 Tue Mar 16 15:32:48 2021, Patrick Sieberer, SiC strip sensor, 69, SiC+DSSD tracker, 62.4, II(BETA+EFE), Proton, , Crap, , , , , , , ,
|
Testrun for Beam
Ripple Filter jumping around |
|
Tue Mar 16 15:33:23 2021, Patrick Sieberer, SiC strip sensor, 70, SiC+DSSD tracker, 62.4, II(BETA+EFE), Proton, 1.1M, Good, , , , , , , ,
|
Energy Scan
00:21
Filter vermutlich draussen |
|
Tue Mar 16 15:34:25 2021, Patrick Sieberer, SiC strip sensor, 71, SiC+DSSD tracker, 100.4, II(BETA+EFE), Proton, 1.2M, Good, , , , , , , ,
|
Energy Scan
00:46
Filter vermutlich draussen |
|
Tue Mar 16 15:34:50 2021, Patrick Sieberer, SiC strip sensor, 72, SiC+DSSD tracker, 83, II(BETA+EFE), Proton, 1.2M, Good, , , , , , , ,
|
Energy Scan
01:10
Filter vermutlich draussen |
|
Tue Mar 16 15:35:10 2021, Patrick Sieberer, SiC strip sensor, 73, SiC+DSSD tracker, 145.4, II(BETA+EFE), Proton, 1M, Good, , , , , , , ,
|
Energy Scan
01:35
Filter vermutlich draussen |
|
Tue Mar 16 15:35:35 2021, Patrick Sieberer, SiC strip sensor, 74, SiC+DSSD tracker, 252.7, II(BETA+EFE), Proton, 3M, Good, , , , , , , ,
|
Energy Scan
01:54
Filter vermutlich draussen |
|
Tue Mar 16 15:35:59 2021, Patrick Sieberer, SiC strip sensor, 75, SiC+DSSD tracker, 800, V, Proton, 400k, Good, , , , , , , ,
|
Energy Scan
02:48
1-6M Hz! |
|
Tue Mar 16 15:37:05 2021, Patrick Sieberer, SiC strip sensor, 76, SiC+DSSD tracker, 800, VI, Proton, , Crap, , , , , , , ,
|
Energy Scan
03:02
4Hz, VII -> MHz ? |
|
Tue Mar 16 15:37:49 2021, Patrick Sieberer, SiC strip sensor, 77, SiC+DSSD tracker, 800, V, Proton, 6.6M, Good, , , , , , , ,
|
Energy Scan
03:06-5:18
MHz Rate
Danach: Abbauen |
|
Sat Feb 27 09:26:27 2021, Felix Ulrich-Pur, Rate verification, 1, SiC+Si+RaMon, 62.4, III(EFE+SID2), , , Unknown, , , , , , , ,
|
Start 06:37
rate looks okish. few emtpy spills
2021-02-27, 06:07:
channel 1 : Si upstream
channel 2: SiC downstream
400 V Bias
Referenz: 2.475V channel 2, 0-Level: 2.310V channel 2
Referenz: 2.112V channel 1, 0-Level: 2.315V channel 1
position:
x: 0
y: 0
2021-02-27, 06:30:
Referenz: 2.477V channel 1
channel 2 unverändert
2021-02-27, 06:37:
Setting: 3
Run 1: 6:37 62.4 MeV, Rate geringer als erwartet
|
|
Sat Feb 27 09:28:07 2021, Felix Ulrich-Pur, Rate verification, 2, SiC+Si+RaMon, 252.7, III(EFE+SID2), , , Crap, , , , , , , ,
|
Start 06:47
rate only 10Hz, stopped run, room request and rewired trigger.
NOTE: Problem was caused by operators: Optics were not set correctly after ramping up energy from 62.4 to 252.7, not trigger cable
channel 1 : Si upstream
channel 2: SiC downstream
400 V Bias
Referenz: 2.475V channel 2, 0-Level: 2.310V channel 2
Referenz: 2.477V channel 1, 0-Level: 2.315V channel 1
position:
x: 0
y: 0 |
|
Sat Feb 27 09:29:41 2021, Felix Ulrich-Pur, Rate verification, 4, SiC+Si+RaMon, 252.7, III(EFE+SID2), , , Good, , , , , , , ,
|
Start 06:55
reallocated correctly, rate looks similar to old measurements now (kHz ish)
channel 1 : Si upstream
channel 2: SiC downstream
400 V Bias
Referenz: 2.475V channel 2, 0-Level: 2.310V channel 2
Referenz: 2.477V channel 1, 0-Level: 2.315V channel 1
position:
x: 0
y: 0 |
|
Sat Feb 27 09:30:32 2021, Felix Ulrich-Pur, Rate verification, 5, SiC+Si+RaMon, 62.4, III(EFE+SID2), , , Good, , , , , , , ,
|
Start 07:03
verified if run 1 was reliable-->Same results
channel 1 : Si upstream
channel 2: SiC downstream
400 V Bias
Referenz: 2.475V channel 2, 0-Level: 2.310V channel 2
Referenz: 2.477V channel 1, 0-Level: 2.315V channel 1
position:
x: 0
y: 0 |
|
Sat Feb 27 09:31:57 2021, Felix Ulrich-Pur, Rate verification, 6, SiC+Si+RaMon, 252.7, I(EFE+SID0), , , Good, , , , , , , ,
|
Start 07:16
rate looks fine,
channel 1 : Si upstream
channel 2: SiC downstream
400 V Bias
Referenz: 2.475V channel 2, 0-Level: 2.310V channel 2
Referenz: 2.477V channel 1, 0-Level: 2.315V channel 1
position:
x: 0
y: 0
SiC: man sieht erstmals Signale |
|
Sat Feb 27 09:40:15 2021, Felix Ulrich-Pur, Rate verification, 7, SiC+Si+RaMon, 62.4, I(EFE+SID0), , , Good, , , , , , , ,
|
Start 07:40
rate looks fine, however operators mentioned, that CPD data might have been loaded incorrectly-->pause during run and reloaded (07:48), rate seems unchanged
channel 1 : Si upstream
channel 2: SiC downstream
400 V Bias
Referenz: 2.475V channel 2, 0-Level: 2.310V channel 2
Referenz: 2.477V channel 1, 0-Level: 2.315V channel 1
position:
x: 0
y: 0
|
|
Sat Oct 8 07:11:03 2022, Christian Irmler, Ramon only, 1, RD50-MPW3, 800, , Proton, , Crap, lowflux high, , , , , , ,
|
| |
Sat Oct 8 07:10:31 2022, Christian Irmler, RD50-MPW3 - First Testbeam, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 
|
Tracker xml file: hvcmos_mpw3_20221008_TLU_00-000053.xml
|
|
Sun Nov 7 19:00:54 2021, Felix Ulrich-Pur, Peakfinder WET meas 7.11.21, 13, , 175.3, nominal, , , Good, , , 10, , , , none,
|
Start: 08:30
WET measurement of PMMA slabs also used for TOF-CT (GSI)
coarse run (to find Bragg range |
|
Sun Nov 7 19:02:25 2021, Felix Ulrich-Pur, Peakfinder WET meas 7.11.21, 14, , 175.3, nominal, , , Good, , , 10, , , , none,
|
Start: 08:55
WET measurement of PMMA slabs also used for TOF-CT (GSI)
reference run (with Arduino Spill Start/Stop logic)
fringes in Bragg peak (trigger not optimal (maybe too much latency with Arduino))--> next measurement with "Accumalte Charge" instead of "Spill Start/Stop" |
|
Sun Nov 7 19:04:10 2021, Felix Ulrich-Pur, Peakfinder WET meas 7.11.21, 15, , 175.3, nominal, , , Good, , , 10, , , , none,
|
Start: 09:14
WET measurement of PMMA slabs also used for TOF-CT (GSI)
reference run
"Accumalte Charge" |
|