Re: First draft

[Steven Clayton <smclayto@npl.uiuc.edu>]

Dear Brendan,

it looks like an excellent start!  Here are a few things I
notice:
1) Calib cN2 units (B21 and B23): should be ppm, not ppb.

2) Prod cN2 gas chrom. (row 23): is this really a max. value for
   run8?  It must depend on when the sample was taken, tending
   to decrease over the course of production data-taking (This
   is observed in the capture yield, anyway.)

3) Calib cN2 fit (row 21): you can also enter in my run8 results
   by just running the macro without changing file names.
   You can also run it on Tom's CalibN2 file:
   neutrino.npl.uiuc.edu:/scratch/Merged/Tom/CalibN2-mu-.root
   (I don't have his prod file, but mine may be close enough
   for this exercise.)  Tom's "best" histogram is named
   "Life_Detectors_25PP_study12".  You can drop it in the
   calib_cZ_fit.C macro and comment out my histo like this:
//***********************************
//  TFile fcalibN2("../HistFiles/pass11muminCalibN2MTA1.root");
//  TH1 *hcalibN2 = ((TH2*)fcalibN2.Get("hLifetime_Better_b120mm"))->ProjectionX();
  TFile fcalibN2("/scratch/Merged/Tom/CalibN2-mu-.root");
  TH1 *h = ((TH2*)fcalibN2.Get("Life_Detectors_25PP_study12"))->ProjectionX();
  TH1 *hcalibN2 = h->Rebin(32);
//***********************************

4) row 25, "% of Yield from N2" should read "Fraction of Yield from N2".
   or multiply the number by 100.

5) regarding O vs. Oeff: Oeff is just the transfer rate required to
   make the eps*Y_z agree with humidity sensor data, and not really
   motivated by literature, right?

Could you post your spreadsheet on a twiki page?

Thanks,
Steven

On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 02:16:54PM -0500, Brendan Kiburg wrote:
> Dear All,
>  Here is a preliminary (partial) compilation of the impurity table.  
> The first worksheet shows the values/errors/constants, and the second 
> worksheet shows references (where applicable).
> 
> I think I have summarized the run8 analyses in good depth so far, and I 
> have included the run9/10 nitrogen information.
> I still have more work to do with my water data, but there is a 
> preliminary run10 calculation which is still lacking the full kinetics fits.
> I also need to fulfill Steve's request regarding the Oxygen efficiency 
> based on his run 8 analysis.
> 
> My calculations tend to show that nitrogen only accounts for 3-4% of 
> the production yield from run8 (row 25), implying that water makes up a 
> quite large fraction of the total impurities.
> 
> Finally, I am unsure about which value to use for theoretical Y/conc. 
> for water.  In Tom's table I see yield per ppm for O and Oeff which vary 
> quite a bit.  I assume that the run10 concentrations are close enough to 
> run8 to allow me to use these values and that the missing deuterium 
> won't have a large effect.
> 
> Please send me questions/comments.
> 
> Regards,
> Brendan