Did Schottky measurements using 5 shots with and without gas target each
restarting the DAQ

no solution to kicker problem. 

Kicker Guy (U. Blell) arrived in order to fix modules.

Attached are the theory K-REC cross sections as calculated by Andrey Surzhykov (August 2021).

They are done for 118Te52+ on H2 at 7.049 and 6.042 MeV/u as well as for 124Xe54+ on H2 at 7.049 MeV/u.


first column - photon angle (deg), second column - cross section (barn/sr). The results are given already in the laboratory frame.

Comment of Andrey on uncertainty:
Important question about theoretical model and, hence, accuracy of calculations. I used slightly improved "impulse approximation" that takes into account momentum and energy distribution of target electron (in initial state). By playing with the models for the Compton profile of target electron, I estimate the accuracy of calculations as 1 %. To be fair, it is rather conservative estimate. I suspect that for large emission angle (around 90 deg) accuracy is even better. But let us stay with 1 %. 

# 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

Intensities for special gamma or x-ray lines needed for efficiency calibration can be found here:


ENSDF
https://www.nndc.bnl.gov/ensdf/#

NUDAT
https://www.nndc.bnl.gov/nudat2/

An old but still usefull data base:
http://nucleardata.nuclear.lu.se/toi/nucSearch.asp

Intensity from Sis 1.7E9
The intensity is too.low at ESR to be visible. However we could.catch it somehow with Shottky (picture below)

By checking the log files we realized that from yesterday 26.05. 13:44 - today 13:05 the FRS degrader was shown as out.
TS3ET7US should be at -420.0mm not at -580mm (=out). This 3.26mm Sci is used as a degrader and is essential.

After recognizing we set the drive controller back to remote and moved the degrader to -420mm (at 13:02)
The wrong values start on 26.05. at 13:44 and show variation until 16:11 until over night it was always shown as out.

It was tested today (~14h) that if you really move it out no beam is injected into ESR, but beam and even Te was observed in ESR last night.

The drive controller was in manual mode and it may not have given correct updates.
But it was also tested today that drives on the same crate get updates even in manual mode (at ~16h with TS1DG5_S and TS3ED7DS).

We also checked graylog. No drive command was issued yesterday in this time period, whereas the drive commands for testing today can be clearly seen.
Yesterday other drives in S4 area on the same controller were tested. This is most likely the reason for the manual mode.

Logbook from start of FRS until 118Te injection

Here is a setting plan for FRS and corresponding LISE files.
2 LISE files still use the old FRS-ESR optics, one the new with S6 focus on slits. 
But this does not make a big difference for the simulation, only dispersion S2-S6 is lower.
For realistic contaminants you must open the slits at S6 more(~ +/-10mm).
Added a list of fragments and expected frequencies after cooling at 400 MeV/u.
Only nuclides close to 118Te in m/q should be cooled.

Maybe, our degrader in FRS was removed by hand at (~13:40 26/05/21)
It is put back now (~13:10 27/05/21)
All runs taken in this period have to be double checked!

However, the xray lines from this night show Te for k_alpha and K-KREC

It is also possible that the readout of this degrader motor was just wrong due to its state as hand-controlled.

Target thickness must be like 5mm (was measured with a moving thin wire)
The beam thickness is small because of the low intensity
Maybe we hit the target a bit offset --> less rate?

We might have the option to increase the target 1magnitude more, but this might not help because we can kill the beam 
with this.

I have the impression we just simply have less number of stored ions like 10^4 or evem less...

Yury: "we are unsure about the settings and desperately seek for any means of additional diagnostics"

Pierre Michel and Laszlo go inside the ESR for switching on the MCP detector so that the photons from the gas jet and secondary beam interaction can be seen.

Close file: run061

since about 01:40 AM, there is no beam in ESR. .
stopped data acquisition
OPs are working on it. After searching, OPs decided that something is wrong with ESR.

Below are the results from the e-cooler voltage offset measurments done by Regina Hess et al. using the voltage divider (VD).

--7 MeV-- 
Sollwert GECEBG1E: 4008.3 V     
Measured at VD: 3913 V
Offset: -95.3 V

--6 MeV-- 
Sollwert GECEBG1E: 3460.5 V     
Measured at VD: 3364 V 
Offset: -96.5 V

Below are the cooler parameters from ParaModi for our production runs.

--7 MeV/u--
UE: 3842.7V
IE: 50mA
BG1E: 4008.7V
BG1E dU: 120V

--6 MeV/u--
UE: 3290.833V
IE: 50mA
BG1E: 3460.4809V
BG1E dU: 120V

--energy calculation--
as described here 

-- uncertainty --
for E108b we agreed on 10%
maybe further discussion is needed

For the x-ray detectors, efficiencies have been measured, before and after the experiment was performed. 
The preliminary results of the determined efficiencies can be seen in the attached plots 

The full cycle length of ESR with 30 stacks is about 7:45 minutes, out of which 15.5 sec are with target switched ON.
This is without CMB/HTD in parallel.