[Clas12_first_exp] Data taking status

[Valery Kubarovsky]

Dear Maxime, 

1. Actually it is not new trigger. This is old FT*FD*CTOF trigger N24 that we had all the time. It is heavily prescaled and does not affect total trigger rate, data rate or dead time. I just adjusted the CTOF trigger parameters. The main physical triggers stay the same . So there is nothing to worry about. In the old version we had incorrect CTOF gains and CTOF trigger parameters. We discussed these changes during todays early morning meeting with people who is interesting on the photoproduction experiments. 

2. Again, we discussed today the change in the beam current. The off line analysis shows that the electron purity is about 70% in all 6 sectors. The DC occupancy is also lower then in the inbending runs. We will find out the track reconstruction 
efficiency and electron purity after cook will be done. 

Best regards, 
Valery 

> From: "mdefurne" <mdefurne at jlab.org>
> To: "clas12 first exp" <clas12_first_exp at jlab.org>
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2018 1:03:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [Clas12_first_exp] Data taking status

> Hi Valery,

> What is this new trigger? Which difference with previous one?
> Moreover when was it discussed? As previous Run Coordinator barely 23hours ago,
> nobody started any discussion about a new trigger version. What was wrong with
> the previous one?

> Considering the increase in beam current, how did the DC occupancies change? Are
> tracks as clear as it was in ced plots? (If you start not being able to
> disentangle a track from noise with your eye, it might get tricky from a
> tracking point of view to do the same.)

> From my point of view, both decisions should have been discussed during a RC
> meeting. (I agree that it might not have been easy with the CLAS collaboration
> meeting to have such meeting but I would have come to this meeting to ask all
> questions above).

> The more trigger we have, the trickiest/the most painful the analysis will be.

> Kind regards,

> Maxime
> On 15/11/2018 17:48, Valery Kubarovsky wrote:

>> Hi All:
>> Please see the details in https://logbooks.jlab.org/entry/3626619
>> Best,
>> Valery

>> _______________________________________________
>> Clas12_first_exp mailing list Clas12_first_exp at jlab.org
>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/clas12_first_exp

> _______________________________________________
> Clas12_first_exp mailing list
> Clas12_first_exp at jlab.org
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/clas12_first_exp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/clas12_first_exp/attachments/20181115/99a659fb/attachment.html>