The one disadvantage of the C-magnet is that it would require a more detailed field map to precisely identify symmetric pairs for an energy calibration measurement -- in case that is on anyone's agenda.
Dan Sober
Jim Stewart wrote:
Pine.LNX.4.58.0806021636420.5982@jlabl1.jlab.org">Dear tagger While at BNL I went looking for possible magnets for the pair spectrometer. I found several which look like good candidates. The 20x42 looks to be very interesting. It is a C-Magnet with the following characteristics: pole width 508mm pole gap 203mm pole length 1067mm Max field 1.85T The gap is too large but it would be easy to add plates to the poles to reduce this. A C-Magnet has the advantage that on one side of the magnet we can measure very low momentum particles. Installing the vacuum chamber can also be done without taking the magnet apart. The 24-8-72 is an H-magnet with a field clamp and relatively wide poles. pole width 609mm pole gap 203mm pole length 1829mm Max field 1.85T To reduce the gap here you would need to add tapered plates. This could be done but requires a simulation. The 18D36 is also an H-magnet. It has a somewhat narrower pole and is more compact. (18" wide pole and 36 inches long) They may also have power supplies for the magnets above. We would need to install new controls in any supply we got. I feel that the 20x42 is a rather good match to our needs. Please let me know what you think! Jim
--
Daniel Sober
Professor and Chair
Physics Department
The Catholic University of America
Washington, DC 20064
Phone: (202) 319-5856, -5315
E-mail: sober@cua.edu
Daniel Sober
Professor and Chair
Physics Department
The Catholic University of America
Washington, DC 20064
Phone: (202) 319-5856, -5315
E-mail: sober@cua.edu