<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"> P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} </style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
Jay,</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
I do not read your comments as arguing that we ought _not_ to move the cryounit. I am not certain whether you think an attempt to "improve" things is ill- or well-advised, or whether you are attempting to withhold opinion on that.
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
The (large) beam offset in the beam line downstream from the cryounit has been a problem from multiple perspectives, and I thought we should consider what might be done. The 1.2 mm offset mentioned in Reza's note (survey reference) that Todd forwarded appeared
to me implicitly to portray a 1.2 mm offset as the total content related to the beam line issue. I think this is a significant integer factor too small (like five times too small), and that speaking "1.2 mm" in this context is very misleading to observers
unfamiliar with the actual situation.</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
Michael Tiefenback<br>
</div>
<div>
<div id="appendonsend"></div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<hr tabindex="-1" style="display:inline-block; width:98%">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font style="font-size:11pt" face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> Jay Benesch <benesch@jlab.org><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, October 2, 2020 12:47<br>
<b>To:</b> Michael Tiefenback <tiefen@jlab.org>; bteam@jlab.org <bteam@jlab.org><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [BTeam] Injector Alignment</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="BodyFragment"><font size="2"><span style="font-size:11pt">
<div class="PlainText">Mike,<br>
<br>
The transverse kick is why we never use MQJ0L01: add the feeddown to the <br>
transverse momentum and the correctors are too feeble. Steer to center <br>
the beam before 0L02 and one can get by. The peak beam envelope is <br>
large (~2.5 mm sigma) as one develops the FODO lattice through <br>
0L02/0L02A, 0L03A/0L03, 0L04. That's why I wanted to switch to solenoid <br>
focusing in the 6 MeV region.<br>
<br>
Jay<br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</div>
</body>
</html>