Difference between revisions of "PREX/CREX Thursday, May 22, 2014 10:00am EDT"
From PREX Wiki
(→Agenda) |
|||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
<br/> | <br/> | ||
Present:<br/> | Present:<br/> | ||
| − | + | Seamus, Dustin, Bob, Kent, Paul, Nickie and Guido | |
== Minutes == | == Minutes == | ||
| + | |||
| + | * In our simulations we see target as not the primary source of high energy neutrons when the geometry is included. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Empirically, the nuclear blow-up mechanism that Pavlo mention could be a photon/electron QE scattering with heavy nucleus where there is an additional neutron coming out. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * We do not see this in our simulation and Dustin will do a Lead target simulation with MCNPX code to compare Geant4 result. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ** These high energy neutrons could be seen as dominant with no geometry included in the simulation. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Show results from elog 2946 and 2919 to Pavlo to get his feedback. Eventually we have to see some results from rad-con group about their simulation claims and which generators they are using. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Bob is combing through the PREX-I time-line to get an idea about radiation issues. He will also look at APEX and DVCS which were experiments ran after the PREX to see any long term increase in failure rates. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * We need to have an estimate of how much coulombs used for PREX-I data. Then look at PREX-II estimates with better acceptance to see how much beam-time we need to reach there. These calculations were probably done before it just going through again in a PREX meeting. My crude back of the envelope calculation says we only need to go over twice beam-time to reach the PREX-II goal. | ||
| + | |||
== Misc.== | == Misc.== | ||
| Line 21: | Line 36: | ||
=== TO DO Lists === | === TO DO Lists === | ||
| + | * We need to have an estimate of how much coulombs used for PREX-I data and an estimate for PREX-II to determine effectively how much more beam time we will use. | ||
* Have a optic calibration run plan (discussed in 01/16/2014 meeting) | * Have a optic calibration run plan (discussed in 01/16/2014 meeting) | ||
* It would be nice to have real-time viewer for optics studies in commissioning (disussed in 01/16/2014 meeting) | * It would be nice to have real-time viewer for optics studies in commissioning (disussed in 01/16/2014 meeting) | ||
Latest revision as of 11:11, 22 May 2014
Link to the Meeting page PREX/CREX Teleconferences
Last meeting: PREX/CREX Thursday, May 15, 2014 10:00am EDT
The teleconference info is as follows:
Phone #: 1-866-740-1260
Code: 6931422
Contents
Agenda
Updates from Rakitha : High energy neutrons, follow up from last week elog-2946
Update from Bob : PREX-I Timeline
Present:
Seamus, Dustin, Bob, Kent, Paul, Nickie and Guido
Minutes
- In our simulations we see target as not the primary source of high energy neutrons when the geometry is included.
- Empirically, the nuclear blow-up mechanism that Pavlo mention could be a photon/electron QE scattering with heavy nucleus where there is an additional neutron coming out.
- We do not see this in our simulation and Dustin will do a Lead target simulation with MCNPX code to compare Geant4 result.
- These high energy neutrons could be seen as dominant with no geometry included in the simulation.
- Show results from elog 2946 and 2919 to Pavlo to get his feedback. Eventually we have to see some results from rad-con group about their simulation claims and which generators they are using.
- Bob is combing through the PREX-I time-line to get an idea about radiation issues. He will also look at APEX and DVCS which were experiments ran after the PREX to see any long term increase in failure rates.
- We need to have an estimate of how much coulombs used for PREX-I data. Then look at PREX-II estimates with better acceptance to see how much beam-time we need to reach there. These calculations were probably done before it just going through again in a PREX meeting. My crude back of the envelope calculation says we only need to go over twice beam-time to reach the PREX-II goal.
Misc.
- From Last Meeting
- Beam parasitic studies
TO DO Lists
- We need to have an estimate of how much coulombs used for PREX-I data and an estimate for PREX-II to determine effectively how much more beam time we will use.
- Have a optic calibration run plan (discussed in 01/16/2014 meeting)
- It would be nice to have real-time viewer for optics studies in commissioning (disussed in 01/16/2014 meeting)
