[Isocops] Tests

[Nathan Schwadron]

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
>> 		
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>