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