2003 MSE Calibration: Preliminary Analysis

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Proposal to Use Metallic Mirrors for MSE Continued February 10, 2003 S. D. Scott PPPL.
Advertisements

GOME-2 polarisation data and products L.G. Tilstra (1,2), I. Aben (1), P. Stammes (2) (1) SRON; (2) KNMI GSAG #42, EUMETSAT,
Polarization Angle Calibration by the Wiregrid rotation Osamu Tajima (KEK) Presented by Hogan Nguyen (FNAL)
ASC XP-823 Error Field Correction and Long Pulse J.E. Menard, S.P. Gerhardt Part 1 Determine the source of, and optimal correction for, the observed n=3.
METO 621 Lesson 5. Natural broadening The line width (full width at half maximum) of the Lorentz profile is the damping parameter, . For an isolated.
(FEA) Analysis P J Smith University of Sheffield 27 th November 2008.
PI laser jitter measurements Data taken on 11 th April 2013.
S. White, LBS 17 May Van Der Meer Scans: Preliminary Observations.
Edge Neutral Density (ENDD) Diagnostic Overview Patrick Ross Monday Physics Meeting Monday, March19, 2007.
ICESat TM 04/21/20031 MIT Activities Two main areas of activity: –Validation of atmospheric delays being computed for ICESat –Assessment of statistics.
Tests with JT0623 & JT0947 at Indiana University Nagoya PMT database test results for JT0623 at 3220V: This tube has somewhat higher than usual gain. 5×10.
J A Snipes, 6 th ITPA MHD Topical Group Meeting, Tarragona, Spain 4 – 6 July 2005 TAE Damping Rates on Alcator C-Mod Compared with Nova-K J A Snipes *,
Sampling Distributions
Radian Measure. Many things can be measured using different units.
Investigating the Accuracy and Robustness of the Icelandic Cod Assessment and Catch Control Rule A. Rosenberg, G. Kirkwood, M. Mangel, S. Hill and G. Parkes.
Slide MSE Calibration: Preliminary Analysis H. Yuh, S. D. Scott, R. Grantez 27 May 2003 Note: This presentation is best viewed with PowerPoint 2002.
Plasma Dynamics Lab HIBP E ~ 0 V/m in Locked Discharges Average potential ~ 580 V  ~ V less than in standard rotating plasmas Drop in potential.
Validation workshop, Frascati, 13 December 2002Page 1 SCIAMACHY products quality and recommendations Based on presentations and discussions during this.
The Practice of Statistics, 5th Edition Starnes, Tabor, Yates, Moore Bedford Freeman Worth Publishers CHAPTER 3 Describing Relationships 3.2 Least-Squares.
University of Saskatchewan PHYSICS AND ENGINEERING PHYSICS Spectral widths of F-region PolarDARN echoes, a statistical assessment A.V. Koustov, S. Toderian.
CLIC CTF3: Phase Feed Forward Comparing the effect of the phase feed forward system on beam phase stability with various theoretical predictions. CLIC.
Quality Control  Statistical Process Control (SPC)
Measurements Measurements and errors : - Here, the goal is to have some understanding of the operation and behavior of electrical test instruments. Also,
, Dan Peterson Apparent inconsistencies and other issues in the xBSM measurements of IBS Scans We have studied the pinhole and CodedAperture.
Calibration of energies at the photon collider Valery Telnov Budker INP, Novosibirsk TILC09, Tsukuba April 18, 2009.
1 EMCAL Reconstruction in Pass pp 900 GeV 29/03/2010 Gustavo Conesa Balbastre.
Initial Results from the Scintillator Fast Lost Ion Probe D. Darrow NSTX Physics Meeting February 28, 2005.
Evaluation of Anomalous Fast-Ion Losses in Alcator C-Mod S. D. Scott Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory In collaboration with R. Granetz, D. Beals, C.
Preliminary Analysis of TF Joint Behavior* C Neumeyer NSTX Team Meeting 2/12/4 *Summary from 1/29/4 Presentation.
Profiles of density fluctuations in frequency range of (20-110)kHz Core density fluctuations Parallel flow measured by CHERS Core Density Fluctuations.
Application of the CRA Method Application of the CRA Method William A. Gallus, Jr. Iowa State University Beth Ebert Center for Australian Weather and Climate.
MSE Radial Resolution with ‘Dirty’ Lens
Chapter 3 Comparison of groups.
Introduction to Alternating Current and Voltage
CHAPTER 3 Describing Relationships
Some General Concepts of Point Estimation
Dimension Review Many of the geometric structures generated by chaotic map or differential dynamic systems are extremely complex. Fractal : hard to define.
Analysis Test Beam Pixel TPC
Accuracy and Precision
Dome C, Antarctica 2012.
Chapter 12 Using Descriptive Analysis, Performing
Characteristics of measurement systems
Freeze-In and Hole Ice Studies with Flashers
Telecommunications Engineering Topic 2: Modulation and FDMA
NanoBPM Status and Multibunch Mark Slater, Cambridge University
CHAPTER 3 Describing Relationships
Graphing with Uncertainties
UVIS Calibration Update
Measurements Measurements and errors :
UVIS Calibration Update
Chapter 3: Describing Relationships
Uncertainty and Error
Chapter 3: Describing Relationships
Chapter 3: Describing Relationships
CHAPTER 3 Describing Relationships
CHAPTER 3 Describing Relationships
Dione’s O2 Exosphere C. J. Hansen January 2013.
CHAPTER 3 Describing Relationships
Chapter 3: Describing Relationships
CHAPTER 3 Describing Relationships
CHAPTER 3 Describing Relationships
Chapter 3 Comparison of groups.
Chapter 3: Describing Relationships
Chapter 3: Describing Relationships
CHAPTER 3 Describing Relationships
Chapter 3: Describing Relationships
Propagation of Error Berlin Chen
Basic Steps in Development of Instruments
Some General Concepts of Point Estimation
CHAPTER 3 Describing Relationships
Presentation transcript:

2003 MSE Calibration: Preliminary Analysis H. Yuh, S. D. Scott, R. Grantez 2 June 2003 File: 2June2003 MSE calibration.ppt Note: This presentation is best viewed with PowerPoint 2002 or later

Shot Summary 21-May-2003: A Good Day 35 shots total 3 - Lost due to DNB gate-valve permissive (90 minutes) 1 - No-power test 1 - No-field fault 2 - Short DNB, too short to use 28 usable MSE shots 3 shots with about 25 ms DNB duration – usable 5 shots with ~5 ms faults (45 ms good DNB) – good 20 shots with full-length, 50-ms DNB

Calibration Data Obtained EF3 and EF4 scan at both TF=2.7 and TF=5.4 One shot at TF = 4.5 Tesla One shot each with EF1 and EF2 Several shots at same conditions to determine shot-to-shot reproducibility.

Two Analysis Methods Agree Well Channels 0-8: Average Difference = -0.003 degrees Scatter = 0.05 degrees Channel 9 (innermost): Average Difference = 0.06 degrees Scatter = 0.14 degrees

Statistical Uncertainty is ~0.06 Degrees Inferred from standard deviation in mean angle (10 x 5-ms intervals) Scatter is larger for innermost channel In frame of polarimeter. Shot-shot scatter is somewhat larger – being investigated.

MSE Measured Angles at BT=5.4 Tesla

MSE Measured Angles at BT=5.4 Tesla

Overall Trends Look Very Consistent – No Special Behavior at EF=0

Shots with Matched Ratio of TF/EF

Calibration Against Expected Angles Compute field-line pitch-angle with mflux for all shots. Data looks quite good – consitent trends -- except for outer three channels with EF3=EF4=0. Faraday rotation effect appears to be small. Analysis in progress.

MSE Measured Angles at BT=2.7 Tesla

We expect small variation in measured angles at the outer channels due to viewing geometry Mse measured angle (degrees) Actual field-line angle (degrees)

The expected nonlinearity is small

A Puzzle: Profiles of Measured Angles for EF=0 ‘Uptick’ at edge not understood Rmajor (cm)

Angle in Edge Channels Measured Angle in Other Channels Edge channel Core channels Measured Angle in Channel 4

Shot-Shot Scatter Sometimes Consistent with Measured Variation within a Single Shot

Shot-Shot Scatter Sometimes Consistent with Measured Variation within a Single Shot

Shot-Shot Scatter Sometimes Not Consistent with Measured Variation within a Single Shot Note: these shots have TF = 5.4 Tesla and EF3 = EF4 = 0, which seem to be problematic in other ways.

MFLUX Pitch-Angles during EF scan at 5.4 Tesla

MFLUX Mapped Pitch-Angles during EF scan at 5.4 Tesla

Measured MSE Angles during EF scan at 5.4 Tesla Strong rise in measured angle at innermost point. Strong rise in measured angle at outer edge

MFLUX Pitch-Angles during EF scans at 2.7 Tesla

MFLUX Mapped Pitch-Angles during EF scan at 2.7 Tesla

Measured MSE Angles during EF scans at 2.7 Tesla Behavior at edge similar to that at 5.4 Tesla Reasonably well-behaved on innermost points.

Measured MSE Polarization Fraction Typical range of measured angles Imax - Imin Polarization fraction = F (Imax + Imin)

Polarization Fraction during 5.4 Tesla EF Scan +/- 0.05 Systematic +/- 0.05 shot-to-shot variation. Polarization fraction is much smaller on innermost channel.

Polarization Fraction during 2.7 Tesla EF Scan +/- 0.05 Values at outer edge reduced from (0.6-0.7) in 5.4 Tesla scan to (0.5-0.6) in 2.7 Tesla scan. Innermost channel not different from others.

Polarization During EF4 Scan at 5.4 Tesla Polarization fraction generally increases with increasing EF4. Suggests possible tuning problems but effect on measured angle should (??) be small.

Polarization During EF3 Scan at 5.4 Tesla Some trend toward increasing polarization fraction with increasing EF4

Polarization During EF3+4 Scan at 5.4 Tesla Scaling with EF is not so clear in this dataset.

Polarization During EF4 Scan at 2.7 Tesla Scaling with EF is not so clear in this dataset.

Polarization During EF3 Scan at 2.7 Tesla No clear scaling with EF in this dataset.

Phase Offset between 40 kHz PEM drive and Signal Offset between PEM drive and MSE Signal (radians) Varies about mean value by +/- 0.05 radians. No apparent trend with EF or TF

Phase Offset between 44 kHz PEM drive and Signal Offset between PEM drive and MSE Signal (radians) Varies about mean value by +/- 0.10 radians. No apparent trend with EF or TF

Effect of Phase Shift on Measured MSE Angle Phase Offset Amplitude Ratio D Angle (radians) (degrees) - 0.125 0.9919 0.120 - 0.100 0.9948 0.075 - 0.075 0.9970 0.043 - 0.050 0.9986 0.020 - 0.025 0.9996 0.006 0.000 1.0000 0.000 0.025 0.9997 0.004 0.050 0.9989 0.016 0.075 0.9974 0.037 0.100 0.9952 0.069 0.125 0.9925 0.108 Angle = 0.5 * atan(Amplitude Ratio) Conclusion: the observed variability in phase shift might account for 0.02 – 0.08 degrees shot-to-shot variability.

Conclusions Tuning is definitely off for innermost channel at 5.4 Tesla. Polarization fraction measurements might suggest tuning problems generally, but hard to see how this could appreciably affect our measurements. Variability in phase shift between PEM and MSE signals is reasonably small … not enough to account for unusual behavior of edge channels during calibration.