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. 

Sergey is optimizing beam cycle. 

After two days of tuning the beam, yesterday evening (~8pm), it was found out that within one ESR pattern using the new control system the harmonics of the cavities cannot be changed. This gives us a fatal limitation, that we cannot go lower 
than 10MeV/u with the beam energy.
-As a first attempt we try to reach this 10MeV/u with two steps deceleration (first to 30MeV/u). At this 10MeV/u we have the p,n channel opened as well, which based on TALYS gives significant, weird shaped background in the spot of the p,g 
peak both in xy and xE histos.
-A second option would be that we inject the beam to ESR roughly at 330MeV/u. Then we can decelerate until 5MeV/u, but there is no stochastic, neither e-cooling available. This result to a "hot" decelerated beam with intensity factor 5 less 
(in optimistic scenario). But for this the whole tuning phase (the first two days of the beam time) must be remade, we have to start basically from scratch. 




It is "funny" that we have a very limited 5 days of beam time which is spent estimately >99% with, from the physics point of view, completely useless beam manipulation issues, which in a normal world must be done already in the engineering 
beam time... 
It is quite challenging to stay positive at the current status (not positive in the sense of the growing Corona-virus). 

Around 17:15 cooling had "unknown status 6"
At 17:21 cooling: "pumping in progress"
Around 17:41 cooling had "unknown status 6"

At 18:16 "unkown status 0"
At 18:21 "ok"

At 19:26 "unknown status 0"
At 19:31 "ok"

Simulated Rutherford scattering distribution on detector

   Beam: 111Sn
   Luminosity: 3.08 /mb/s
   
   Distance between the detector and central orbit: 2.80cm

   Particle Number in the simulation: 5 Million

   Beam quality used in MOCADI input file:
4,
0.27386, 0.182573, 0, -4.0, 0
4,
0.131477, 0.383186, 0, 0.0,  0
1,
0.02, 0, 0, 0.0, 0


1. Beam Energy: 6MeV/u
   
2. Beam Energy: 7MeV/u 

3. Beam Energy: 8MeV/u 

We got 30 counts out of this afternoon 118Te run on our Si TargetON histo.
That 1 count at bin (6,10) I dont understand.

Now i can see peaks both at the 35 and 90 angle Xray spectra but not much on the 145 one.
At the end the target density stayed at 8.6E13.

Si was moved from -25 mm to -19 mm before run 0072.

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

Setting for the machines.

We found the beam axis with the scraper to be -17.5 mm.
The Scraper position set to +12.5 mm, 30 mm relative from the beam.

run101 is stopped

run096 is stopped

The pattern in SIS was changed so that we get more injections into ESR. Before HTD had 9 seconds which resulted in a timeout in the ESR. Now HTD has 10 seconds which improved a lot...

After calling ESR on-call duty (M. Steck) he confirmed that the ESR is fine and suspected the SIS kicker modules.

SIS operators then checked and could confirm that module 5 is out of order and module 4 sometimes works sometimes not.

They asked me I said better to run as good as possible with lower number of modules until the end of experiment, then later change the module. because otherwise changing module might take time.

they tried to increase the kick angle to check if they can move the spot to the center.

some shots went well but mostly failed.

they decided to call the Rufbereitschaft.

meanwhile I started the run number 93 to at least collect some data from some of the correct shots.

if counts are too high I will stop it.

let's see.

SIS Kicker seems to be working properly. but we have to see how regularly it will work.

attached are the settings for all MSCFs.
Settings are optimized for DSSD only, not BaF!

Yuri puts back the scraper (Egelhof 1 - GE01DD1IG) into position = +19. (where it was in the evening)