Horizontal x offset corrections for PIONCT 04/11/06

The procedure is outlined in the entry below.

For pionct, the beam x and y offsets (cm) in the lab frame using the BPMs were:

1acarbon 0.1      0.04
2acarbon 0.11      0.03
3acarbon 0.11      -0.01
4acarbon 0.12      -0.01
5acarbon 0.1      0   
6acarbon 0.12      0   
7acarbon -0.05  -0.08
8acarbon -0.05  -0.07

For settings 1-6, the results below will not change.

For settings 7 and 8, the beam x position in the lab frame was -0.05cm.

                9/9/4
                T(mm)
Loop1(T1_A)    3.03(54)
Loop2(T2_A)    3.37(54) 
Loop3(T3_A)    3.44(54)

          9/9/4 
         2*r(cm)    x_0(cm)     t(cm) 
Loop1   3.969(8)   0.169(54)   3.955(24)
Loop2   3.977(8)   0.203(54)   3.956(25)
Loop3   3.975(8)   0.210(54)   3.953(26)

Target horizontal x offset corrections 04/11/06

This is a summary of the XEM analysis

dave meekins report lists the following dimensions for 
the cryotargets:
                                                  ID
         OD(mm)      wall1(mm)    wall2(mm)    cryogen(cm)
Loop1   40.13(8)    0.1384(13)   0.1270(13) =   3.986(8)
Loop2   40.18(8)    0.1219(13)   0.1219(13) =   3.994(8)
Loop3   40.16(8)    0.1232(13)   0.1194(13) =   3.992(8)

After correcting for thermal contraction, the inner diameters are
Loop1   3.969(8)
Loop2   3.977(8)
Loop3   3.975(8)

The total horizontal (x in the hall) distance between the
beam center and the cell center is:

  T = beam_offset - (target_ladder_offset + cell_offset)

               6/17/4          9/9/4
                T(mm)          T(mm)
Loop1(T1_A)    2.77(54)       3.19(54)
Loop2(T2_A)    2.87(54)       3.53(54) 
Loop3(T3_A)    3.58(54)       3.60(54)

The target lengths at the beam center positions given by the
offsets above are:  t = 2*r*sqrt(1 - (x/r)^2)

         6/17/4                              dave's  
         2*r(cm)    x_0(cm)     t(cm)         t(cm)  
Loop1   3.969(8)   0.277(54)   3.930(22)     
Loop2   3.977(8)   0.287(54)   3.935(23)     
Loop3   3.975(8)   0.358(54)   3.910(25)     

          9/9/4 
         2*r(cm)    x_0(cm)     t(cm) 
Loop1   3.969(8)   0.319(54)   3.917(24)     3.907
Loop2   3.977(8)   0.353(54)   3.914(25)     3.914
Loop3   3.975(8)   0.360(54)   3.909(26)     3.912  

(dave's numbers come from his XEMLOG entry (203) dated 9/6/5)

now we can do one more thing, average over the raster 
pattern to get the average thickness.

         6/17/4 
         2*r(cm)    x_0(cm)   w(cm)   z_1     z_2     t_ave(cm)   dave's 
Loop1   3.969(8)  0.277(54)   0.12  0.07911 0.20005   3.928(26)	   t(cm) 
Loop2   3.977(8)  0.287(54)   0.12  0.08398 0.20468   3.933(26)		    
Loop3   3.975(8)  0.358(54)   0.12  0.11975 0.24050   3.921(26)		    
									    
          9/9/4			    
         2*r(cm)    x_0(cm)   w(cm)   z_1     z_2     t_ave(cm) 				       
Loop1   3.969(8)  0.319(54)   0.12  0.10028 0.22121   3.915(26)    3.907
Loop2   3.977(8)  0.353(54)   0.12  0.11717 0.23787   3.911(26)	   3.914  
Loop3   3.975(8)  0.360(54)   0.12  0.12075 0.24151   3.907(26)	   3.912 


Using the nominal densities listed here, the thicknesses are
                                 june.        sept.    currently using    dave's
target  density(g/cm^3)  loop   t(g/cm^2)   t(g/cm^2)      t(g/cm^2)      t(g/cm^2)
LH2        0.0723         2      0.2844      0.2828         0.284         0.2830
LD2        0.167          3      0.6548      0.6525         0.6534        0.6534
He3        0.0708         2      0.2785      0.2769         0.2771        0.2771
He4        0.135          1      0.5303      0.5285         0.5275        0.5275