Page 7 of 13
Re: 2011 Events Discussion
Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 6:56 pm
by PhilG
The 624 bunch filling scheme looks much more favourable for ATLAS and CMS with 598 collisions per turn vs only 424 in the 480 bunch scheme. Based on the 535/μb/s record from yesterday this implies a possible 535*598/424 = 750/μb/s
Re: 2011 Events Discussion
Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 9:22 pm
by DCWhitworth
PhilG wrote:The 624 bunch filling scheme looks much more favourable for ATLAS and CMS with 598 collisions per turn vs only 424 in the 480 bunch scheme. Based on the 535/μb/s record from yesterday this implies a possible 535*598/424 = 750/μb/s
Close - about 730
Re: 2011 Events Discussion
Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 9:38 pm
by DCWhitworth
Re: 2011 Events Discussion
Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:00 pm
by DCWhitworth
DCWhitworth wrote:PhilG wrote:The 624 bunch filling scheme looks much more favourable for ATLAS and CMS with 598 collisions per turn vs only 424 in the 480 bunch scheme. Based on the 535/μb/s record from yesterday this implies a possible 535*598/424 = 750/μb/s
Close - about 730
Or perhaps not -
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=895
Re: 2011 Events Discussion
Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2011 5:56 am
by PhilG
I was watching closely and it reached 737 for ATLAS and 660 for CMS, whichever is correct its a nice step up.
Re: 2011 Events Discussion
Posted: Mon May 02, 2011 9:03 am
by PhilG
With 768 bunches peak luminosity is now over 900/ub/s in ATLAS and 830/ub/s in CMS.
The next step should take them beyond the 1000/ub/s target luminosity wanted for this year, but that will probably be after the next technical stop. Present scheme has 700 colliding bunches. This will be doubled if they fill with maximum 1404 bunches so 1700/ub/s should be possible.
Integrated luminosity delivered is now about 320/pb, enough for some interesting physics I hope.
Re: 2011 Events Discussion
Posted: Mon May 02, 2011 5:59 pm
by ikarus177
Does anybody know what the "unsqueeze"-tests are good for?
Currently, b* is about 90m in CMS... (but with no beam in the machine)
Re: 2011 Events Discussion
Posted: Mon May 02, 2011 6:36 pm
by pcatom
Does anybody know what the "unsqueeze"-tests are good for?
Currently, b* is about 90m in CMS... (but with no beam in the machine)
Report this post
The 90m beta* optics is requested for Totem and Alfa. The first studies (with beam) will take place during the MD session starting on Wednesday.
Re: 2011 Events Discussion
Posted: Mon May 02, 2011 7:36 pm
by tomey36
what are teh SEE's and SEU's that have been causing them so much trouble?
Re: 2011 Events Discussion
Posted: Mon May 02, 2011 9:27 pm
by Kasuha
tomey36 wrote:what are teh SEE's and SEU's that have been causing them so much trouble?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_ ... amage:_SEE
SEE = single-event effect
SEU = single-event upset, a kind of SEE
Generally some of their machines are malfunctioning due to radiation which they need to prevent.
Re: 2011 Events Discussion
Posted: Tue May 03, 2011 4:03 pm
by Stephen
I have a question for you guys - what was the energy of the Pb + Pb collisions in this last November? And at what energy are they going to perform Pb + Pb collisions in 2014?
Re: 2011 Events Discussion
Posted: Tue May 03, 2011 4:45 pm
by Kasuha
Stephen wrote:I have a question for you guys - what was the energy of the Pb + Pb collisions in this last November? And at what energy are they going to perform Pb + Pb collisions in 2014?
1.38 TeV per nucleon, i.e. 287 TeV per lead nucleus in each beam. That corresponds to 3.5 TeV per proton charge.
In 2014 it should be twice as much.
Re: 2011 Events Discussion
Posted: Sat May 07, 2011 9:49 am
by ikarus177
Does anybody know what ATS means (they are doing "ATS MD" right now)?
Kind regards
Re: 2011 Events Discussion
Posted: Sat May 07, 2011 12:19 pm
by LarryS
Achromatic Telescopic Squeezing Machine Development … whatever that is!
Re: 2011 Events Discussion
Posted: Sat May 07, 2011 7:31 pm
by PhilG
There is an excellent new page with data on all the fills
https://lhc-statistics.web.cern.ch/LHC-Statistics/
Use the "Fill Summaries" tab to get all this years fills.
(comparing with my notes I think that 1745 and 1715 are missing)