Versions Compared

Old Version 3

changes.mady.by.user Gilliss Dyer

Saved on

compared with

New Version 4

changes.mady.by.user Gilliss Dyer

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

TimeItemWhoNotes
Walk - in / out
  • KB mirrors. Asked Diling why XPP goes with transfocator, not KB pair. 
    • Per Diling: Much easier to change spot size based on XPP user requests
      • Based on Diling's experience, our flexibility to change focus on demand is reduced. 
      • Long effort for changing focus in current implementation.
      • This goes away from what David Fritz says. Diling has never seen this in practice. Diling not sold on the ease of changing focus with mirror bending. 
      • Worrisome that this is something that is possible in principle but worry about practice
    • Achromaticity is a sure benefit
    • KB implies a different path through the chamber than lenses. 
    • Experiments go als 
  • Also discussing beam path below grade and what control room we would use. 
    • MEC-U's current standpoint is the CDR plan or else using the space of TAO (ROD 16). Using the current MEC control room was a last resort concept. Note I link to the records of decision page here
    • Possibility of beam path going below CXI line (slightly offset by CXI)?

Technical updates
  • ELI Beamline photos from Eric, Dimitri and Meriame
  • Discussion of stalled MEC-U UAP meeting
  • Scope conversations
    • Kai is asking engineers to refer to a facility not supporting the upgrades in CDR 11.2 not as "FES Base" but rather "FES minus explicitly designed upgrades" ("FES -EDU")
    • Cavern space looks very constrained when considering beam delivery, dumping and access. 
    • Mikael 
  • Requirements transcription into Jama - needing help
  • Considering a different mirror to put MEC below floor at final FEH location. Discussed this morning
    • Very preliminary discussion

...