US workers present:
Barry B., Ed K., Sophia, Massimo, Valeriano,
Nicola, Erik, Chris O., Lori, Musser.
The detector continues to operate in a very smooth and troublefree
fashion.
During this period, the only problems encountered were:
A problem with the MV synchronization for MV3, requiring that SM 5 and 6
be out of acquisition until Mon - 22nd. The Phrase system was in
acquisition for the entire detector.
On Friday 19th, there occured a problem with the Scint. HV on SM 5,6,
involving the inability to talk with the HV crate. This is a problem
mysteriously goes away if one waits patiently, and that was the approach
taken.
On Monday 22, the Scint HV on SM 5,6 tripped for no known reason. They
were brought back up without troubles.
On Monday 22, a fan was replaced on one of the Phrase crates.
Work in Progress:
Nicola is running the calibrations for the Scint/ERP system. When last
checked, he had good calibrations up to 24 June 98. It looks to me
like the calibration system+ software is working about as well as it
ever
has - Nicola and Ionnis have done a fantastic job on this.
Valeriano is investigating the source of overflowing WFD channels which
are associated with the start of runs. The occurs in only a few random
channels at the very start of each run, and is not really a
'show-stopper',
but Erik is being his usual meticulous self.
Lori is working on the lamassma calibrations, which show a not now
understood
difference in the number of events seen on the two tank ends. She is
investigating this. She, along with the Technicians and Erik, have also
worked to put the calibration system on a 'spare' microvax, rather than
running from one of the primary acquistion processors. This seems to
speed
up the calibrations by a substantial amount.
Chis is at the lab primarily to make a set of rare particle DSTs for his
thesis, but is at the same time extending the DST coverage to earlier
times (prior to the WFD fix). The tapes he is making are RZ formatted,
and so can be used on all machines, unlike the present rare DST
distribution.
Sophia is continuing work on her thesis, and showed at the meeting a
comparison between her monopole analyis and Erik's. Both analyses
have something like 260 events in the final data sample. Of these,
100 are common to the two analyses. This degree of commonality seems to
me to be quite remarkable, given the very different approaches, and the
fact that the monopole analysis really has to dig down in into the
depths of pathological data.