User name A. Deur
Log entry time 13:27:59 on June20,2001
Entry number 63878
keyword=He3 pressure curveIt seems I forgot to put the He3 pressure curve when I posted some results last week.
Here it is. It is a little bit different from the one I have shown before: I had forgoten to correct for the increase of pressure due to the N2 (I had only the yield corrected, a much bigger correction anyway). The fig shows the pressure curve after this pressure correction. The pressure curve goes very nicely to about zero as expected in the perfect case (see the three first couple of points. The last couple of points at 188 psia are data from Gore).
The data are only from the elastic peak. The windows are cut out and I have cut on the angles and the number of track (only one track events) in order to remove the misrecontructed events. I have also a tight cerenkov cut but it should not affect the results). I corrected for the increase in yield due to the N2 contamination (using a N2 ref cell run) and I corrected for the increase in pressure due the N2 contamination using the N2 pressure curve (so for this tiny correction, it was useful to have done the pressure curve). The difference between the He3 partial pressure and the read pressure is about 1.7 psia. The last correction is the different radiative corrections in the case of Gore (wall thickness 1.35 mm) and the ref cell (wall thickness of 1.5 mm). This correction reduce the Gore yield by 6%.
The data show also that there is about 0.1 atm of nitrogen contamination in the ref cell.
If, using this pressure curve, I compute the pressure of Gore under running condition, I find that the left arm gives about 186 psia (=12.7 atm) and the left arm 200 psia (=13.6 atm). This is to compare with 188 psia (=12.8 atm) expected from the pressure broadening measurement done on Gore after temeprature correction (using Kevin's temperature predictions: Tp=250 degree C and Ts=50 degree C).
Everythings looks quiet nice beside the 7% desagrement between the left and right arm. This may be resolve if Gore survive the experiment and if we measure the wall thickness on both size. It may be different by up to 10% and explain this difference in yield.
FIGURE 1
