I'm a bit confused. Earlier today, Adrian told me he was getting 99%
efficiencies. Why is it now 71-75%? Obviously, there was either a
mistake in the first assessment or the second. Please advise me as
to what is really going on.
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Peter Karpius wrote:
> Added 91" of cable to TDC start - this improved efficiency from 71% to 75%
> but it is clearly not the whole story.
>
> tried adding more delay but this only made things worse
>
> noticed that the CS leading edge was bouncing back and forth between being
> coincident with T1 and being ~20nsec after T1 (phys trig). It was my
> understanding that we want T1 to precede CS by about 10 nsec - I spoke
> with Karen about this (has CS shifted?) Currently trying a run with T1
> delayed so that CS comes at about 10nsec after T1.
>
> Pete
>
>
-- John R. Calarco Dept. of Physics Univ. of New Hampshire Durham, NH 03824 phone: (603)862-2088 FAX: (603)862-2998 email: calarco@unh.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Feb 24 2014 - 14:07:28 EST