Hi Sara, Unfortunately, I am not a macro writer, and I know that macros have sometimes been recycled from earlier runs. Here is a possible source of confusion. Power supplies have a name. Magnets have a name. The power supply is connected to a magnet, and the names can be the same, but the names also can be different. (Things move around in our beamline, piE3. Things did not move around historically. There was no confusion when a power supply and a magnet had the same name, if things did not move around. Now there is an opportunity for confusion. In addition, both power supplies and magnets can fail and have to be replaced.) My notes show that the names are the same for power supplies and magnets through QSB72. After that they can be the same or they can be different. I believe that we kept the same magnets and power supplies for the summer, 2005 run and the fall, 2005 run. I attach both and xls and a pdf version of the file that I have for field to DAC. See if the magnet and power supply naming convention is the source of the confusion. The magnetSet entries are power supply names. The spreadsheet are magnet names. Incidently, both power supplies and magnets will have their own parameters that must be properly specified for the DAC to field to be correct. All of the necessary properties are in the spreadsheet. Regards, Paul Sara Knaack wrote: > Dear Peter and Paul, > > I have a copy of the .XLS spreadsheet which is supposed to convert > between fields and daq settings. I have an issue though. I'm > attempting to put together a series of Turtle and Transport files for > the Mucap tune(s) used last fall. When I compare the beam macro I see > different magnet names than in the spreadsheet, So much so I wonder I > should use the magnets toward the end of the list. The two are > consistent up until QSB72 and then the names are different in the > macro and spreadsheet. Is this indicating different magnets were used? > I also see one of the magnets is the WEN magnet setting, and that's > not on the spread sheet either. Is there any information on the other > magnets? Is this not as major an inconsistency as I first though? > Thanks so much. I'm not entirely sure how to proceed on this point. > The sheet says Summer 05, too, so it's recent as of last summer. > > magnetSet("QSB73", dacQSB73*scale); > magnetSet("QSB75", dacQSB75*scale); > magnetSet("WEN", dacWEN *scale); > magnetSet("QSD02", dacQSD02*scale); > magnetSet("QSC01", dacQSC01*scale); > magnetSet("AEK01", dacAEK01*scale) ; > > Is what I find in the macro, versus > > SEP > QSK54 > QSL55 > QSK52 > QSB73 > QSB74 > QSB61 > > > in the spreadsheet. > > Paul, > > Things are progressing here. The TPC was set back in place Friday > morning after as basic a repair as could be hoped for under the > circumstances, so that is being readied for run conditions, and the > APD's are ready for the resolution measurement. We're waiting on more > stable beam, however. > > Best wishes, see you soon, Peter, > > Sara > > -- Paul T. Debevec 405 Loomis Laboratory of Physics University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 1110 W. Green St. Urbana, IL 61801-3080 MC-704 Telephone: 217-333-0285 Fax: 217-333-1215 email: debevec@uiuc.edu
Attachment:
field_to_DAC&DAC-to_field.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
Attachment:
field_to_DAC&DAC-to_field.xls
Description: MS-Excel spreadsheet