[Sbs_gems] Timeline for SBS GEMs

[Bogdan Wojtsekhowski]

Hi Andrew,

The key is the electron-nucleon luminosity: the GEn will be effectively about 0.5 uA beam on GMn target even without any collimations. So, just use the observed rate (8 uA SBS-8 with BB at 26.5 degree) and scale the distance/angle.

Bogdan


________________________________
From: Andrew Puckett <puckett at jlab.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2022 2:40 PM
To: Mark Jones <jones at jlab.org>; Bogdan Wojtsekhowski <bogdanw at jlab.org>; Holly Szumila-Vance <hszumila at jlab.org>; Sbs_gems at jlab.org <Sbs_gems at jlab.org>
Cc: Cates, Gordon D (gdc4k) <gdc4k at virginia.edu>; Averett, Todd D <tdaver at wm.edu>
Subject: Re: Timeline for SBS GEMs


One more thing I should add to this is that we do not yet know for certain that the rates on the SBS side will be low, if there is no end window collimation on the SBS side of the beamline. GEMs in SBS was of course not in the original scope of GEN, and we never simulated having GEMs in SBS under the GEN-II conditions. We can try to look at that, but that would take some work by Eric or someone else. Naively I expect they will be manageable. They will be at forward angle but at larger distance from the target. If someone can give me even rough information about the geometry of the planned layout of GEMs in SBS, we can certainly simulate the worst-case scenario (with no end window collimation).



Andrew



From: Sbs_gems <sbs_gems-bounces at jlab.org> on behalf of Mark Jones <jones at jlab.org>
Date: Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 2:32 PM
To: Bogdan Wojtsekhowski <bogdanw at jlab.org>, Holly Szumila-Vance <hszumila at jlab.org>, Sbs_gems at jlab.org <Sbs_gems at jlab.org>
Cc: Cates, Gordon D (gdc4k) <gdc4k at virginia.edu>, Averett, Todd D <tdaver at wm.edu>
Subject: Re: [Sbs_gems] Timeline for SBS GEMs

Bogdan,

          We need to be realistic. I know that you want to run pion A_LL.

The estimated schedule has been vetted by Gordon and other target experts

and the end of installation by the end of August in realistic. I do not see starting experiment

in July as remotely possible.

         We should have a separate meeting to determine what SBS GEMs are a priority to install.



Cheers,

            Mark

________________________________

From: Sbs_gems <sbs_gems-bounces at jlab.org> on behalf of Bogdan Wojtsekhowski <bogdanw at jlab.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2022 2:22 PM
To: Holly Szumila-Vance <hszumila at jlab.org>; Sbs_gems at jlab.org <Sbs_gems at jlab.org>
Cc: Cates, Gordon D (gdc4k) <gdc4k at virginia.edu>; Averett, Todd D <tdaver at wm.edu>
Subject: Re: [Sbs_gems] Timeline for SBS GEMs



Hi Holly,



I would like to bring your attention that with He-3 target the rates will be low and

needs for improved (final) HV system is not critical. It would be nice to have one-two

divider to be installed for test.

At the same time to make the DAQ installation and commissioning must to be considered.

>From GEn point of view I advocate to move GEM installation as early as possible

because to start experiment in July is very important.

Thanks,



Bogdan

________________________________

From: Sbs_gems <sbs_gems-bounces at jlab.org> on behalf of Holly Szumila-Vance <hszumila at jlab.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2022 1:59 PM
To: Sbs_gems at jlab.org <Sbs_gems at jlab.org>
Subject: [Sbs_gems] Timeline for SBS GEMs



Hi all,

So it looks like first week of June is still the best time for the crane in Hall A to put the SBS side GEMs in place. We basically have up until then to prepare the layers, and if we are only modifying 1 HV divider then it seems doable to me.

We would want the INFN layers modified by then if possible.

Let me know if you think differently.

-Holly
_______________________________________________
Sbs_gems mailing list
Sbs_gems at jlab.org
https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/sbs_gems
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/sbs_gems/attachments/20220303/add12f61/attachment-0001.html>