centralized). The following channels are combined in the
simulation:

-8AMeV:
  Rutherford
  pg channel, 5cascade model. Photon emission is treated isotropically
  pn channel, including: -->gs, -->1-->gs, -->2-->gs, -->3-->gs, -->3-->1-->gs, -->4-->1-->gs, -->5-->3-->gs,
-->5-->3-->1-->gs, -->5-->4-->1-->gs decay chains with their weights. Neutron and photon emission is treated isotropically.

-7AMeV:
  Rutherford
  pg channel, 4cascade model. Photon emission is treated isotropically

-4AMeV:
  Rutherford
  pg channel, 3cascade model. Photon emission is treated isotropically


The detector position is -2.5cm from the beam in the radial direction and centered vertically with a 45° tilt. 
The cross section values for pg and pn, the pn channel mixing, and the pg cascade number is based on TALYS simulations.
The other two input parameters are the luminosity and the measurement time. For the simulation, a little
pessimistic (or realistic?) scenario is taken: L = 10^24 cm-2s-1, and t = 10^4 s. From this values, from the N=CS*L*t
equation, the pg counts (based on the TALYS
cross sections) are the following: 8AMeV ~267, 7AMeV ~163, 4AMeV ~5! This means that to reach the Gamow-window
energies is challenging, but with a well-working scraper it is not impossible to reach.


As it is visible, the 8AMeV 118Te(p,g) case is very similar to the 7AMeV 124Xe case. The p,n threshold is
somewhere ~7.5MeV.

# Z   A   Iso Re Rc   T9 upper width mxpos  shift
 52 118 te118 pg 20  0.5  1.39  0.58  1.06  -0.01
 52 118 te118 pg 20  1.0  2.27  1.04  1.69  -0.01
 52 118 te118 pg 20  1.5  3.04  1.46  2.21  -0.01
 52 118 te118 pg 20  2.0  3.71  1.82  2.68  -0.01
 52 118 te118 pg 20  2.5  4.32  2.16  3.10  -0.02
 52 118 te118 pg 20  3.0  4.85  2.44  3.47  -0.06
 52 118 te118 pg 20  3.5  5.35  2.73  3.79  -0.12
 52 118 te118 pg 20  4.0  5.79  2.97  4.08  -0.19
 52 118 te118 pg 20  5.0  6.55  3.38  4.61  -0.35

source: https://journals.aps.org/prc/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevC.81.045807

To move the detector remotely from the HKR:
-go to a desktop of a HKR computer
-right click: "App Launcher PRO"
(-you have to give some password at this point?)
-within the program go to "Development->ProHelper"
-write the name of our slow control unit in the field Nomen: "GE01DD4AS"
-There are 4rows, the middle two called: "Read props", "Write props"

-In "Read props" open "rposiabss" -> if you hit here the refresh button it will show only the SET position
-In "Read props" open "rposiabsi" -> if you hit here the refresh button it will show the REAL-TIME position of the detector

-In "Write props" open "wposiabss" -> here you can set the absolute position of our detector (one click is already enough to execute the command).
 most OUT of the ring  position: -10613 [0.1mm] in absolute
 most IN into the ring  position: -7 [0.1mm] in absolute
 The value can have as big step size as we want contrary to relative movement, when you are limited to something like 20cm.

To close the program just simply hit the "x" buttons.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/14m8WcCq1erx6HqWJRK7TLbCx121IkjqGa5l-frf4YjI/edit#gid=0

Here you can find the digital version of the E127 beam time manual.

Detector: 90
Source: Am241 
Distance: 200mm
Start time: 17:15:12 15.03.2020
Stop time:  17:32:17 15.03.2020

file name: run036_xxxx.lmd
avrg. rate: 450Hz
dead-time:  5%

Detector: 90
Source: Am241 
Distance: 167.5mm
Start time: 17:40:00 15.03.2020
Stop time:  17:49:57 15.03.2020

file name: run037_xxxx.lmd
avrg. rate: 620Hz
dead-time:  7%

--------------------

update at 05.05.2020: the cables were probably twisted between the 90 and the 145 angle detectors.

Detector: 90
Source: Ba133 - high rate
Distance: 167.5mm
Start time: 17:53:38 15.03.2020
Stop time: 18:05:41 15.03.2020

file name: run038_xxxx.lmd
avrg. rate: 2.6kHz
dead-time:  26%


--------------------

update at 05.05.2020: the cables were probably twisted between the 90 and the 145 angle detectors.

Detector: 90
Source: Ba133
Distance: 167.5mm
Start time: 18:10:02 15.03.2020
Stop time:  18:47:36 15.03.2020

file name: run039_xxxx.lmd
avrg. rate: 150Hz
dead-time:  2%

Detector: 145
Source: Am241
Distance: 305mm
Start time: 18:53:16 15.03.2020
Stop time: 19:18:35 15.03.2020

file name: run040_xxxx.lmd
avrg. rate: 230Hz
dead-time:  3%


--------------------

update at 05.05.2020: the cables were probably twisted between the 90 and the 145 angle detectors.

Detector: 145
Source: Ba133
Distance: 305mm
Start time: 19:22:34 15.03.2020
Stop time: 19:38:44 15.03.2020

file name: run041_xxxx.lmd
avrg. rate: 1kHz
dead-time:  11%


--------------------

update at 05.05.2020: the cables were probably twisted between the 90 and the 145 angle detectors.