| | 13 | - Front quad is quite shiny so placed something in front to reduce reflection. |
| | 14 | - Changed around 5 separate things and now (fingers crossed) do not see the burning... |
| | 15 | - Ran 20 shots on Tues and Weds and saw no burning |
| | 16 | - Does mean not sure what caused it and could be any of the 5 things, including front quad being reflective... |
| | 17 | |
| | 18 | - CD: Recap of experimental and simulated results |
| | 19 | - [raw-attachment: Slides] |
| | 20 | - Nick pointed out there is still a flaw in the comparison based on the number of particles reaching the final dish |
| | 21 | - Simulations producing similar shapes to experimental results |
| | 22 | - Based on Highland equation for multiple scattering angle (from Geant4 documentation) predicted the different scattering effects |
| | 23 | - Mark has offered 2.5um Gold if we wanted to try that? |
| | 24 | - Cu 10um at furthest distance from second quad seems like a sensible option |
| | 25 | - If not uniform enough can move it closer |
| | 26 | - If we move it so the copper is 300mm from second quad then sims predict the dose will drop by 45% and the CV goes down by 6% |
| | 27 | - Robbie has a spare drive that we could use to play with this without pumping down the vacuum chamber each time |
| | 28 | |
| 15 | | - KL/CD update on getting calibrated film cut |
| 16 | | - CD: Recap of experimental and simulated results |
| 17 | | - Discuss best route forward |
| 18 | | - CD: Discussion of the best metric for uniformity |
| | 31 | - Calibration Done |
| | 32 | - 2023 batch is much preferred due to the framing we see around the edge of the darker batch |
| | 33 | - If we use the darker batch in the future cut only for the centre to avoid the framing |
| | 34 | - Calibration was also complete for some of the framed parts of the film to get some values for previously scanned work |
| | 35 | - Three sheets of the 2023 batch with Emma |
| | 36 | - I think there is more in SCAPA - Ask Ewan |
| | 37 | - KL/CD update on 2023 getting cut to 1cmx1cm: |
| | 38 | - Hopefully done by tomorrow |
| | 39 | - For future use best to buy a new batch and complete a calibration just before irradiating |
| | 40 | - Scanner Best Practices: |
| | 41 | - Place black cardboard around the RCF on the scanner to fix its position |
| | 42 | - Run 5-10 scans before scanning RCF to allow the scanner lamp to warm up |
| | 43 | - RCF Dose Calculation: |
| | 44 | -[raw-attachment: Slides] |
| | 45 | - Key Conclusions: |
| | 46 | - Scanner Best Practices: |
| | 47 | - Place black cardboard around the RCF on the scanner to fix its position |
| | 48 | - Run 5-10 scans before scanning RCF to allow the scanner lamp to warm up |
| | 49 | - An x by x median filter kernel should be applied to the dose map before calculating the flatness. Tony uses x=5. |
| | 50 | - A three channel correction could provide a more accurate dose than using one channel |
| | 51 | - Variability pixel to pixel? - Comes from the scanner resolution and is not indicative of low stats hitting each cell |
| | 52 | - 1 Gy means around 70 particles traversing the nucleus |
