I'd suggest that we use the design value for those fields that
affect the configuration and are not directly input in the analysis.
Examples are: beam energy, blast current, holding field direction and value
The checklist is a way to mostly sort out data and essentially all the
fields in the checklist are configuration variables. Other parameters are
instead measured every second in the data.
> Hi Tancredi,
> >
> > Au contraire, in the run by run checklist, people should bother *not* to
> > submit entries such as holding field angle = -1.4 deg since that is clearly
> > meant to be 0 degrees and in the long run, having fancy (meaningless) numbers
> > will only make the run number search more difficult.
> > Who would have thought that (today, next year) by searching "runs with
> > H.F. parallel to the beam line" I'd have missed most of the runs from
> > this weekend ?
> >
> a good old problem. Do we fill in "Demand values" or "Measured values"?
> As "demand values" will probably not help in any analysis of true data,
> one would rather like to have "measured values". But then I wonder why
> human beings have to do it (as a source of mistakes) and why it can't be
> automized. Or we'd better have both DV and MV in this list.
>
> An angle of -1.4 could be recognized as "parallel" e.g. by the comparison
> abs(theta) < 2.
>
> Michael
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Feb 24 2014 - 14:07:29 EST