Changeset 700 in ETALON for CLIO


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Jun 20, 2017, 11:19:31 AM (7 years ago)
Author:
hodnevuc
Message:
 
File:
1 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • CLIO/CLIO2017/main.tex

    r699 r700  
    1 \documentclass{article}
     1\documentclass[12pt]{article}
    22\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
    33\usepackage{graphicx}
     
    1313\usepackage{tcolorbox}
    1414\usepackage{lipsum}
     15
     16
     17\usepackage[top=1in, bottom=1.25in, left=1.25in, right=1.25in]{geometry}
     18
     19
     20
     21
     22
    1523\begin{document}
    1624
     
    2230
    2331\subsection{Data Acquisition}
    24 Data is taken with DAQ board with 250 ksps sampling rate. Python script (read\_plot\_data.py) Analyze single file with taken data and produce the the array of signals on chosen channels. Noise filtering is implemented inside script. We use simple FFT filtering by turning in zero high frequency component of modulus of FT of the signal. Depth of filtering could be chosen by user.
     32Data is taken with DAQ board with 250 ksps sampling rate. Python script (read\_ plot\_data.py) Analyze single file with taken data and produce the the array of signals on chosen channels. Noise filtering is implemented inside script. We use simple FFT filtering by turning in zero high frequency component of modulus of FT of the signal. Depth of filtering could be chosen by user.
    2533Signal is extracting from filtered data on falling edge of electron signal and computed as difference of signal amplitude at equidistant positions from the edge. This give amplitude on detector when bunch pass grating and with respect to the moment before.
    2634Except this electron signal amplitude is acquired as simple min. For this type of the signal we remove constant component with FFT and live other components as they are.
     
    3947\begin{figure}[h!]
    4048\centering
    41 \includegraphics[scale=1.7]{}
     49%\includegraphics[scale=1.7]{}
    4250\caption{}
    4351\label{}
     
    396404
    397405
    398 
     406Spectrum change as function of buncher power is presented on figure \ref{shsp2d} and \ref{shsp1d}. With low power of buncher, Its impossible to form good bunch for futher acceleration.
    399407
    400408\begin{figure}[!htb]
     
    404412  \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Spectrum2dBP.eps}
    405413  \caption{}
    406   \label{}
     414  \label{shsp2d}
    407415\end{subfigure}%
    408416\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
     
    410418  \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{SpectrumBP.eps}
    411419  \caption{}
    412   \label{}
    413 \end{subfigure}
    414 \caption{}
    415 \label{}
    416 \end{figure}
    417 
    418 
    419 
     420  \label{shsp1d}
     421\end{subfigure}
     422\caption{}
     423\label{}
     424\end{figure}
     425
     426
     427On figure \ref{bpff} presented interpolated and extrapolated Form factor. FWHM and FW0.1M not really depend from buncher power, but FW0.9M increase almost twice with decrease of buncher power. That indicate on bad compression.
    420428
    421429
     
    426434  \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{FFfitBP.eps}
    427435  \caption{}
    428   \label{}
     436  \label{bpff}
    429437\end{subfigure}%
    430438\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
     
    437445\label{}
    438446\end{figure}
    439 
     447Profile evolution is presented on figure \ref{profBP}
    440448\begin{figure}[!htb]
    441449\centering
     
    453461\end{subfigure}
    454462\caption{}
    455 \label{}
    456 \end{figure}
    457 
     463\label{profBP}
     464\end{figure}
     465\clearpage
    458466\section{Section phase}
    459 Using same method, we get:
     467Using same method, we obtain follow map for fitting coefficients (see fig. \ref{ampsp} and fig. \ref{evasp})
    460468
    461469\begin{figure}[!htb]
     
    465473  \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{AMP2dSP.eps}
    466474  \caption{}
    467   \label{}
     475  \label{ampsp}
    468476\end{subfigure}%
    469477\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
     
    471479  \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{EvaWSP2d.eps}
    472480  \caption{}
    473   \label{}
     481  \label{evasp}
    474482\end{subfigure}
    475483\caption{}
     
    555563\label{}
    556564\end{figure}
     565
     566\begin{tcolorbox}[colback=red!5,colframe=red!40!black,title=Take it into account!!!]
     567SEY for 44.2 MeV
     568\end{tcolorbox}
    557569\begin{figure}[!htb]
    558570\centering
     
    572584\label{}
    573585\end{figure}
    574 
    575586\begin{figure}[!htb]
    576587\centering
     
    591602\end{figure}
    592603
    593 
    594 
    595 
    596 
    597 
     604In this calculation was negleged change of SEY, but even with this assumption we see that profile didnt change a lot, as we espect. Second conclusion:
     605
     606\begin{tcolorbox}[colback=red!5,colframe=red!40!black,title=Make this study!!!]
     607Is current setup is sufficient  to study change of spectrum as function of bunch energy.
     608\end{tcolorbox}
     609
     610
     611\clearpage
    598612
    599613\section{Conclusion}
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.