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
