20131004 Search for Smallest Scan
Now with updated dual analysis and proper analysis of the horizontal size it is much better to look through the data again from February to March to see what the smallest scan size is. Note, must have a horizontal and vertical scan under the same conditions.
20130131 Shift
| H |
20130201_0707_lws |
| V |
20130201_0641_lws |
| sex |
200.2 +5.6 -5.8 |
| sey |
1.73 +0.12 -0.11 |
20130222 Shift
| H |
20130222_0716_lws |
| V |
20130222_0640_lws |
| sex |
123.4 +4.6 -4.6 |
| sey |
1.55 +0.14 -0.13 |
| H |
20130222_1127_lws |
| V |
20130222_1105_lws |
| sex |
171.7 +5.1 -4.9 |
| sey |
1.56 +0.08 -0.08 |
Nothing better in this shift. There is a quad scan, but the machine broke in the middle. If time, may be nice to look at.
20130226 Shift
| H |
20130226_0306_lws |
| V |
20130226_0335_lws |
| sex |
152.65 +5.1 -5.08 |
| sey |
1.51 +0.09 -0.09 |
| H |
20130226_0631_lws |
| V |
20130226_0639_lws |
| sex |
161.11 +3.36 -3.36 |
| sey |
1.57 +0.09 -0.09 |
| H |
20130226_0830_lws |
| V |
20130226_0839_lws |
| sex |
125.1 +3.46 -3.46 |
| sey |
1.57 +0.07 -0.07 |
| H |
20130226_0808_lws |
| V |
20130226_0816_lws |
| sex |
110.51 +2.49 -2.51 |
| sey |
1.11 +0.06 -0.06 |
This is small, but the fit's not wonderful - ie the wings aren't great. This is probably because of scan variation (higher charge) at that point, but mostly due to laser information not quite matching
--
LaurieNevay - 04 Oct 2013
Copyright © 2008-2023 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.