[Dsg-halla_ecal] Hall A Beam Current

[Donald Jones]

Estimating from diagram (see below) something like 75 deg vs 125 deg.
[cid:705a0e84-0796-441c-ad9e-5fa2b130588f]

Donald Jones
Hall A/C Staff Scientist
Jefferson Lab
Newport News, VA
________________________________
From: Brian Eng <beng at jlab.org>
Sent: Monday, May 6, 2024 10:29 AM
To: Ellen Becker <ebecker at jlab.org>; Mark Kevin Jones <jones at jlab.org>; dsg-halla_ecal at jlab.org <dsg-halla_ecal at jlab.org>; Marc Mcmullen <mcmullen at jlab.org>; Donald Jones <jonesdc at jlab.org>
Subject: Re: Hall A Beam Current

The input impedance on the cRIO TC modules is quite high at 78 MΩ so the additional resistance shouldn't effect the accuracy that much, but it will to some degree mainly in the form of an offset error.

The main thing with going with a longer cable length is to make sure it's not near any sources of EMI like power cables, motors, etc. Having at least an overall cable shield will help there some. I'm not sure this application requires the accuracy/hassle/expensive of including individual shields.

What is the angle of the planned bunker vs where the DAQ one is located?

________________________________
From: Dsg-halla_ecal <dsg-halla_ecal-bounces at jlab.org> on behalf of Donald Jones via Dsg-halla_ecal <dsg-halla_ecal at jlab.org>
Sent: Monday, May 6, 2024 9:44 AM
To: Ellen Becker <ebecker at jlab.org>; Mark Kevin Jones <jones at jlab.org>; dsg-halla_ecal at jlab.org <dsg-halla_ecal at jlab.org>; Marc Mcmullen <mcmullen at jlab.org>
Subject: Re: [Dsg-halla_ecal] Hall A Beam Current

Hi Marc,
I think that would be pushing it a bit too far. The usual cable length we plan on for going all the way to the bunker is 70m. We probably could get by with 60m, but that's still pretty long for thermocouple extension cables. The rates should be much much lower at the high angle of the new bunker. You still have to worry about the isotropic neutron background bouncing around the hall. If you are concerned, we could request an additional wall of lead + poly built around your rack and put it in the back of the bunker furthest from the opening.
-Don

Donald Jones
Hall A/C Staff Scientist
Jefferson Lab
Newport News, VA
________________________________
From: Ellen Becker <ebecker at jlab.org>
Sent: Friday, May 3, 2024 11:29 AM
To: Donald Jones <jonesdc at jlab.org>; Mark Kevin Jones <jones at jlab.org>; dsg-halla_ecal at jlab.org <dsg-halla_ecal at jlab.org>; Marc Mcmullen <mcmullen at jlab.org>
Subject: Re: Hall A Beam Current

The large DAQ bunker would definitely be the better option if you can manage it.
________________________________
From: Dsg-halla_ecal <dsg-halla_ecal-bounces at jlab.org> on behalf of Marc Mcmullen via Dsg-halla_ecal <dsg-halla_ecal at jlab.org>
Sent: Friday, May 3, 2024 10:49 AM
To: Donald Jones <jonesdc at jlab.org>; Mark Kevin Jones <jones at jlab.org>; dsg-halla_ecal at jlab.org <dsg-halla_ecal at jlab.org>
Subject: Re: [Dsg-halla_ecal] Hall A Beam Current

I wonder if the additional radiation is an issue. The expansion module has lost contact twice now and I am trying to see if  there is something to it concerning radiation or perhaps just a network issue.

I know you are planning to move the shielding bunker and that will move the power supplies and interface chassis. My current plan is install the controls in that shielding. But I am wondering if using the larger bunker (DAq I think) for the controls IO connections may be a better option.

We are getting quotes in for the thermocouple extensions now and I am using 100' as a length. Can someone calculate the run from the detector to the large bunker?  Just for the controls, so it would be the thermocouple extensions (~200 pairs) from the detector, and then some low voltage runs from the controls to the power supplies (control voltage = 16 pairs, current readback = 16 pairs).

I'll keep an eye on the system this weekend and see if the issue persists.

Additionally, I'll find out which switch its on and see if the issue is there.

Marc
________________________________
From: Donald Jones <jonesdc at jlab.org>
Sent: Friday, May 3, 2024 10:32 AM
To: Marc Mcmullen <mcmullen at jlab.org>; Mark Kevin Jones <jones at jlab.org>
Subject: Re: Hall A Beam Current

Hi Marc,
Just going from memory, I think it is IBC1H04CRCUR2. The current is lower but the radiation is higher because now we have a liquid target as opposed to gas before.
-Don

Donald Jones
Hall A/C Staff Scientist
Jefferson Lab
Newport News, VA
________________________________
From: Marc Mcmullen <mcmullen at jlab.org>
Sent: Friday, May 3, 2024 10:30 AM
To: Mark Kevin Jones <jones at jlab.org>
Cc: Donald Jones <jonesdc at jlab.org>
Subject: Hall A Beam Current

Hi Mark and Don,

Do you guys know the PV name for the beam current in Hall A? Also, in general, is the beam current higher now than in November?

Thanks,
Marc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/dsg-halla_ecal/attachments/20240506/08a5652f/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 548261 bytes
Desc: image.png
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/dsg-halla_ecal/attachments/20240506/08a5652f/attachment-0001.png>