AIDA
GELINA
BRIKEN
nToF
CRIB
ISOLDE
CIRCE
nTOFCapture
DESPEC
DTAS
EDI_PSA
179Ta
CARME
StellarModelling
DCF
K40
ISOLDE
Draft saved at 00:00:00
Fields marked with
*
are required
Entry time:
Thu Oct 23 08:19:36 2025
Author
*
:
Subject
*
:
> --original email text-- > Using Claudia's code, I added a layer of Al foil before the heavy ion > silicon detector. The attached plots correspond to the heavy ion > portion of fig 3(a) in the proposal. Thus it only uses ground-state > transitions and doesn't account for geometry or efficiency etc. I opt > to show only the highest and lowest beam energies for each simulation. > > As I said before, something between 10 and 20 um of Al was likely to > be the correct choice, which is confirmed. 10 um is almost to thin to > guarantee the signals are below 200 MeV, while for 20 um we start > having issues of detecting the lowest energy recoils for the low > energy run. > > We can discuss the selection in more detail at the next meeting, but > most probably we can just use some kitchen foil, adopting whatever its > thickness of 13 to 15 um depending what we find. > > The attached file starts with no degrader, then adds 10 um Al, and 1 > um Al steps up to 20 um. > > --Updated 2 Oct to include 5 um ~ 10 um-- > > As ~185 MeV is the maximum energy, but the gain resistors may vary by up to ~10%, then the 'maximium safe energy' is about 160 MeV. This we can get for the highest energy run > with 15 um Al (we have it in stock); however, then the lowest energy case becomes about 30 MeV, or less than 1 MeV/u, which may be an issue for straggling etc. So we will > prepare two foils, as it is seen even for the low energy beam, it comes almost to 190 MeV without a degrader foil. In fact, any foil thickness between 5 ~ 10 um may be okay > (we have 8 um in stock). > > Using also all 5 energies (212, 236, 260, 277, 295) then we see that the two lowest energies are okay for 8 um foil, and the three highest energies are suitable for 15 um foil. > > NB: 19 Oct I deleted 15 um (previously attachment 2) and now it is attachment 8. > > Note that the beam energy order (right to left, left to right) differs between the first PDF and the second two. > > --4 Oct-- > Existing 8um Al foils are not the right size. Check 6 um and 10 um in detail, as we have more stock of these two. Attached. > > --12 Oct-- > > Attachments 5-7 show the 59Cu energy after the degrader foils for elastic (12C,12C) scattering. Foil thicknesses are 6, 10, 15 um of Al, respectively. Note that the angular > range shows up to 15 degrees (larger than the case of the (p,a)).
Encoding
:
HTML
ELCode
plain
Suppress Email notification
Attachment 1:
Drop attachments here...
Draft saved at 00:00:00
ELOG V3.1.3-7933898