29-30 April 2008- with focus and defocused beam,  slits 150x150

Ring: digital feedback on (V and H)


xtal_ke_5th
(focus 2.41mm lambda 0.9795A)
This is the same xtal as yesterday, not necessarily the same starting orientation.

This is 1 deg for 1 sec and it diffracts to 1.5A as opposed to 1.9A for 0.5 deg 3 sec yesterday.

Despite not a huge difference in the C2 and C4 counters, the intensity of the beam is obviously about 10x higher today.
In the i0 plot, there are some spikes in the C4  (green) which are also seen at C2 (red).
This scaling is what we used to have before the "clamp".

xtal_ke_5th
(defocus 2.9mm lambda 0.9795A)
A lot less intensity.
Still some spikes in C4 and C2.

It's not ovious if there is any improvement in the scaling caused by defocusing the beam.


xtal_ke_5th
defocus with longer exposure time to pick more of the intensity
exposure of 6 sec for 0.5 deg. The beam dumped at after 300 frames.
xtal_ke_5th
1.1A, focused 1.78mm. very weak intensity.
We scanned the gap to make sure we were not too off.
Tweaked the outboard twist to improve the profile of the beam.

The C4 counter goes from 60K to 175K from 0.9597A to 1.1A but the C2 counter doesn't improve that much even when we refocused. The beam dies very fast and it is reflected in the scaling.

According to Paul the ring gives beam extremely quiet today.
Xtal barely diffracts to 2.1A Rsym=6.5% reject 5.5% for 360 frames.

We have to keep in mind that we didn't have time to really optimize X25 (move the mono horizontally??).






 28 April 2008- with focus at 2.4 and slits 150x150 (because I am missing the xtal)


xtal_ke_5th
This is for 0.5 deg 3 sec exposure
no attenuator

Rsym 6.0 rejects 0.19%
The temporary clamp on the xtal-roll has been removed

killed the previous xtal, so I had to take a small one not collected on x29.

this scaling IS as quiet as X29
??????
The green line on the I0 plot shows a bigger drop than expected.
We did not move the roll motor after being unclamped. The pitch motor seems to have some reliability problems.

xtal Ke 10ai-1 collected on april 18 2008
 on X25 same xtal as below
0.5 sec with one attenuator
xtal shot at the tip
 no I0 plot because the data collection stopped (too short exposure time)










xtal Ke 10ai-1  (Ke 10ai-1_3 collected on april 2008)
on X29
for this data collection, the scaling is pretty much typical for this beamline.











Here are some of the datasets collected -1 march 2008- with focus at 1.8 and slits 100x100


This is for 0.5 deg 1.25 sec

Rsym 5.6 rejects 2.2%

This is for 1 deg 2.5 sec

Rsym 5.3 rejects 2.5%

This is for 2 deg 5 sec 

Rsym 6.3 rejects 2.18%

So I adjusted the exposure time to be about equivalent per degree. That seems to be the major factor as far as rejection.

What really bothers me is the noise in my scaling.

Here are some scaling for the SAME xtal at X29
(slits v=100 H=160)

 

The scalings look the same and are very smooth. They always are.
X29 1deg 3 sec
Rsym 6.3 reject 3.8%



X29 2 deg 1 sec
Rsym6.4 reject 1.5


Data collected at X25 on Feb 28, 2008 defocused at 1.8 slits 100x100



This is for 0.5 deg 10 sec

Rsym 7.1 rejects 15%

This is for 1 deg 10 sec

Rsym 7.7 rejects 8%

This is for 2 deg 10 sec 

Rsym 7.5 rejects 2.8%

So I adjusted the exposure time to be about equivalent per degree. That seems to be the major factor as far as rejection.

What really bothers me is the noise in my scaling.

Here are some scaling for the SAME xtal at X29


1 deg for 3 sec Rsym 6.3 reject 3.8%


2 deg for 1 sec Rsym6.4 reject 1.5

the scalings look the same and are very smooth. They always are.





Data collected at X25 feb 28, 2008 focussed at 2.8 slits 100x100



1 deg 2 sec

Rsym 6.0 Rejects 2.2%

(6Hb_x25_3)

2 deg 2 sec

Rsym 7.0 Rejects 0.9%

(6Hb_x25_6)


2 deg 2 sec
Rsym 7.0 Rejects 0.9%(6Hb_x25_7)