MICE Cavity Microphone Tests MTA Weekly RF Meeting Peter Lane - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
MICE Cavity Microphone Tests MTA Weekly RF Meeting Peter Lane Illinois Institute of Technology 1 Tests Description Use trigger hammer to capture physical taps trigger DAQ by completing a circuit on contact Tap ~5 times on each
MICE Cavity Microphone Tests MTA Weekly RF Meeting Peter Lane Illinois Institute of Technology 1
Tests Description ● Use “trigger hammer” to capture physical taps ● trigger DAQ by completing a circuit on contact ● Tap ~5 times on each microphone ● Tap on several locations around microphones ● Checked amplifier gain 2
DW3, DW4, & DW6 3
Upstream Window Mics with Downstream Center Mic 4
Record #11: DW1 & DW6 5
Initial Conclusions ● 22/24 microphones functioning normally ● 1 microphone easily separated from cavity ● not one of the abnormal function microphones ● will leave in cavity as a control for EMI ● DW6 sensitive enough to saturate when any other mic receives even a moderate signal ● Not surprisingly, the cavity reverberates for several seconds ● Amplifier gain was not saved when changed to max from min (operator error) 6
What is the relevance to actual RF signals? 7
RF Hammer on DW1 and DW6 8
Spark on DW 1 and DW6 9
Spark Minus RF Hammer on DW1 & DW6 10
RF Signal Conclusions ● Spikes concurrent with RF pulse do not behave like impulses ● No recoil ● No reverberation ● DW6, though very sensitive, does not register ● We may still be able to see reverberations with amplifiers turned up, but the RF pulse spike will still drown out wavefront 11
Recommend
More recommend
Explore More Topics
Stay informed with curated content and fresh updates.