Difference between revisions of "Meeting 22 January 2019"

From Cuawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
'''ACTION ITEMS'''
 +
 +
* Preliminary Proposal
 +
::* Project description: Dustin will send a writeup on Oxford work - fold in the description
 +
::* Budget updates: Igor will send info on tungsten (see his email from 1/22/19), Dustin will send numbers for target based on Oxford experience
 +
::* Science figures: Gabriel will try to optimize figures, e.g. for RCS try a multi-panel figure that illustrates that with CPS can take data in a region where theoretical uncertainty is large. For TCS need to project why CFF is important and why one needs these four components. Dustin will write a paragraph on this.
 +
::* PEP: aim for 1-2 sentences to address each point in the list, meet during Hall A/C meeting to go over details
 +
::* Bio sketches: Gabriel will send a helpful script for extracting collaborator info from databases
 +
 +
* Article
 +
::* Take David's cleaned up tech document and see what sections to port to the article
 +
 +
 +
'''Discussion Details'''
 +
 +
* Discussion prelim proposal/article draft sections
 +
::* FOM figure contains only polarized target data, includes 2008 Mainz point from Igor, note that HIGS and SOLID are the same bar
 +
 +
* Budget estimate
 +
::* Target estimate based on C. Keith's estimate, aims to have largest possible opening (new), recycle existing equipment, but replace aging pumps, separate magnets for longitudinal and transverse configurations
 +
::* Dustin has a writeup from Oxford on cryogen-free solution, transversely polarized magnet, can rotate sideways and vertically, traditional design with smaller apertures
 +
::* for tungsten figure used $3.5M here
 +
::* tungsten inserts updates figure (1/22/19) is $122k
 +
::* Target numbers - include Dustin's numbers based on Oxford
 +
::* Tungsten powder - see Igor's email update
 +
 +
* Science figures: RCS and TCS
 +
::* RCS
 +
::::*in general good to show more points do demonstrate that can do more with CPS and gives credence to FOM
 +
::::* need to optimize to illustrate how much more range and how difficult the measurement is
 +
::::* Possible improvement: make multi-panel figure, e.g. for low and high t
 +
::* TCS
 +
::::* make unique piece jump out more
 +
::::* in general, why are CFF important and why do we need these four components - goes back to EM and electron scattering from a moving quark
 +
::::* make connection to: with new CPS technique can measure very small cross sections in this new era and now can do real electron scattering from moving quark
 +
 +
* PEP
 +
::* template with principles that regular DOE projects have
 +
::* scope similar to SBS, DIRC, etc. - projects at JLab
 +
::* aim to explain in 1-2 sentences for each point what will be done
 +
::* budget profile - use budget and required time for each piece
 +
 +
 +
* Discussion Article Draft
 +
::* David H sent updated version
 +
::* Use the cleaned up version and see what sections to port into/merge with the section drafts
 +
::* aim for more discussion at 1 February collaboration meeting
 +
 +
 +
 
'''Discussion Material'''
 
'''Discussion Material'''
  
Line 6: Line 56:
  
 
* (Bogan, C. Keith, ...) [https://wiki.jlab.org/cuawiki/images/5/59/CPS_cost_v2.pdf Budget estimate]
 
* (Bogan, C. Keith, ...) [https://wiki.jlab.org/cuawiki/images/5/59/CPS_cost_v2.pdf Budget estimate]
 +
::* (Igor) [https://wiki.jlab.org/cuawiki/images/5/51/Tungsten-density-and-cost.pdf Information on Tungsten]
  
 
* (Gabriel) Science Figures
 
* (Gabriel) Science Figures

Revision as of 09:07, 23 January 2019

ACTION ITEMS

  • Preliminary Proposal
  • Project description: Dustin will send a writeup on Oxford work - fold in the description
  • Budget updates: Igor will send info on tungsten (see his email from 1/22/19), Dustin will send numbers for target based on Oxford experience
  • Science figures: Gabriel will try to optimize figures, e.g. for RCS try a multi-panel figure that illustrates that with CPS can take data in a region where theoretical uncertainty is large. For TCS need to project why CFF is important and why one needs these four components. Dustin will write a paragraph on this.
  • PEP: aim for 1-2 sentences to address each point in the list, meet during Hall A/C meeting to go over details
  • Bio sketches: Gabriel will send a helpful script for extracting collaborator info from databases
  • Article
  • Take David's cleaned up tech document and see what sections to port to the article


Discussion Details

  • Discussion prelim proposal/article draft sections
  • FOM figure contains only polarized target data, includes 2008 Mainz point from Igor, note that HIGS and SOLID are the same bar
  • Budget estimate
  • Target estimate based on C. Keith's estimate, aims to have largest possible opening (new), recycle existing equipment, but replace aging pumps, separate magnets for longitudinal and transverse configurations
  • Dustin has a writeup from Oxford on cryogen-free solution, transversely polarized magnet, can rotate sideways and vertically, traditional design with smaller apertures
  • for tungsten figure used $3.5M here
  • tungsten inserts updates figure (1/22/19) is $122k
  • Target numbers - include Dustin's numbers based on Oxford
  • Tungsten powder - see Igor's email update
  • Science figures: RCS and TCS
  • RCS
  • in general good to show more points do demonstrate that can do more with CPS and gives credence to FOM
  • need to optimize to illustrate how much more range and how difficult the measurement is
  • Possible improvement: make multi-panel figure, e.g. for low and high t
  • TCS
  • make unique piece jump out more
  • in general, why are CFF important and why do we need these four components - goes back to EM and electron scattering from a moving quark
  • make connection to: with new CPS technique can measure very small cross sections in this new era and now can do real electron scattering from moving quark
  • PEP
  • template with principles that regular DOE projects have
  • scope similar to SBS, DIRC, etc. - projects at JLab
  • aim to explain in 1-2 sentences for each point what will be done
  • budget profile - use budget and required time for each piece


  • Discussion Article Draft
  • David H sent updated version
  • Use the cleaned up version and see what sections to port into/merge with the section drafts
  • aim for more discussion at 1 February collaboration meeting


Discussion Material

  • (Gabriel) Science Figures
  • Proposal Links: