Bent Crystal Results to Bent Crystal Results to DateDate

Feb 26, 2007Feb 26, 2007

D. StillD. Still

Relative Positions of Crystal and Relative Positions of Crystal and E03HE03H

Relative position between Crystal and E03H

0

50

100

150

200

250

12-Feb 14-Feb 16-Feb 18-Feb 20-Feb 22-Feb 24-Feb 26-Feb

Date of studies

Po

siti

on

rea

din

gs

(mil

s)

cccp

e03h

Thought from DiscussionsThought from Discussions

Is there an effect on baking the strip Is there an effect on baking the strip crystal.crystal.

Should we request addition crystals Should we request addition crystals for possible use here. Maybe for possible use here. Maybe 150urad and ~400 urad.150urad and ~400 urad.

Total Work on SatTotal Work on Sat Finished Finished

scansscans

Scanned -28 Scanned -28 mils point.mils point.

Data w/ TEL Data w/ TEL offoff

Data w/ 1mm Data w/ 1mm bumpbump

Effect of TEL offEffect of TEL off

TEL off drops TEL off drops losses by X2.losses by X2.

Not sure if Not sure if this is a this is a problem.problem.

Results of scan from 20 to 46 Results of scan from 20 to 46 milsmils

LE0PIN Vs E0CCIW Feb 24 data E0CCIw from 20 to 46 mils

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

20 25 30 35 40 45

E0CCIW (mils)

LE

0PIN

(h

z)

t:le0pin 11 per. Mov. Avg. (t:le0pin)

Results of a 3urad scan from a Results of a 3urad scan from a 36x36 end of store study 9-30-36x36 end of store study 9-30-

20052005Crystal Collimator Angular Scan 3urad step

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

0 500 1000 1500 2000

Crystal Angle (urad)

Lo

ss (

hz)

t:le033c

t:e1l14c

Channel SignatureChannel Signature

Possible channel CCIW = -28.2 milsFeb 19,2007 data 2urad steps, Colls out, E03H in

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

relative angle (urads)

Lo

sses

(h

z)

t:le033c c:lostpc t:le0pin

20 per. Mov. Avg. (t:le033c) 20 per. Mov. Avg. (t:le0pin) 20 per. Mov. Avg. (c:lostpc)

154292138 urad

channel

Rescan of possible channel (-Rescan of possible channel (-28mils)28mils)

LE0PIN vs E0CCIWFeb 24 data rescan of possible channel at E0CCIW = -28 to -27

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

-47 -42 -37 -32 -27 -22 -17 -12 -7

t:e0cciw 10 per. Mov. Avg. (t:e0cciw)

Could not Confirm Could not Confirm ChannelingChanneling

Rescan to confirm channel at CCIW = -28.2 milsfrom data on Feb 19,2007

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

-30 -29 -28 -27 -26 -25 -24 -23 -22 -21

E0CCIW inchworm (mils)

LE

0PIN

BL

M

(hz)

t:le0pin 10 per. Mov. Avg. (t:le0pin)

Should have seen channeling but only saw large losses.

Maybe due to beam motion, angle does Not repeat?

Beam on Feb 20 different than Previous store. Crystal and E03HDid not go in as far.

Previous EOS

FEB 20 EOS

Summary of the Crystal Summary of the Crystal Studies:Studies:

Completed a 2 urad step size scan over the Completed a 2 urad step size scan over the entire range of the ~ 8000 urad of the entire range of the ~ 8000 urad of the inchworm. In part of that data on Feb 19 inchworm. In part of that data on Feb 19 saw a signature of channeling. saw a signature of channeling. Rescanned the area that was believed to Rescanned the area that was believed to be channeling (E0CCIW ` -28 mils) multiple be channeling (E0CCIW ` -28 mils) multiple times including different rates, inch worm times including different rates, inch worm approaches and a +1 mm vertical offset to approaches and a +1 mm vertical offset to the crystal. We could not reproduce any the crystal. We could not reproduce any other signature of channeling.other signature of channeling.

Summary continuedSummary continued Did make a scan with TEL 2 off and noticed that it Did make a scan with TEL 2 off and noticed that it

reduced the amount of loss noise on the crystal reduced the amount of loss noise on the crystal by about a factor of 2. This should not effect by about a factor of 2. This should not effect channeling. Also TEL was used during “O” channeling. Also TEL was used during “O” shaped measurements without problem only shaped measurements without problem only addition of noise.addition of noise.

Todd informed that the optical offset measured Todd informed that the optical offset measured before installation was 0 = 3.9 volts on the LVDT before installation was 0 = 3.9 volts on the LVDT which is about 2000 urad offset. There should still which is about 2000 urad offset. There should still be a enough inchworm angle to see channeling.be a enough inchworm angle to see channeling.

Attempts to make a horizontal angle bump would Attempts to make a horizontal angle bump would only lead to a small angle and we are not sure only lead to a small angle and we are not sure that alignment is the total problem.that alignment is the total problem.

This leaves making the bend angle and alignment This leaves making the bend angle and alignment measurements in the tunnel as the next best measurements in the tunnel as the next best ideas.ideas.

The Plan this Week:The Plan this Week:

Finish scanning the 8 mrad angular range of inchworm.Finish scanning the 8 mrad angular range of inchworm.

Investigate anything that looked like channeling.Investigate anything that looked like channeling.

8 mrad Angular Inchworm range

This is the signature we are looking for

Scanned last weekScanned this week

Looking for the channelLooking for the channelPossible channel CCIW = -28.2 mils

Feb 19, 2007 data 2 urad steps, Colls out, E03H in

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000

relative angle (urads)

Lo

sses

(h

z)

t:le033c c:lostpc t:le0pin

20 per. Mov. Avg. (t:le033c) 20 per. Mov. Avg. (t:le0pin) 20 per. Mov. Avg. (c:lostpc)