This some preliminary analysis results by using  NTCAP data.   The IQ rate of NTCAP is 20 MSamples/seconds. I analyzed data files recorded from May 7 
17:39 to May 8 2:20.  The frequency of 72Ge is bended by 4kHz at the beginning of some injections.  In order to check whether this frequency bending is 
due to isomer or unstable magnetic field. I compare the 72Ge with other isotopes. The similar bending was observed for other isotope in each 
corresponding injections. It seems that bend is due to unstable magnetic field.  

They are not easy to find, but we do occasionally see what might be the isomer.

> Following Xiangcheng Chen's analysis, I analysed 11 ms time slices separated by 25 ms to see the evolution of the potential isomer across the injection.
> 
> Attachment 1: Data from May 7th 19h-20h. -t 11ms progression from -s=5 to -s=5.175
> Attachment 2: Data from May 8th 21h-22h. -t 11ms progression from -s=5 to -s=5.175
> 
> The extra resolution gained on the 8th (and potentially other settings too) make the isomer visible where it wasn't present on the 7th.

Hi, attached is the sum of all spectra from 1-2am on May 10th, on the 245 MHz detector. Takes me forever to download everything...
I used the same parameters as Guy and Xiancheng: LFRAMES = 512 (in analyzer); -t 0.011 (= 11 ms) -s 5 ... 5.175 s.

Resolution looks good... :-)

Same as before, but for 410 MHz detectors.
Peaks visible in the 3rd-5th slice.


> > Following Xiangcheng Chen's analysis, I analysed 11 ms time slices separated by 25 ms to see the evolution of the potential isomer across the injection.
> > 
> > Attachment 1: Data from May 7th 19h-20h. -t 11ms progression from -s=5 to -s=5.175
> > Attachment 2: Data from May 8th 21h-22h. -t 11ms progression from -s=5 to -s=5.175
> > 
> > The extra resolution gained on the 8th (and potentially other settings too) make the isomer visible where it wasn't present on the 7th.
> 
> Hi, attached is the sum of all spectra from 1-2am on May 10th, on the 245 MHz detector. Takes me forever to download everything...
> I used the same parameters as Guy and Xiancheng: LFRAMES = 512 (in analyzer); -t 0.011 (= 11 ms) -s 5 ... 5.175 s.
> 
> Resolution looks good... :-)

Same as before but for 4-5am on 410 MHz detector. Peak visible.


> Same as before, but for 410 MHz detectors.
> Peaks visible in the 3rd-5th slice.
> 
> 
> > > Following Xiangcheng Chen's analysis, I analysed 11 ms time slices separated by 25 ms to see the evolution of the potential isomer across the injection.
> > > 
> > > Attachment 1: Data from May 7th 19h-20h. -t 11ms progression from -s=5 to -s=5.175
> > > Attachment 2: Data from May 8th 21h-22h. -t 11ms progression from -s=5 to -s=5.175
> > > 
> > > The extra resolution gained on the 8th (and potentially other settings too) make the isomer visible where it wasn't present on the 7th.
> > 
> > Hi, attached is the sum of all spectra from 1-2am on May 10th, on the 245 MHz detector. Takes me forever to download everything...
> > I used the same parameters as Guy and Xiancheng: LFRAMES = 512 (in analyzer); -t 0.011 (= 11 ms) -s 5 ... 5.175 s.
> > 
> > Resolution looks good... :-)

Same as before for 5-6 am.
Peak still there, maybe a bit less than before.


> Same as before but for 4-5am on 410 MHz detector. Peak visible.
> 
> 
> > Same as before, but for 410 MHz detectors.
> > Peaks visible in the 3rd-5th slice.
> > 
> > 
> > > > Following Xiangcheng Chen's analysis, I analysed 11 ms time slices separated by 25 ms to see the evolution of the potential isomer across the injection.
> > > > 
> > > > Attachment 1: Data from May 7th 19h-20h. -t 11ms progression from -s=5 to -s=5.175
> > > > Attachment 2: Data from May 8th 21h-22h. -t 11ms progression from -s=5 to -s=5.175
> > > > 
> > > > The extra resolution gained on the 8th (and potentially other settings too) make the isomer visible where it wasn't present on the 7th.
> > > 
> > > Hi, attached is the sum of all spectra from 1-2am on May 10th, on the 245 MHz detector. Takes me forever to download everything...
> > > I used the same parameters as Guy and Xiancheng: LFRAMES = 512 (in analyzer); -t 0.011 (= 11 ms) -s 5 ... 5.175 s.
> > > 
> > > Resolution looks good... :-)

Attached are two files with a proposed particle identification.
Different colors indicate different harmonic numbers

This is an old spectrum which was recoded on May.

SC_2021-06-30_11-00-12
IQ_2021-06-30_11-00-12
reference level -80dBm.
Amplifier is off.

SC_2021-06-30_12_35_52
IQ_2021-06-30_12_35_43
Reference level=-20dBm

This is the latest ID of 70Se setting.

reference level=-20 dBm.
p:\E143\sc\SC_2021-6-30_23_27_45
p:\E143\iq\IQ_2021-6-30_23_27_34

The first good spectra after the gas bottle change is from 23:38:25 (on the 410 MHz Analyzer) 

The last hour before the gas bottle change is summarized here. 
The first pic shows the 410 MHz spectra taken from 22-23h on the 410 MHz analyzer, in time slices of 0.1 sec from 0s-2s.
The second pic shows the spectra in 20ms slices from 1s-1.16s.

python3 e143_analyzer.py -s 1.0 -t 0.02 /home/dillmann/.../sparc-daq-02.gsi.de/E143-410MHz/410MHz-2021.07.01.22*

The third spectra was taken in May, for comparison.

I don't think we see anything...

Same as before, for 0-1h on July 2nd


> The last hour before the gas bottle change is summarized here. 
> The first pic shows the 410 MHz spectra taken from 22-23h on the 410 MHz analyzer, in time slices of 0.1 sec from 0s-2s.
> The second pic shows the spectra in 20ms slices from 1s-1.16s.
> 
> python3 e143_analyzer.py -s 1.0 -t 0.02 /home/dillmann/.../sparc-daq-02.gsi.de/E143-410MHz/410MHz-2021.07.01.22*
> 
> The third spectra was taken in May, for comparison.
> 
> I don't think we see anything...

Same as before for 0-4h on July 2nd.

> Same as before, for 0-1h on July 2nd
> 
> 
> > The last hour before the gas bottle change is summarized here. 
> > The first pic shows the 410 MHz spectra taken from 22-23h on the 410 MHz analyzer, in time slices of 0.1 sec from 0s-2s.
> > The second pic shows the spectra in 20ms slices from 1s-1.16s.
> > 
> > python3 e143_analyzer.py -s 1.0 -t 0.02 /home/dillmann/.../sparc-daq-02.gsi.de/E143-410MHz/410MHz-2021.07.01.22*
> > 
> > The third spectra was taken in May, for comparison.
> > 
> > I don't think we see anything...

I've written two scripts that others might find useful for the on-line analysis. 
  1. The first is a simple bash script that runs a for loop to run the e143_analyzer.py script for a sequence of start values (-s). You'll need to change the increment and 
start/end of the for loop to set the time resolution.
  2. The second is a root script that takes the above generated scripts, reads the histograms, and then fills a 2D histogram. You'll need to adjust the TH2 bin number to 
match both the bin number of the TH1s and the number of analysed files. I've included a print line to help identify the TH1 bin number.

To see the first results, I've attached a sum of July 1st 22-23h data. Sadly, I don't see any indication of the isomer, or at least the production is very low.

Same as before for 4-5h and 5-6h.
No isomer, I think :-( (Sorry, Wolfram!)

> Same as before for 0-4h on July 2nd.
> 
> > Same as before, for 0-1h on July 2nd
> > 
> > 
> > > The last hour before the gas bottle change is summarized here. 
> > > The first pic shows the 410 MHz spectra taken from 22-23h on the 410 MHz analyzer, in time slices of 0.1 sec from 0s-2s.
> > > The second pic shows the spectra in 20ms slices from 1s-1.16s.
> > > 
> > > python3 e143_analyzer.py -s 1.0 -t 0.02 /home/dillmann/.../sparc-daq-02.gsi.de/E143-410MHz/410MHz-2021.07.01.22*
> > > 
> > > The third spectra was taken in May, for comparison.
> > > 
> > > I don't think we see anything...