17F run

 

Target:

* Large S and Al contaminations

* Low yield of F+ yield for F+ 1.5E5/uC

(assuming 50% transport eff to tape station, in reality probably higher 75%)

    yield for AlF+ 3.4E6/uC

(assuming 52% transport eff to tape station, in reality probably higher 75%?)

    yield for LaF+ none

* All in the F sidebands

 

Excerption from the HRS logbook: 

Measured so far 17F, 27Al17F, 40Ca17F and 138Ba17F: 17F+ 1.5E5/uC (assuming 50% transmission to CA0). 27Al17F+ 3.4E6/uC (with measured 52% transmission) 40Ca17F+ 8E3/uC (with measured 71% transmission) 138Ba17F+ <<1E3/uC (with assumed 50% transmission) I.e. the overall 17F yield looks not bad, but most of the 17F goes into the AlF sideband. Since Al is outgasing very slowly it would take endless to get the 27Al level sufficiently down to get more 17F as atomic ions. The other detectable sidebands don't give any better 17F/background ratio than the atomic mass.   UK

 

REX : 

* 17F5+

* S doubly charged out of the trap

* Why didn't the mysterious beam at A/q=3.4 pass the RFQ?

* Difficult to run with so few particles as 1E5 out of the target

* Beam setup with Na+ to Na7+ 18% in the EBIS

* EBIS CB eff for 950 pA out of trap was 4.9%

* General efficiency numbers:

The Miniball sees 100-150 particles/s. Does that agree with what we expect?  

Target/ion source production yield = 4.6E4 ions/uC (yesterday's yield measurement) => ~ 1E5 ions/s (dependent on what transmission to the tape station one assumes it is 1-1.5E5 ions/s out of the target) 

            Transmission HRS to REXTRAP 70% 

            (if we trust the non-suppressed injection plate it is 67%, if we trust the FC it is >30%) 

            REXTRAP efficiency 30-40% 

            EBIS efficiency to 5+ <10% (most likely 3-5 %) 

            Linac transmission <70% 

            Stripping foil efficiency 40% 

=> At the Miniball target one would expect between 150 and absolutely maximum 1200, most likely 250

 

Problems: 

*  BD FEC broke down  - repaired by Ivan Deloose .

*  Large peak of S2+ confused us in the identification process .

* The end of the Linac was vented, with concequences for the REX mass sep, BTS and Trap. Ebis unaffected thanks to the fast closing valve.

* The amplitude for the cyclotron cooling was suppressed for 17F (anti-resonance for the amplifier).

* A vacuum leak was created in the HRS target during the weekend. This triggered the vacuum interlock for the HT and finally the vacuum vent up to 5E-3 mbar.

 

Lessons:

* One can get significant amount of 2+ ions out of the REXTRAP.

* Rethink if the yield already from the primary target is too low for the experiment to be carried out.

* Second different target type as spare if the first doesn't perform according to expectation, or have the exact target tested before?

* Beam transport and injection to the trap was very sensitive to the HRS target HT, within a few 10 V.

* Oxygen, La, F and LaF are ionised at a different potential within the HRS ion source compared with noble gases. Thus, the potential of the separator has to be adjusted so:

    the magnet calibration is maintained

    the injection energy into the trap is correct

For low count beams transport the beam to the tape station with ordinary separator settings. Thereafter adjust the HTtarget so a maximum yield is obtained.

* The stripper foil worked fine

 

 

Ulli's pre-charaterisation email below:

Since 17F has only betas it makes probably no sense to set up a gamma detector. You could try to optimize a bit the HRS slit settings for 17O suppression just with alternate measurements on the tape station and the FC as we did for the 22Mg/22Na optimization this spring. Till next week I am available to show to whoever is interested how we did it.
 
I would see the strategy as follows:
1. Try with 17F+ and check if the 17F+/17O+ ratio is acceptable.
2. If it is just on the edge one could hope to gain a small factor (<<5) improvement in F/O ratio by using the
HRS.
Note that for 22Mg/22Na (M/dM=4900) we could gain a factor 15 by throwing away also a lot of the 22Mg, but here we have M/dM=5700, an MK5 with larger emittance, the
HRS running at 30kV and cannot afford to loose too much of the 17F!
3. AlF+ will definitely not work since an MK5 has always a huge (many nA) beam of CO2 on mass 44!
4. Most other molecules risk to have unacceptable background: 9Be17F+/26Mg+/26Al+/26Na+, 40Ca17F+/57Fe+, 88Sr17F+/86Sr19F+, 138Ba17F+/136Ba19F+, etc. the only exception being 139La17F+ (hoping that there is no significant 140Ce contamination which would give a 140Ce16O+ background).

5. Therefore the target will have a mass marker with La. In case atomic 17F+ is hopeless one can heat the mass marker and look how much comes out as 139La17F+. For low La flux the ratio 139La17F+/17F+ is supposed to increase proportionally to the 139La+ current, then eventually saturating. Use of the LaF+ molecule will probably need
again the REXTRAP set to a "soft" injection to prevent breakup.