[Solid_hgc] C4F8 radiator gas

[Zhiwen Zhao]

hi, Brad and Garth

I also saw this in the CLAS note here
https://userweb.jlab.org/~vlassov/cc/node9.html#SECTION00032000000000000000

Considering C4F8 has lower refraction index than C4F10 and n-1 is linear 
to pressure
0.00153*1.5/0.001285=1.786
It seems C4F8 would need even higher pressure to reach C4F10 goal

By the way, I made a list for solid_hgc.
Currently we have me, Chao, Brad, Simona, Ahmed,Garth in the list.

Zhiwen

On 8/27/2016 3:07 PM, Brad Sawatzky wrote:
> Yeah -- that looks like a great option from a performance perspective.
>
> Poking around a bit, I see it was considered in the past even for CLAS6
> and rejected in favor of C4F10.  Performance was basically identical, so
> presumably cost was the reason (at that time?).
>
> I'll be very interested to hear what you get for a quote!
>
> -- Brad
>
> On Sat, 27 Aug 2016, Garth Huber wrote:
>
>> It appears that C4F8 is commonly available and I have put in a price request to
>> Praxair for 2000kg of high purity gas.  If the gas is sufficiently cheap, then
>> we might not need such a complicated gas system, which saves even more money.
>>
>> Attached is a safety sheet for your review.
>>
>> My Mainz collaborator also gives the following information:
>>
>>> -) vapor pressure is about 2 bars; you can find many other parameters in
>>>
>>> http://encyclopedia.airliquide.com/Encyclopedia.asp?LanguageID=11&CountryID=19&Formula=&GasID=121&btnMolecule.x=15&btnMolecule.y=13&UNNumber=&EquivGasID=121&RD20=29&RD9=8&RD6=64&RD4=2&RD3=22&RD8=27&RD2=20&RD18=41&RD7=18&RD13=71&RD16=35&RD12=31&RD19=34&RD24=62&RD25=77&RD26=78&RD28=81&RD29=82
>>>
>>> -) I could not easily find info about the UV absorption
>>>    as far as I remember is slightly better than C4F10
>>>    (transparency threshold is lower)
>>>
>>> Paolo
>>
>>
>> Garth
>>