Search found 10 matches
- 09 Feb 2020, 16:36
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: Unexpected behaviour of s_dependent_driving_terms_file of twiss_output
- Replies: 1
- Views: 5047
Unexpected behaviour of s_dependent_driving_terms_file of twiss_output
Hello, when using twiss_output and setting the s_dependent_driving_terms_file variable to a filename, I stumbled across a few problems: the output file is only filled with more than the header if also the filename variable for general twiss output is set zero length sextupoles and/or quadrupoles in ...
- 30 Jan 2020, 17:45
- Forum: General
- Topic: Mismatch of vertical chromaticity from twiss_output with other codes
- Replies: 4
- Views: 2269
Re: Mismatch of vertical chromaticity from twiss_output with other codes
Michael,
Thank you again for your fast and very helpful response!
Best regards,
Felix Armborst
Thank you again for your fast and very helpful response!
Best regards,
Felix Armborst
- 30 Jan 2020, 17:07
- Forum: General
- Topic: Mismatch of vertical chromaticity from twiss_output with other codes
- Replies: 4
- Views: 2269
Re: Mismatch of vertical chromaticity from twiss_output with other codes
Hi Michael, thank you very much for your fast response! Using 2nd order edge effects indeed solves my problem. The hgap is 25mm and fint should be around 0.7 (Rogowski formed pole shoes). I unfortunately do not have any measurements of the fringe fields. Which setting of fse_correction and edge_orde...
- 30 Jan 2020, 14:21
- Forum: General
- Topic: Mismatch of vertical chromaticity from twiss_output with other codes
- Replies: 4
- Views: 2269
Mismatch of vertical chromaticity from twiss_output with other codes
Hello, We have encountered a mismatch in the vertical chromaticity for the BESSY II design lattice when comparing the results from elegant's twiss routine with those of other codes. Could you please help me get to the bottom of this problem? Here an overview of the obtained results (I have attached ...
- 11 Dec 2018, 12:14
- Forum: Installation
- Topic: sdds for python3.5
- Replies: 17
- Views: 28149
Re: sdds for python3.5
Hi Soliday,
Could you please upload the SDDSPython3 rpm for debian 9 too or am I missing something (https://www.aps.anl.gov/Accelerator-Ope ... uide_Linux)?
Thanks a bunch and cheers,
Felix
Could you please upload the SDDSPython3 rpm for debian 9 too or am I missing something (https://www.aps.anl.gov/Accelerator-Ope ... uide_Linux)?
Thanks a bunch and cheers,
Felix
- 19 Apr 2018, 09:30
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: SDDS watchpoint output does not match simulation
- Replies: 2
- Views: 7242
Re: SDDS watchpoint output does not match simulation
I am using ext4 and the glitch seems to happen with both the parallel and normal elegant version. My momentary workaround is to change the number of turns and particles and try both versions until I get useful data
I will send you my input files by mail.
I will send you my input files by mail.
- 19 Apr 2018, 09:25
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: %s in <filename>=<x>+<y> not working
- Replies: 3
- Views: 8477
Re: %s in <filename>=<x>+<y> not working
Ah thank you, that makes sense. Didn't notice the search_path parameter yet. Woud be nice though to point this out explicitly in the manual under "7.2
General Command Syntax" and maybe also include it in the <filename>=<x>+<y> info.
General Command Syntax" and maybe also include it in the <filename>=<x>+<y> info.
- 19 Apr 2018, 06:44
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: SDDS watchpoint output does not match simulation
- Replies: 2
- Views: 7242
SDDS watchpoint output does not match simulation
Hi, I have the problem that in some cases the data in watchpoint sdds files does not match the simulated amount of particles and turns. Also sometimes the particleID of the last particle is 16777216L. I have attached an example elegant output with 2 particles tracked for 80 turns and the strange out...
- 19 Apr 2018, 06:29
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: %s in <filename>=<x>+<y> not working
- Replies: 3
- Views: 8477
%s in <filename>=<x>+<y> not working
Hi,
I like to call elegant from scripts and store alle input- and output files of a simulation in one path passed to elegant via the rootname macro. This feature seems to break for the BUMPER element waveform input file.
Best,
Felix
I like to call elegant from scripts and store alle input- and output files of a simulation in one path passed to elegant via the rootname macro. This feature seems to break for the BUMPER element waveform input file.
Best,
Felix
- 23 Aug 2017, 09:15
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: Change the optimizer's path of a new directory
- Replies: 4
- Views: 3416
Re: Change the optimizer's path of a new directory
Hi,
Had the same problem and found out it was due to me actually putting a semicolon after the filename as shown in the manual.
Best, Felix
Had the same problem and found out it was due to me actually putting a semicolon after the filename as shown in the manual.
Best, Felix