You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It may be useful to oversample the XRC and take data with smaller box sizes (even though the aperture is bigger than this). This should give us a more precise location for the centre of mass.
Acceptance Criteria
There is an easy way for the user to change box size and exposure time
We communicate how to do this to the user
This does snot affect aperture selection
We confirm on the beamline that we still go to the correct place even with smaller box sizes
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Tested in #211. Failed to work easily. Box size isn't just changed by changing BOX_WIDTH_UM because it isn't passed through to grid_detection_plan. Trying to hard code in that call resulted in https://ispyb.diamond.ac.uk/dc/visit/cm37235-3/dcg/12681792 , which failed to kickoff the FGS. Some offline time needed to investigate
It may be useful to oversample the XRC and take data with smaller box sizes (even though the aperture is bigger than this). This should give us a more precise location for the centre of mass.
Acceptance Criteria
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: