Difference between revisions of "PREX/CREX Dec 11 2017 11:00am EDT"
From PREX Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to searchCiprian Gal (talk | contribs) (Created page with "Back to Main Page >> PREX/CREX_Teleconferences previous meeting << >> PREX/CREX_Dec_18_2017_11:00am_EDT|following...") |
Ciprian Gal (talk | contribs) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
== Agenda == | == Agenda == | ||
| − | # | + | # Dump simulation - Adam on the extended dump [[https://prex.jlab.org/cgi-bin/DocDB/private/ShowDocument?docid=48 Slides]] [https://prex.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/File:DumpSimPresentation.pdf slidesOnWiki] |
| − | #* | + | #* AZ: the short dump does not have anything at the end (goes into air). |
| + | #* AZ: The results are for a detector along the beam line at the entrance of the dump tunnel | ||
| + | #* AZ: slide 7: R from center beam line for incoming electron. both sims have the same primary electron beam | ||
| + | #* AZ: slide 10: the difference between the two dump configurations with cuts are minimal | ||
| + | #* AZ: slide 12 looking at the events coming from DS of the Al door we see very small number of events (and energy) | ||
| + | #* AZ: slide 13-16: neil numbers don’t show any difference by the inclusion of the extended dump. The hall lid radiation increased due to hits coming directly from the water tank (this is not realistic because we don’t have the dirt around the dump). | ||
| + | #* AZ: the overflows in the energy spectra should be taken care of by the NEIL calculation which don’t show any difference. | ||
| + | #* BM: the intuition is water and depth (solid angle) provide enough shielding. | ||
| + | # Kent: Accelerator dump meeting | ||
| + | #* CG: we have two dump configurations that are being costed: donut increase + 45 cm concrete U shield (gives 37% of PREX 1 radiation for both PREX2+CREX) and fat pipe (gives 26% of PREX 1 radiation for both PREX2+CREX). They will give us an estimate by the end of Jan | ||
| + | #* KP: the fat pipe removes about 1/3 of the radiation for P2+C | ||
| + | #* KP: for the donut change they would be able to do it in-house, cut on the hall floor. but it may take more than 4 months. But replacing the pipe would be easier in terms of time budget. | ||
| + | #* CG: Keith W. has pointed out some additional details for the PREX1 configuration which I have to check in the simulation and update/rerun if needed. | ||
== Attendance == | == Attendance == | ||
| − | + | Bob M, Tyler K, Sanghwa P, Tao Y, Ciprian G, Caryn P, Ryan R, Silviu D, Jay B, Cameron C, Kent P, Seamus R, Adam Z, Victoria O, David A, Paul S, Paul K, Dustin M, | |
=== Excused: === | === Excused: === | ||
| + | KK | ||
Latest revision as of 12:38, 11 December 2017
Back to Main Page >> PREX/CREX_Teleconferences
previous meeting << >> following meeting
Logistic information
BlueJeans calling instructions: Toll-Free Number (U.S.& Canada): 888-240-2560 International toll number: 408-740-7256 Bluejeans CODE: 847 917 938 Bluejeans link: https://bluejeans.com/847917938 Offline room: CEBAF Center F227
Agenda
- Dump simulation - Adam on the extended dump [Slides] slidesOnWiki
- AZ: the short dump does not have anything at the end (goes into air).
- AZ: The results are for a detector along the beam line at the entrance of the dump tunnel
- AZ: slide 7: R from center beam line for incoming electron. both sims have the same primary electron beam
- AZ: slide 10: the difference between the two dump configurations with cuts are minimal
- AZ: slide 12 looking at the events coming from DS of the Al door we see very small number of events (and energy)
- AZ: slide 13-16: neil numbers don’t show any difference by the inclusion of the extended dump. The hall lid radiation increased due to hits coming directly from the water tank (this is not realistic because we don’t have the dirt around the dump).
- AZ: the overflows in the energy spectra should be taken care of by the NEIL calculation which don’t show any difference.
- BM: the intuition is water and depth (solid angle) provide enough shielding.
- Kent: Accelerator dump meeting
- CG: we have two dump configurations that are being costed: donut increase + 45 cm concrete U shield (gives 37% of PREX 1 radiation for both PREX2+CREX) and fat pipe (gives 26% of PREX 1 radiation for both PREX2+CREX). They will give us an estimate by the end of Jan
- KP: the fat pipe removes about 1/3 of the radiation for P2+C
- KP: for the donut change they would be able to do it in-house, cut on the hall floor. but it may take more than 4 months. But replacing the pipe would be easier in terms of time budget.
- CG: Keith W. has pointed out some additional details for the PREX1 configuration which I have to check in the simulation and update/rerun if needed.
Attendance
Bob M, Tyler K, Sanghwa P, Tao Y, Ciprian G, Caryn P, Ryan R, Silviu D, Jay B, Cameron C, Kent P, Seamus R, Adam Z, Victoria O, David A, Paul S, Paul K, Dustin M,
Excused:
KK
