Survey(s) of TT8 10/12 TT 8 after wall1 16/12 TT 8 Standalone

Yellow plate 11 pairs of magnetic targets Top EC 23 magnetic targets Right EC 24 magnetic targets Left EC 24 magnetic targets 22 magnetic targets on glued iron plates 38 adhesive targets on plastic plates Bottom EC 24 magnetic targets Total magnetic: = /12

Analysis of the central point (on the surface of the horizontal modules) for Plane 8 + wall 1 (10/12)

CroisillionsMagnetic targets on adhesive iron plates All central targets corrected by their thickeness: Iron+magnetic 2 mm Plastic+adhesive 4.8 mm Croisillions mm Slice 1 Slice 2 Slice 3 Slice 4 All slices togheter

Slice 1 Slice 2 Slice 3 Slice 4 The pattern is quite regular taking the points at the same height but we should not forget that often on the surface of the modules there are bumps

All targets corrected by their tickness X (horizontal) Z (vertical) Y distance from the magnet X Z Y is represented by a color code Sagitta increasing at the bottom

Detailed analysis of the 3D position of the end-caps for Plane8 + wall 1 10/12

1 mm Front view Side view Top view 2 mm 1 mm

mm Front view Side view Top view mm

Front view Top view Side view 1 mm 18 mm 4

Front view 1 mm Top view 20 mm Side view

Front view 1 mm Plane 8 + wall 1 Plane 8 standalone

Red: Top end-caps Blue: Bottom end-caps Green: Gallery end-caps Purple: Rock end-caps Analysis of the precision points at the End-caps Plane8 + wall 1 Plane8 alone Top view Side view 35 mm 40 mm

Tilt analysis of the yellow beam for Plane8 + wall 1 10/12

Plane 8 tilt of the yellow plate, 10/12 Magnetic targets on the yellow beam Small difference in y top-bottom Means small tilt Larger difference in y top-bottom

Plane 7 12/11/04Plane 7 19/11/04 Plane 8 10/12/04 The yellow plate of plane 8 has on average a small tilt angle (centered around 0) but the amplitude of the angular variation along the length of the plate is not negligible 

Comparison between the measurements for Plane8 + wall 1 (10/12) and Plane8 standalone (16/12)

Slice 1 Slice 2 Slice 3 Slice 4 Plane8 + wall1 Plane8 alone Analysis of the points on the surface of the TT

Slice 1 Slice 2 Slice 3 Slice 4

X (horizontal) Z (vertical) Y distance from the magnet X Z

Plane 7 19/11/04 Plane 7 + wall 9/12/04 Plane 8 + wall 10/12/04 Plane 8 alone 16/12/04  Comparison for the yellow plate tilt TT8 alone TT8 + wall1

Organization; Now we have a roboust procedure for taking measurements in the targets area on two configurations: a) Wall + TT at its back b) TT standalone In both cases we have optimized the procedure (targets arrangements, shooting positions, camera conditions, analysis) which is now systematic and well reproducible Both measurements are possible in a morning time (<1 hour to equip the detector, 40 minutes for the pictures, <1 hour to remove the targets). A full analysis takes about 3-4 hours. To speed up we need some further organization: 1)A cupboard where we can store the materials (now there is really a lot of stuff) without the risk of loosing pieces 2)Boxes to contain the targets in order to easy the manipulation (see the one for the bricks) 3)Reduce the use of adhesive targets (with the extra 40 bricks this will be possible for the wall) 4)Change the bi-adhesive tape, the actual one is too strong and difficult to remove, we need a better one 5) Order some extra targets (magnetic) in order not not to have the pieces counted

Appendix: Analysis of plane 7 before the insertion of wall1 Results of the two surveys performed on plane 7 Set 1: morning of 12/11/2004 Set 2: morning of 19/11/2004 Some improvements on the way plane 7 is suspended and aligned were implemented in between the two measurements and should have visible effects in Set2

Planarity, measured with the coordinate perpendicular to the magnet plane (Y), at the level of the end-caps with the pin targets (2 points/end-cap) as a function of the horizontal coordinate (X) Y is the « beam axis » coordinate X is the horizontal Z is the vertical Set 1 Comment: in Set2 it was attempted to improve the alignment of the bottom part of the TT with respect to the magnet. This worked apart for the first vertical module which is skew by about 8 mm The shape of the positions of the top end-caps comes from the deformation on the yellow I-beam which supports the TT, it is the same in both measurements Bottom end-caps Top end-caps X X X X X X Z Y Y Y Y Set 2

Same measurement as the previous transparency but performed using the magnetic targets on the end caps and on the yellow plate Set 1 Set 2 Bottom end-caps Top end-caps Yellow plate Comment: The picture is the same as for the one of the previous transparency obtained with the pin targets. The kink on the yellow plate is very well visible. From time to time two targets were put about at the same x but at the top and bottom of the yellow plate. At the rigth of the plate these two targets have very different Y, there the plate is quite skew with respect to the vertical, better in Set2

Set 1 Set 2 Comment: in Set1 the rock side of the TT was not vertical by about 45 mm from the bottom to the top (the bottom was closer to Borexino). This is improved in Set2, where the two sides behave in similar way. Both in set 1 and set 2 there is a concavity about in the middle of the detector Coordinate along the beam axis (y) as a function of the vertical coordinate (z) for the pin targets on the end-caps of teh horizontal modules bottom top Left end-caps right end-caps

Same measurement as the previous transparency but performed with the magnetic targets on the end-caps instead of the pin targets Comment: the behavior is quite similar to the one measured with the pin targets on the end-caps. Note that often we had two magnetic targets at the same heigth on the two sides of the horizontal modules endcaps, the fact that they do not fall at the same y shows that the end-cap is tilted on the horizontal plane, it is not perpendicular to the beam axis (i.e. not parallel to the brick wall) bottom top Set 1 Set 2 right end-caps Left end-caps