[Isocops] Tests
Nathan Schwadron
nschwadron at mac.com
Wed Jun 9 11:33:17 EDT 2010
I was going to set table 2 to 0 and the cadence to 0 so that we just use table 1.
You didn't answer my question below .. I am confused about the cadence.
>>
>> I am confused here. I thought I wrote 10 cycles of table 3
>> and then 1 cycle of table 1. So that would be
>>
>> 64*10 = 640 spins of table 3
>> 64*1 = 64 spine of table 1
>>
>> Is that right?
-N
On Jun 9, 2010, at 10:56 AM, Dunn, Greg wrote:
>> Thanks for pointing out my mistake in the table .. it should
>> be table 3 .. righto!
>
> Also for the second table do you intend to a cycle of Fall
> Oxygen (table 1) as currently written, or should that be
> table 0 (normal sweep)?
>
> -- Greg
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Nathan Schwadron [mailto:nschwadron at mac.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2010 9:18 AM
>> To: Dunn, Greg
>> Cc: Greg Dunn; Mark Tapley; Ken Fairchild; Chelle Reno; David
>> Heirtzler; Geoff Crew; isoc cops
>> Subject: Re: Tests
>>
>> Hi Greg
>>
>> Thanks for pointing out my mistake in the table .. it should
>> be table 3 .. righto!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> timestamp || CEU_LO_SCIENCE_MODE OXYGEN
>>
>>
>> timestamp || CEU_LO_SCI_PLAN 3, 10, 1, 1
>>
>>
>>
>> Would that indicate to use table 3 for
>>
>>
>> 10 cycles and then table 1 (Fall Oxygen, ESA2) for 1
>>
>>
>> cycle.
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>>
>>
>> If so, does one cycle corresond to a typical
>> voltage step
>>
>>
>> (e.g., two spins)?
>>
>>
>>
>> As Geoff mentioned, a cycle corresponds to an Oxygen
>> Histogram cycle. So y! ou would able
>> 4, then 64 spins of table 1.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I am confused here. I thought I wrote 10 cycles of table 3
>> and then 1 cycle of table 1. So that would be
>>
>> 64*10 = 640 spins of table 3
>> 64*1 = 64 spine of table 1
>>
>> Is that right?
>>
>> Nathan
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Nathan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
More information about the Isocops
mailing list