[Solid_baffle] [Solid] revised draft agenda for SoLID collaboration meeting 5/14-5/15

[Richard S. Holmes]

On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Zhiwen Zhao <zwzhao at jlab.org> wrote:

> About baffle parametrization, we certainly need to improved the current
> design using small blocks.
> but the guideline can't be just reducing parameters.
> I think we should really consider how it will be made or machined.
>

The design and the parameterization of the design are two different things.
For example, even if it were made using 20 layers of small blocks, the 20
block starting angles and 20 angular widths are 40 parameters which
presumably are not a minimal, robust set of parameters for the relevant
degrees of freedom. I would guess, for instance, that the 8 or 10
coefficients of two cubic or quartic polynomials would adequately generate
those 40 numbers, and there are other choices some of which probably would
be better for optimization.

But you are correct that machining considerations need to be reflected in a
realistic design. (Of course machining considerations will depend on the
materials we choose, based on simulations... so there will have to be some
iteration to get to an optimized design.)

Other news about magnet, it will need to be changed!
> hallA engineering gives us feedback that they need more iron for supporting
> and SIDIS setup certainly now is too tight to fit everything in.
> And we haven't cut holes for any cable out yet.
>

Good point. Any other undefineds that would affect baffle design?

-- 
- Richard S. Holmes
  Physics Department
  Syracuse University
  Syracuse, NY 13244
  315-443-5977
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/solid_baffle/attachments/20150512/c804bd21/attachment.html