[Pansophy] NB3SN-CMTF-CM-ACTS-R1

Tue Apr 23 10:59:02 EDT 2024

Hi Allen,
That worked.  I was unaware of the need to instantiate first.
Thanks,
Mike

On 4/23/2024 10:55 AM, Allen Samuels wrote:
>
> Mike,
>
> That’s what the traveler will say before you instantiate. You have to 
> hit instantiate (in the same place as submit to database) before file 
> submission works. Try that and let me know if it works. If it doesn’t 
> we might have an issue with pansophy proper, not just the traveler.
>
> Allen
>
> *From:* Mike Drury <drury at jlab.org>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 23, 2024 10:52 AM
> *To:* Allen Samuels <samuels at jlab.org>; Mike McCaughan <michaelm at jlab.org>
> *Cc:* pansophy <pansophy at jlab.org>
> *Subject:* Re: NB3SN-CMTF-CM-ACTS-R1
>
> This is what I see when I look at the traveler in Pansophy for either 
> step:
>
> On 4/23/2024 10:47 AM, Allen Samuels wrote:
>
>     Mike,
>
>     I talked to Valerie, and we decided an R2 was best. However, as I
>     went into the documents to add the file uploads, I found that
>     steps 69 and 97 already have file uploads. Was there somewhere
>     else that they were supposed to be, or are we actually good?
>
>
>
>     Allen
>
>     *From:* Mike Drury <drury at jlab.org> <mailto:drury at jlab.org>
>     *Sent:* Tuesday, April 23, 2024 9:47 AM
>     *To:* Allen Samuels <samuels at jlab.org> <mailto:samuels at jlab.org>;
>     Mike McCaughan <michaelm at jlab.org> <mailto:michaelm at jlab.org>
>     *Cc:* pansophy <pansophy at jlab.org> <mailto:pansophy at jlab.org>
>     *Subject:* Re: NB3SN-CMTF-CM-ACTS-R1
>
>     I'm inclined to leave it alone.  This is a one-off traveler and we
>     can add comments for any deviations from the numbers that qualify
>     for NCR's in the instructions.  These numbers are often being
>     decided on the fly.
>     There is one problem I found looking at the traveler again that
>     should probably be fixed.  There should be file upload fields for
>     lines 69 and 97.
>     If that needs a Rev, then fine.  I have yet to instantiate a
>     traveler though if that helps.
>     Mike
>
>     On 4/23/2024 9:28 AM, Allen Samuels wrote:
>
>         Mike McCaughan,
>
>         I was looking over the approval email for
>         NB3SN-CMTF-CM-ACTS-R1 now that Tony had signed (he hadn’t at
>         the time I uploaded to pansophy, but we needed the traveler in
>         production). I noticed that you had quite a few comments
>         regarding changes that needed to be made to the traveler. We
>         at pansophy are willing to make minor changes to a document
>         after it has been approved, but it is not preferred, and we
>         don’t like making major changes. In this case, it probably
>         would have been best to disapprove and list the changes that
>         needed to be made; either by us or by the document author.
>         Nothing for it at this point, just something to keep in mind
>         going forward.
>
>         Mike Drury, I’ve copied the text of Mike McCaughan’s comments
>         down below. Do these changes need to be implemented? At this
>         point we’d probably have to do an R2 of the document,
>         especially if data has already been entered.
>
>         Mike McCaughan, 04/16/2024 10:15:42 Approved:
>
>         Steps 43/49: Update gradient targets to Emax - 1MV/m from 4K
>         VTA data: 12.6 (cav. 7) and 8.12 (cav. 8).
>
>         Steps 59 & 63: Update targets to Eop, Eop - 2 MV/m, and Eop -
>         4 MV/m. Both Qos in VTA were ~2.5e9 at 4K.
>
>         Between steps 69 and 70 do we want to insert Emax measurements
>         at 2K before taking Qos again as we should reach higher
>         gradients? New 2K targets 17.5 (cav. 7) and 8.2 MV/m (cav. 8)
>         [Emax,VTA - 1MV/m; copy paste steps 47-52]
>
>         Present steps 71 & 75 - I think Qo target numbers for NCR
>         writing are swapped.
>
>         Step 78: Do we actually want to do the full +/- 500 kHz range
>         test? Defere to Gigi/Grigory. Smaller 2K loop seems
>         reasonable. +/- 50 kHz range probably more than sufficient.
>
>         Steps 83 & 92: New targets 17.5 and 8.2 MV/m respectively (VTA
>         Emax - 1 MV/m)
>
>         Steps 99 and 102: Qo targets should perhaps be 2.7e9 and
>         1.2e10 from VTA data?
>
>         Allen
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/pansophy/attachments/20240423/77f16a0e/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 31360 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/pansophy/attachments/20240423/77f16a0e/attachment-0004.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 29322 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/pansophy/attachments/20240423/77f16a0e/attachment-0005.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 32406 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/pansophy/attachments/20240423/77f16a0e/attachment-0006.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 4484 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/pansophy/attachments/20240423/77f16a0e/attachment-0007.png>