Miniproposals

Miniproposal: 259 Date Filed: 4/5/2000 Title: MSE Calibration First Author: Norton Bretz Session Leader: Steve Scott (shots 1-29) Session Leader: Howard Yuh (shots 1-29)

Engineering Operator Run Comment

2004 MSE Beam Calibration; SL: Scott/Yuh PO: Parker EO: Dekow/Fitz/Parki

Session Leader Plans

Physics Operators Plans

Session Leader Summaries

Entered: Jul 7 2004 03:49:02:273PM

Author: Howard Yuh

Run Summary: MP#314 MSE Calibration Note: On the three MSE fiber bundles which were moved last Thursday to make the MSE spectra measurement, signals were weak compared to shots from the previous MSE calibration campaign, 1030521, by a factor of (3 ~ 5). Rotation of optical fibers on mse channels did not affect this. Score card: 22 useful shots for MSE calibration 2 data test (008, 025) 2 beam faults or too short to use (012, 021) 2 shots at nonstandard Bt, one of which provides useful data to MSE Overall Progress: EF scan at 2.7 Tesla: fully completed TF scan: fully completed EF scan at 5.4 Tesla: got most of what we wanted (declare success) Temperature Scan not started EF scan at 8.0 Tesla: not started Run plan accomplished the following: Condi- TF EF4 EF3 Shot tion (T) (kA) (kA) EF scan at 2.7 Tesla 002 1A 2.7 0 0 003 1B 2.7 0 0 004 2 2.7 -5 0 slight beam fault at the end 005 3 2.7 -3 0 006 4 2.7 3 0 007 5 2.7 5 1(0.6) 009 -- 5.4 0 0 Bt was raised to evaluate a TF monitoring problem, but MSE did not adjust the filter temperatures accordingly, so the filter temperatures are not correct for this shot. However, this makes for an interesting comparison to condition 18 = shot 23. 010 -- 5.4 5 4(1) On this shot also, the BT was 5.4 Tesla while MSE filters were tuned for 2.7 Tesla. Unfortunately we did not get the demanded EF, so this cannot be compared with other shots at 5.4 Tesla to make an ersatz temperature scan. 011 -- 2.7 5 4(0.6) Got less EF than we demanded, but this is still a valid member of the scan. 012 6A 2.7 5 4 beam too short 013 6B 2.7 5 4 014 7 2.7 6 5 TF Scan (note: there was some deviation between demand EF and actual EF on these shots) 015 8 2.7 0 0 016 9 2.7 2.21 2.65 017 10 3.6 0 0 018 11 3.6 2.95 3.54 beam a little short 019 12 4.5 0 0 020 13 4.5 3.69 4.43 021 16 6.1 0 0 25ms beam 022 17 6.1 5 6 EF Scan at 5.4 Tesla 023 18 5.4 0 0 024 19 5.4 -5 0 026 24 5.4 5 6 027 22 5.4 5 1(1.46) 028 21 5.4 3 0 029 23 5.4 5 4(4.35) For EF4 and EF3, numbers in parantheses after the desired values indicate the actually values we got

Physics Operator Summaries

Entered: Jul 7 2004 04:36:48:613PM

Author: Ron Parker

Physop Summary for January 21, 2004 Engineering Setup and Run Plan 1040121 Purpose: 2004 MSE Beam Calibration Session leaders: Scott and Yuh Physop: Parker Engineering Setup: Power Supplies as on 1030521 Fill B top with 6 psi D2, Hybrid Enabled All other gas valves Hybrid DISABLED DNB gate valve Enabled All other diagnostic valves DISABLED Run Plan In this run, the diagnostic neutral beam will be fired into the torus backfilled to a pressure of ~ 1.8 mTorr. Both TF and EF fields will be energized and the currents scanned as the run proceeds. A table of conditions proposed for each shot is provided below: Shot# TF(T) EF3(kA) EF4(kA) 1 2.7 0 0 2 2.7 -5 0 3 2.7 -3 0 4 2.7 3 0 5 2.7 5 1 6 2.7 5 4 7 2.7 5 6 8 2.7 0 0 9 2.7 2.21 2.65 10 3.6 0 0 11 3.6 2.95 3.54 12 4.5 0 0 13 4.5 3.69 4.43 14 5.4 0 0 15 5.4 4.43 5.31 16 6.1 0 0 17 6.1 5 6 18 5.4 0 0 19 5.4 -5 0 20 5.4 -3 0 21 5.4 3 0 22 5.4 5 1 23 5.4 5 4 24 5.4 5 6 25 2.7 0 0 26 2.7 0 0 27 2.7 0 0 28 2.7 0 0 Computer problems limited the number of shots to 29, a few of which were no power shots. One non-issue came up, namely an apparent heating of a TF turn. Investigation using real time data acqusition revealed that this was not real. In any event, coupled with an operator error or two, plus an occasional shot in which the beam pulse was too short, the number of successful calibration shots was limited to 21 of the planned 28 shots. (Also the run started about about 1.25 hours late due to computer problems.) The good news is that there were no disruptions, no fizzles and no duds as all of the shots were beam into gas for MSE calibration.

Session Leader Comments

Physics Operator Comments
Jan 21 2004 09:14:43:760AM	1040121001	Ron Parker	There is a delay due to malfunction of a widget used to write engineering data to the tree. NOTE: THE PROGRAM FOR EF CURRENTS GIVEN IN THE RUN PLAN IS INCORRECT. COILS EF3 AND EF4 WERE INTERCHANGED, THUS CURRENTS LISTED FOR EF3 ARE THOSE FOR EF4 AND VICE-VERSA.
Jan 21 2004 10:20:44:893AM	1040121002	Ron Parker	Shot 1 was a test pulse, shot 2 had TF at 2.7 (75 kA) pulse as requested. There were no PF fields programmed for that pulse. This shot will be repeated with somewhat higher pressure -- 1.5-2 mT vs 1.4 mT on that shot.
Jan 21 2004 10:32:44:713AM	1040121003	Ron Parker	Shot 3 was a repeat of 2, with the fill pressure increased to 1.6 mT. Next shot: TF = 75 kA, EF4 = - 5 kA, EF3 = 0.
Jan 21 2004 10:46:56:937AM	1040121004	Ron Parker	Shot 4 was fine. Notice that G-side pressure does not read properly until EF4 is off. Nest shot: TF = 75 kA, EF4 = -3 kA, EF3 = 0.
Jan 21 2004 10:54:11:767AM	1040121005	Ron Parker	Shot 5 went as programmed in the plan. Next: TF = 75 kA, EF4 = 3, EF 3 = 0.
Jan 21 2004 11:10:44:290AM	1040121006	Ron Parker	Shot 6 OK. Next: Tf = 75 kA, EF4 = 5 kA, EF3 = 1.0 kA
Jan 21 2004 11:45:12:927AM	1040121007	Ron Parker	Shot 7 was OK. Next shot will be a test shot. There is concern about a few high TF joint resistances at these low currents
Jan 21 2004 12:04:00:107PM	1040121008	Ron Parker	This was a no power shot. A few high joint resistances persist. Gary is going over the data with Jim Irby. There will be a short delay while the offending turn is instrumented. The next shot will be a 5.4 T shot, no PF fields. This corresponds to shot 18 in the run plan. If all is OK, we'll return to shot 6 in the run plan.
Jan 21 2004 12:15:59:487PM	1040121009	Ron Parker	Shot 9 was OK. The resistance of the suspicious joint was measured in real time and was ~ 1.6 microohm, i.e., normal. Next shot: TF = 75 kA, EF4 = 5 kA, EF3 = 4 kA (Shot 6 on rumplan).
Jan 21 2004 12:38:49:730PM	1040121010	Ron Parker	Shot 10 was again 5.4 T (must have been operator error.) We'll try it again, this time at 2.7 T (Still shot 6 on runplan)
Jan 21 2004 12:44:37:217PM	1040121011	Ron Parker	Shot 11 was not programmed properly for EF3. Next shot will finally be correctly programmed for shot 6 on the run plan.
Jan 21 2004 01:03:56:753PM	1040121012	Ron Parker	Shot 12 had proper fields for shot 6 on run plan, but beam pulse was not sufficiently long. The shot will be repeated.
Jan 21 2004 01:20:09:707PM	1040121013	Ron Parker	Shot 13 was satisfactory, finally getting the data for shot 6 on run plan. Next shot: TF = 2.7 T, EF4 = 5 kA, EF3 = 6 kA
Jan 21 2004 01:50:21:640PM	1040121014	Ron Parker	Shot 14 was OK, accomplishing shot 7 on shot plan. with next shot, we'll begin TF scan, starting with shot 8 on shot plan. We'll also increase the fill pressure by ~ 10%.
Jan 21 2004 02:10:22:257PM	1040121015	Ron Parker	Shot 15 went OK, Shot 8 in shot plan. Next shot: Shot 9 in shot plan (TF = 2.7 T, EF4 = 2.21 kA, EF3 = 2.65 kA)
Jan 21 2004 02:13:54:040PM	1040121016	Ron Parker	Shot 16 went well. Next Shot: TF = 3.6 T, EF3 and EF4 = 0.
Jan 21 2004 02:30:08:373PM	1040121017	Ron Parker	Shot 17 was OK. next shot: TF = 3.6 T, EF4 = 2.95 kA, EF3 = 3.54 kA
Jan 21 2004 02:56:42:463PM	1040121018	Ron Parker	Shot 18 was OK, so shot 11 of the shot plan obtained. Next shot: TF = 4.5 T, EF4 and EF3 = 0.
Jan 21 2004 02:58:37:603PM	1040121019	Ron Parker	Shot 19 was OK, shot 12 of run plan obtained, Next shot: TF = 4.5 T, EF4 = 3.69 kA, EF3 = 4.43 kA
Jan 21 2004 03:07:15:937PM	1040121020	Ron Parker	Shot 20 was OK, accomplishing shot 13 of run plan. Next shot: TF = 6.1 T, EF4 and EF3 = 0 (Shot 16 of run plan).
Jan 21 2004 03:20:28:580PM	1040121021	Ron Parker	Shot 21 was OK, accomplishing shot 16 on run plan. Next: BT = 6.1 (actually it was 6.0 due to TF current limit) EF4 = 5.0, EF3 = 6.0
Jan 21 2004 03:32:48:540PM	1040121022	Ron Parker	Shot 22 was OK, so shot 17 of the runplan is in the bank. Next shot: TF = 5.4 T, EF4 and EF3 = 0 (Shot 18 of runplan)
Jan 21 2004 03:52:50:187PM	1040121023	Ron Parker	Shot 23 was OK. Next shot: BT = 5.4 T, EF4 = -5.0 kA, EF3 =0. (Shot 19 of run plan)
Jan 21 2004 04:12:05:790PM	1040121024	Ron Parker	Shot 24 was OK. Next: TF = 5.4 T, EF4 = 5 kA, EF3 = 6 kA This is shot 24 on the shot plan. Ooops, an init failure occurred. This shot will be a no-power shot.
Jan 21 2004 04:27:42:607PM	1040121025	Ron Parker	Shot 25 was a no power shot. Shot 26 will be shot 24 on the shot plan.
Jan 21 2004 04:31:32:750PM	1040121026	Ron Parker	Shot 26 was OK. next shot: BT = 5.4 T, EF4 = 5 kA, EF3 = 1 kA (Shot 22 on shot plan)
Jan 21 2004 04:47:01:130PM	1040121027	Ron Parker	Shot 27 was OK. Next: BT = 5.4 T, EF4 = 3 kA, EF3 = 0. (Shot 21 on runplan)
Jan 21 2004 05:25:18:503PM	1040121028	Ron Parker	Shot 28 was OK and corresponded to shot 21 on runplan.
Jan 21 2004 05:27:38:787PM	1040121029	Ron Parker	Shot 29 ran well and corresponded to shot 23 on the shot plan. (BT =5.4 T, EF4 = 5 kA, EF3 = 4 kA.)

Engineering Operator Comments
Shot	Time	Type	Status	Comment
1	08:24:21:287AM	Test	Ok
2	10:10:14:983AM	Test	Ok
3	10:24:49:787AM	Test	Ok
4	10:37:18:777AM	Test	Ok
5	10:49:52:237AM	Test	Ok
6	11:04:43:520AM	Test	Ok
7	11:18:50:150AM	Test	Ok
8	11:32:57:297AM	Test	Ok	TF Scanner Test
9	12:07:41:827PM	Test	Ok
10	12:21:09:427PM	Test	Ok
11	12:39:28:823PM	Test	Ok
12	12:52:40:267PM	Test	Ok
13	01:06:08:670PM	Test	Ok
14	01:39:49:417PM	Test	Ok
15	01:52:57:017PM	Test	Ok
16	02:07:01:163PM	Test	Ok
17	02:23:04:073PM	Test	Ok
18	02:35:49:797PM	Test	Ok
19	02:48:34:053PM	Test	Ok
20	03:01:05:637PM	Test	Ok
21	03:14:15:220PM	Test	Ok	TF only
22	03:27:05:003PM	Test	Ok	TF, EF3, & EF4
23	03:43:52:683PM	Test	Ok	TF Only
24	03:56:24:640PM	Test	Ok	TF & EF4 only
25	04:09:01:740PM	Test	Ok	no power shot, hybrid hardware errors
26	04:28:01:293PM	Test	Ok	TF, EF3, & EF4
27	04:40:29:860PM	Test	Ok	TF, EF3, & EF4
28	04:53:13:490PM	Test	Ok	TF & EF4 only
29	05:05:48:760PM	Test	Ok