 Sun Apr 5 20:34:42 2020, Laszlo, Calibration, Xray energies - 1. calibration, 8x
|
30angle: E[keV] = 0.0158507 *ch-2.07456
90angle: E[keV] = 0.01950*ch-2.76
145angle: E[keV] = 0.017988 *ch-1.809
|
|
Mon Apr 6 04:39:19 2020, Laszlo, Calibration, 2. Xray energy calibration, 9x
|
30angle: E[keV] = 0.015898 *ch-1.91
90angle: E[keV] = 0.0211075*ch-2.39
145angle: E[keV] = 0.01663 *ch-1.758 |
|
Mon Apr 6 23:00:51 2020, Laszlo, Calibration, beam energies for 124Xe and 118Te measurements,
|
"The e- cooler settings were the same for the 124Xe and 118Te beams" - Sergey --> speed of the ions is the same --> same MeV/u
E_beam = 10.0606MeV/u
|
|
Wed Apr 8 20:06:10 2020, Laszlo, Calibration, Counts in the K-REC peaks,
|
3 datasets were investigated:
-124Xe with Scraper (2. Xray calibration parameters needed)
-124Xe without Scraper (2. Xray calibration parameters needed)
|
|
Wed Apr 8 23:02:24 2020, Laszlo, General, lmd to measurement pairing list,
|
I use the following list of lmd files combined to a single root file for each measurement.
It is very important to highlight that sometimes the trigger==1 data got corrupted,massive number of trigger==2 like events appear on the detector as trigger==1
signal, because the gas jet target didn't switch off after its normal phase (gas jet remains ON during injection. Maybe some gas jet issue, maybe some |
|
Tue Apr 21 22:25:00 2020, Jan, Analysis, ,
|
| |
|
Thu Apr 23 19:09:58 2020, Laszlo, Calibration, theoretical K-REC cross sections , 9x
|
Find attached Andrey Surzhykov's calculations for the theta angle in respect to the beam direction (in lab. frame) vs. cross section for 124Xe54+ and 118Te52+.
The calculations made for collision with two H atoms with the accuracy of 1%. There are no molecular corrections done, but these corrections are within
1%.
|
|
Wed Apr 29 16:06:28 2020, Laszlo, Calibration, efficiency fit - 90degree, combined dataset,
|
For the efficiency vs E fit of the 90degree Xray detector I have used the following phenomenological funciton:
f(x) = a * (1-exp(-(x-c)/b)) * exp(-x/d)
|
 Thu Apr 30 17:40:57 2020, Laszlo, Calibration, efficiency fits,
|
For all 3 detector the calibration data sets were combined to include the systematics in the fit results directly. Combining means not a weighted average,
just simple all data points were included into the fit --> doubled efficiency value for most of the energies.
The g(x) = a * (1-exp(-(x-c)/b)) * exp(-x/d) function was used to describe the behavior of the Germanium detectors for the whole range of energies (global |
|
Thu Apr 30 22:55:45 2020, Laszlo, Calibration, inverse square law test,
|
I have made also the inverse square law fits. We have data only for 90degre with the 241Am source, but both for the 1. and 2. calibrations. The 1. and 2.
calibration data sets treated separate.
2 peaks were investigated, 59.5keV and 26.3keV, at two distances 184.8mm and 217.3mm. These distances are the sum of 4 distances:
|
|
Wed May 6 23:02:42 2020, Laszlo, Calibration, efficiency values,
|
I have calculated the efficiency values by putting the energies of the K-REC peaks into the phenomenological (empirical) function and into the linear function
(see below). The K-REC peak's position I got from a Gaussian-fit on the peak. There are 5 data sets in total:
With 1. E-calibration parameters:
|
|
Tue May 19 16:48:15 2020, Laszlo, General, E127 beamtime overview,
|
Here is a representation how was the time management during E127. The time, what we could spend with measuring the 118Te(pg), was ~20% comparing to the
given 6days. |