<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Aptos;
panose-1:2 11 0 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Proxima Nova Rg";
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-ligatures:none;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">That is a nice graph. So, for Axel’s energies of 4 pass and 3 pass, the corresponding magnetic fields would be 0.8 x 5 = 4Tesla, and 0.6x5 = 3 Tesla. According to Chris’ curves a polarization of about 75%
at 4 Tesla and at 3 Tesla about 45-50%, still not too bad.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Volker<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div id="mail-editor-reference-message-container">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">Christopher Keith <ckeith@jlab.org><br>
<b>Date: </b>Wednesday, August 28, 2024 at 12:48 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>Volker Burkert <burkert@jlab.org>, Axel Schmidt <schmidta@jlab.org>, Eugene Pasyuk <pasyuk@jlab.org><br>
<b>Cc: </b>Eugene Pasyuk via Clas12_rgh <clas12_rgh@jlab.org><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [Clas12_rgh] beam energy<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Proxima Nova Rg"">I’ve attached a plot that shows a crude estimate of the polarization vs field dependence, assuming two different models of dynamic nuclear polarization: the solid effect (SE)
and thermal mixing (TM). For ammonia, TM is probably the dominate mechanism. </span>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Proxima Nova Rg""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Proxima Nova Rg"">Both cases indicate that we can’t expect better than about 30% at 2.5 T and 1 K. We can cool to lower temperatures and improve the polarization, but this requires a different
type of refrigerator that is significantly more complex to construct and operate.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Proxima Nova Rg""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Proxima Nova Rg"">As Eugene and Wei have already said, there’s another problem. To provide a larger scattering angle for transverse polarization, the new 5T magnet was designed with a wider separation
between the two sets of superconducting coils. This degrades the uniformity of the central field. The vendor used iron shims to compensate for this effect, so the uniformity is only sufficient in a narrow band around 5.0 T.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Proxima Nova Rg""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Proxima Nova Rg"">We can replace the iron shims with new ones designed for lower fields. Or, if we get a new magnet, we can possibly replace the iron shims with a set of shim<b> coils</b>, driven
by a separate power supply. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Proxima Nova Rg""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Proxima Nova Rg"">Chris</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Proxima Nova Rg""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Proxima Nova Rg""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Proxima Nova Rg""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Proxima Nova Rg""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Proxima Nova Rg""> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div id="mail-editor-reference-message-container">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">Clas12_rgh <clas12_rgh-bounces@jlab.org> on behalf of Volker Burkert via Clas12_rgh <clas12_rgh@jlab.org><br>
<b>Date: </b>Wednesday, August 28, 2024 at 12:15 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>Axel Schmidt <schmidta@jlab.org>, Eugene Pasyuk <pasyuk@jlab.org><br>
<b>Cc: </b>Eugene Pasyuk via Clas12_rgh <clas12_rgh@jlab.org><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [Clas12_rgh] beam energy</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Hi Axel,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">For such a large range in energy it might be better to also lower the polarizing target magnetic field with the chicane magnets and use different microwave frequencies. The prize to pay is lower polarization.
In the past people have used 2.5 Tesla mag. field with still decent polarizations (50-60% for protons??) . But Chris may want to comment on this option.
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Volker</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div id="mail-editor-reference-message-container">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">Clas12_rgh <clas12_rgh-bounces@jlab.org> on behalf of Axel Schmidt via Clas12_rgh <clas12_rgh@jlab.org><br>
<b>Date: </b>Wednesday, August 28, 2024 at 11:52 AM<br>
<b>To: </b>Eugene Pasyuk <pasyuk@jlab.org><br>
<b>Cc: </b>Eugene Pasyuk via Clas12_rgh <clas12_rgh@jlab.org><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [Clas12_rgh] beam energy</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Dear Eugene,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Thank you for raising this issue.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Acknowledging that the approved experiments are all designed for 5th pass beam (and that obviously takes priority), I would be very curious to know how much additional cost and effort would be needed to accommodate
4th pass, or even 3rd pass beam energies. Lower energies would probably be a lot better for measuring two-photon exchange, the physics August and I are investigating. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">I realize that this would require a MUCH larger chicane bend. Would this increase the size/cost/complexity by a large factor? At what point does it become completely infeasible?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">We are still in the early stages for exploring this. We'll do simulations and report to the group. But this seemed like a good moment to register this point. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Thanks,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Axel</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">On Aug 28, 2024, at 11:03, Eugene Pasyuk via Clas12_rgh <clas12_rgh@jlab.org> wrote:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif">Hello RGH enthusiasts,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif">While thinking of the chicane design, it occurred to me that, so far, in all our simulations, we have considered beam energy of 11 GeV. 11 GeV may not be available. Since the
target magnet field is fixed to be 5 T, we will have more bending for lower beam energies. It has two consequences: more background in the forward detector and a larger offset of the middle chicane magnets. The latter means we would need a wider opening of
the chicane magnets. The maximum opening for the existing design that produces enough BdL needs to be checked with the company. It may require a substantial redesign of the magnet compared to the existing version they built for someone.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif">We should define the minimum acceptable beam energy for this experiment and run simulations with this condition.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div id="Signature">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">-Eugene</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p style="margin:0in"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p style="margin:0in"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica">_______________________________________________<br>
Clas12_rgh mailing list<br>
</span><a href="mailto:Clas12_rgh@jlab.org"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica">Clas12_rgh@jlab.org</span></a><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica"><br>
</span><a href="https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/clas12_rgh"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica">https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/clas12_rgh</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>