LB 170048 Nickel Foil Consistency Check - Revision history

Brenleyt at 20:21, 21 February 2018

2018-02-21T20:21:00Z

Foretony at 19:01, 25 January 2018

2018-01-25T19:01:34Z

Brenleyt at 18:16, 25 January 2018

2018-01-25T18:16:21Z

Brenleyt at 19:37, 22 January 2018

2018-01-22T19:37:05Z

Brenleyt: /* Thin Window Method */

2018-01-22T19:26:41Z

Thin Window Method

Brenleyt: /* Thin Window Method */

2018-01-22T19:07:44Z

Thin Window Method

Brenleyt at 19:03, 22 January 2018

2018-01-22T19:03:08Z

Brenleyt at 16:07, 2 November 2017

2017-11-02T16:07:27Z

Brenleyt at 16:03, 2 November 2017

2017-11-02T16:03:54Z

Brenleyt at 16:02, 2 November 2017

2017-11-02T16:02:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:21, 21 February 2018
Line 81:		Line 81:


−	Note that these are not statistically the same, but the ratio between the activities of the front and rear nickel foil is 0.90 +/- 0.02	+	Note that these are not statistically the same, but the ratio between the activities of the front and rear nickel foil is 0.80 +/- 0.02

	Note that 170048 was a 10% soil and selenium mixture. This means that there would be more soil in the aluminum cylinder to attenuate the beam. This could be a reason why the ratio isn't closer to 1.		Note that 170048 was a 10% soil and selenium mixture. This means that there would be more soil in the aluminum cylinder to attenuate the beam. This could be a reason why the ratio isn't closer to 1.

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:01, 25 January 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~Since the Selenium activities are not matching predicted values, check nickel~~ foils from the front and rear ~~to try and get that the activity is~~ the ~~same~~. Below is a table of pictures and information from ROOT sessions. For each of these, the spectrum was weighted by the inverse of the mass. For the front foil the mass was 1.3310g and for the rear foil the mass was 1.2196g. If the background subtraction is negative, take the mean of the two numbers.	+	The activity of Nickel foils from the front and rear of the sample container were compared. Below is a table of pictures and information from ROOT sessions. For each of these, the spectrum was weighted by the inverse of the mass. For the front foil the mass was 1.3310g and for the rear foil the mass was 1.2196g. If the background subtraction is negative, take the mean of the two numbers.

	To find the error in the background, the expanded window's background was subtracted from the original window's background. The signal was found by integrating the gaussian over the original window with an adjusted amplitude, which has been background subtracted and fed into mathematica.		To find the error in the background, the expanded window's background was subtracted from the original window's background. The signal was found by integrating the gaussian over the original window with an adjusted amplitude, which has been background subtracted and fed into mathematica.

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:16, 25 January 2018
Line 82:		Line 82:

	Note that these are not statistically the same, but the ratio between the activities of the front and rear nickel foil is 0.90 +/- 0.02		Note that these are not statistically the same, but the ratio between the activities of the front and rear nickel foil is 0.90 +/- 0.02
		+
		+	Note that 170048 was a 10% soil and selenium mixture. This means that there would be more soil in the aluminum cylinder to attenuate the beam. This could be a reason why the ratio isn't closer to 1.

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:37, 22 January 2018
Line 81:		Line 81:


−	Note that these are not statistically the same.	+	Note that these are not statistically the same, but the ratio between the activities of the front and rear nickel foil is 0.90 +/- 0.02

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:26, 22 January 2018
Line 82:		Line 82:

	Note that these are not statistically the same.		Note that these are not statistically the same.
−
−
−	~~==Thin Window Method==~~
−	~~Repeat this analysis using the "thin window expand by sigma" method.~~
−
−	~~The information for the rear outer foil can be seen below~~
−
−	~~{\| border="3" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0"~~
−	~~\|\| \|\| 5/23/17 \|\| 5/26/17 \|\| 5/29/17 \|\| 5/30/17~~
−	\|-
−	~~\|\|Thin Window \|\|~~
−	\|-
−	\|\|Original Window \|\| [[File:170048 004 RearFoil 5 23 17.png\|100px]] \|\| [[File:170048 004 RearFoil Pos30 5 26 17.png\|100px]] \|\| [[File:170048 004 RearFoil Pos10 5 29 17.png\|100px]] \|\| [[File:170048 004 RearFoil Pos10 5 30 17.png\|100px]]
−	\|-
−	~~\|\|Expanded Window (by 1 Sigma)\|\|~~
−	\|-
−	~~\|\|Original Background (Integrated) \|\|~~
−	\|-
−	~~\|\|Integral of Thin Window \|\|~~
−	\|-
−	~~\|\|Integral of Expanded Window \|\|~~
−	\|-
−	~~\|\|Integral Difference \|\|~~
−	\|-
−	~~\|\|Counts \|\|~~
−	\|-
−	~~\|\|Signal (BG subtracted Counts) \|\|~~
−	\|-
−	~~\|\|Efficiency \|\| 8.9e^-5 +/- 1.8e^-6 \|\| 4.22e^-4 +/- 4.671e^-6 \|\| 0.0031 +/- 3.71e^-5 \|\|0.0031 +/- 3.71e^-5~~
−	\|-
−	~~\|\|.dat file entry \|\|~~
−	\|-
−	\|}

@@ Line 92: / Line 92: @@
 || || 5/23/17 || 5/26/17 || 5/29/17 || 5/30/17
 |-
 ||Original Window  || [[File:170048 004 RearFoil 5 23 17.png|100px]] || [[File:170048 004 RearFoil Pos30 5 26 17.png|100px]] || [[File:170048 004 RearFoil Pos10 5 29 17.png|100px]] || [[File:170048 004 RearFoil Pos10 5 30 17.png|100px]]
 |-
-||Expanded Window ||
+||Expanded Window (by 1 Sigma)||
 |-
-||BG Average ||
+||Original Background (Integrated) ||
 |-
-||Integral of Original Window ||
+||Integral of Thin Window ||
 |-
 ||Integral of Expanded Window ||

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:03, 22 January 2018
Line 82:		Line 82:

	Note that these are not statistically the same.		Note that these are not statistically the same.
		+
		+
		+	==Thin Window Method==
		+	Repeat this analysis using the "thin window expand by sigma" method.
		+
		+	The information for the rear outer foil can be seen below
		+
		+	{\| border="3" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0"
		+	\|\| \|\| 5/23/17 \|\| 5/26/17 \|\| 5/29/17 \|\| 5/30/17
		+	\|-
		+	\|\|Original Window \|\| [[File:170048 004 RearFoil 5 23 17.png\|100px]] \|\| [[File:170048 004 RearFoil Pos30 5 26 17.png\|100px]] \|\| [[File:170048 004 RearFoil Pos10 5 29 17.png\|100px]] \|\| [[File:170048 004 RearFoil Pos10 5 30 17.png\|100px]]
		+	\|-
		+	\|\|Expanded Window \|\|
		+	\|-
		+	\|\|Original Background (Integrated) \|\|
		+	\|-
		+	\|\|Expanded Window Background (Integrated) \|\|
		+	\|-
		+	\|\|BG Average \|\|
		+	\|-
		+	\|\|Integral of Original Window \|\|
		+	\|-
		+	\|\|Integral of Expanded Window \|\|
		+	\|-
		+	\|\|Integral Difference \|\|
		+	\|-
		+	\|\|Counts \|\|
		+	\|-
		+	\|\|Signal (BG subtracted Counts) \|\|
		+	\|-
		+	\|\|Efficiency \|\| 8.9e^-5 +/- 1.8e^-6 \|\| 4.22e^-4 +/- 4.671e^-6 \|\| 0.0031 +/- 3.71e^-5 \|\|0.0031 +/- 3.71e^-5
		+	\|-
		+	\|\|.dat file entry \|\|
		+	\|-
		+	\|}

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:07, 2 November 2017
Line 79:		Line 79:

	The activity of the rear foil (170048-004) is 385325.23 +/- 6487.72 Hz		The activity of the rear foil (170048-004) is 385325.23 +/- 6487.72 Hz
		+
		+
		+	Note that these are not statistically the same.

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:03, 2 November 2017
Line 78:		Line 78:
	Now since the rear foil's time stamp has the initial measurement of the front foil as 0 on the t-axis, we shouldn't need to time correct this either.		Now since the rear foil's time stamp has the initial measurement of the front foil as 0 on the t-axis, we shouldn't need to time correct this either.

−	The activity of the rear foil (170048-004) is	+	The activity of the rear foil (170048-004) is 385325.23 +/- 6487.72 Hz

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:02, 2 November 2017
Line 74:		Line 74:
	Now we can find the initial activity of each of the foils. There is no time correction needed for 170048-003 as its first measurement is set to t = 0. So we can find the activity with		Now we can find the initial activity of each of the foils. There is no time correction needed for 170048-003 as its first measurement is set to t = 0. So we can find the activity with

−	~~<math>~~	+	The activity of the front foil (170048-003) is 428347.47 +/- 6766.18 Hz
		+
		+	Now since the rear foil's time stamp has the initial measurement of the front foil as 0 on the t-axis, we shouldn't need to time correct this either.
		+
		+	The activity of the rear foil (170048-004) is