Elegant users forum

Hi Michael,

I would hope this is not a major request but would be useful for a project I'm looking at performing soon. Would it be possible please to add the changes you made to the RFDF element where you allowed a START_PID and an END_PID?

Cheers,
Seb

Hi Michael, Thanks for putting that together. I compiled it, but I just want to check something please. Without using the new fixEmity command, I just wanted to check that they were the same. Is the discrepancy related to the bug you mentioned about using -emityInput? (For context, 'oldRunScript' us...

Thanks Michael, that's helpful clarification. I think it also helped to put things into context. This is now risking turning into a feature request, but if I knew I would have a particular vertical emittance, then I could I not regard that as a constant in the horizontal emittance calculations? I as...

Hello everyone, I hope this is a quick question! I am using ibsEmittance because I want to plot how the beam-dimension s vary with current. For the lattice I am dealing with, there is no coupling between the two planes (I.E. no skew quadrupoles), nor any vertical dispersion. If I supply the vertical...

We just converted the wake sdds files into impedance files (and obviously changed the .ele file accordingly), and so far looks like no memory leak -- will update if I see otherwise!

That is very odd. Can you say a bit more about the simulations? Are you requesting output from the wake elements? Is this a multi-bunch simulation? --Michael Hi Michael, Yes, this is part of our multi-bunch simulation effort. I've attached our .ele file so you can see the settings of the impedance ...

Hello all, I have just recently switched modelling the collective effects from an impedance element to a wake element. It was since then my problems have been beginning; chiefly, my simulations crashing out with out-of-memory errors. After turning on the monitor_memory_usage=1 option, I was able to ...

Greetings fellow researchers, I wanted to share something I've done that may be of relevance. I'm up for critique, as it's quite a big claim. If it is worth it, then I wonder if Michael could consider adding in a toggleable feature that's officially built into the framework? First off, let me descri...

Hvaing dug into the source code, it strongly appears that the code is designde around the principle of the charge being fixed around the number of particles or bunches, but not either. I suspect this post is now a feature request. I can't personally think of a simple way of correctly allocating the ...

Hi all, I'm scratching my head how to do this. Take for instance if we want to run hybrid mode. Right now, if we want to run a bunch with a greater charge, we have to run more particles (with CHARGE, PER_PARTICLE=1). Clearly we are concerned with the running of the single bunch with greater charge, ...