Difference between revisions of "Se170063"
| Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
To begin, I have corrected the mixture to have a factor of 0.62, which is the mystery factor throwing of all of these analyses. The histogram is also weighted by the mass. The weight added to the histogram is | To begin, I have corrected the mixture to have a factor of 0.62, which is the mystery factor throwing of all of these analyses. The histogram is also weighted by the mass. The weight added to the histogram is | ||
| − | <math> h1 -> Fill(evt.Chan,\frac{1}{0.0523*0.62} </math> | + | <math> h1 -> Fill(evt.Chan,\frac{1}{0.0523*0.62}) </math> |
| − | So the true number of counts has indeed been weighted here. | + | So the true number of counts has indeed been weighted here. No w I want to try to test every different method that was suggested. So first I am going to weight the mixture by the mystery factor of 0.62, and leave my Gaussian fits as wide as they were previously. The gaussians will probably be made more compact if the mystery factor does not alleviate the problem. The first step is to find the number of counts within the window of interest. Below is the process I used to determine the number of counts and the error associated with it. First begin by plotting the histogram using the ROOT program Eff.C, which is shown below. |
=Runlist= | =Runlist= | ||
Revision as of 20:29, 23 October 2017
PAA_Selenium/Soil_Experiments#Selenium_Sample_Analysis
Sample Description
The sample was placed in an aluminum cylinder that was to be irradiated. The target components consisted of a nickel foil on the front of the cylinder with 2 pure selenium pellets under the foil, but still outside the cylinder. Inside the target there was burnt sagebrush ash, which was burned with a blowtorch, and selenium. Below are the masses of the components
Nickel Foil: 0.2783g
Outer Se Pellets: 0.0971g
Sage Ash: 0.5111g
Inner Se Pellets: 0.0523g
Energy
The Calibration for Detector A was done on the morning of 5/23/17 with the MPA software using the thorium rods (as the calibration was fairly close already) and the correction values were found to be Det A Intercept = -12.208800 slope =1.021270
Efficiency
Nickel Information
Activity and Half Life
Se170063 Activity And Half Life
Alternative Method
Se170063 Activity and HL Alternate
Corrected Alternative method
The files used for this analysis are in the directory /data/IAC/Se/May2017/5_25_17/Se_Activity_SysOffset_Mix
To begin, I have corrected the mixture to have a factor of 0.62, which is the mystery factor throwing of all of these analyses. The histogram is also weighted by the mass. The weight added to the histogram is
So the true number of counts has indeed been weighted here. No w I want to try to test every different method that was suggested. So first I am going to weight the mixture by the mystery factor of 0.62, and leave my Gaussian fits as wide as they were previously. The gaussians will probably be made more compact if the mystery factor does not alleviate the problem. The first step is to find the number of counts within the window of interest. Below is the process I used to determine the number of counts and the error associated with it. First begin by plotting the histogram using the ROOT program Eff.C, which is shown below.
Runlist
Table with dates and filename and locations on daq1