Search found 21 matches
- 04 Apr 2022, 09:51
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: N_cavities in FTRFMODE seems doesn't work
- Replies: 1
- Views: 4721
N_cavities in FTRFMODE seems doesn't work
Dear Michael, Recently I'm studying transverse effect of cavity Higher Order Modes using the element FTRFMODE. I found that when I changed the n_cavities from 8 to 1 it gives me the same result. Then I downloaded the newest elegant source code and looked into the code, it seems in both 'RFMODE', 'TR...
- 16 Mar 2022, 08:17
- Forum: Ring Tracking
- Topic: TFBFirSetup to get the FIR coefficients in transverse feedback
- Replies: 3
- Views: 10053
Re: TFBFirSetup to get the FIR coefficients in transverse feedback
Dear Michael
Many thanks, now I can understand the script and get correspondence with paper.
Best regards,
Siwei
Many thanks, now I can understand the script and get correspondence with paper.
Best regards,
Siwei
- 10 Mar 2022, 11:22
- Forum: Ring Tracking
- Topic: TFBFirSetup to get the FIR coefficients in transverse feedback
- Replies: 3
- Views: 10053
TFBFirSetup to get the FIR coefficients in transverse feedback
Dear Michael, Recently I'm studying the transverse multi-bunch feedback and is using the script 'TFBFirSetup' from the elegant example 'APS-24Bunch-CBI'. I learned from elegant forum that this script is using T. Nakamura's Time-domain least squire fitting theory to get the N-tap FIR coefficients. Ho...
- 13 Jan 2022, 05:01
- Forum: Ring Tracking
- Topic: Tracking with LRWAKE and ILMATRIX
- Replies: 4
- Views: 5081
Re: Tracking with LRWAKE and ILMATRIX
Dear Michael It seems the problem comes from when I duplicated the bunch to make the beam, I give a minus value to the duplicate_stagger[4], making the bunches in the beam have a decreasing sequence in time. In this case it seems LRWAKE is dealing with the beam as a single bunch, so it gave a much s...
- 08 Jan 2022, 08:33
- Forum: Ring Tracking
- Topic: Tracking with LRWAKE and ILMATRIX
- Replies: 4
- Views: 5081
Re: Tracking with LRWAKE and ILMATRIX
Dear Michael, I wanted to attach the bunch file at first but it was too large and failed to be uploaded. So I attached the script to generate the bunch. The file makebunch.ele uses bunched_beam to generate the bunch file for a single bunch bunchid-10000.out. And trackSB1.ele uses sdds_beam and dupli...
- 05 Jan 2022, 10:26
- Forum: Ring Tracking
- Topic: Tracking with LRWAKE and ILMATRIX
- Replies: 4
- Views: 5081
Tracking with LRWAKE and ILMATRIX
Dear Michael, I'm studying transverse coupled-bunch instability from long-range resistive-wall wake. In my tracking, I only used ILMATRIX and LRWAKE elements, together with several watch points for each bunch. I calculated the maximum growth rate of each bunch. Then the growth rate is exchanged to 1...
- 11 Sep 2017, 20:24
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: About the edge_effects option in the CSBEND element
- Replies: 8
- Views: 11001
Re: About the edge_effects option in the CSBEND element
Hello Michael
Now I get the point and will be careful with the dipole edge field options. Thank you very much for the reply. It helps me a lot.
Siwei
Now I get the point and will be careful with the dipole edge field options. Thank you very much for the reply. It helps me a lot.
Siwei
- 10 Sep 2017, 06:52
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: About the edge_effects option in the CSBEND element
- Replies: 8
- Views: 11001
Re: About the edge_effects option in the CSBEND element
Hello Michael Thanks for the reply. I tried the scripts and found that when setting the "edge1_effects=2" and "edge2_effects=2" in the CSBEND element, the calculated tunes and chromaticities agree well with the tracking datas, while when I set the "edge1_effects=1" and "edge2_effects=1" in the CSBEN...
- 07 Sep 2017, 22:11
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: About the edge_effects option in the CSBEND element
- Replies: 8
- Views: 11001
About the edge_effects option in the CSBEND element
Dear all, When I used ELEGANT to calculate the chromaticity of our storage ring and compared the result with AT, I found a little difference in the chromaticity with a deviation of about 0.1. Then I found that the problem comes from the dipole fringe field. If I turn off the edge field in both AT an...
- 29 Jun 2017, 01:32
- Forum: Dynamic Aperture
- Topic: About dynamic aperture optimization
- Replies: 2
- Views: 16965
Re: About dynamic aperture optimization
Dear Michael
Thank you very much for the example, I see that the optimization mode for the find_aperture should follow another find_aperture command without the optimization mode. I'll try it with our lattice.
Siwei
Thank you very much for the example, I see that the optimization mode for the find_aperture should follow another find_aperture command without the optimization mode. I'll try it with our lattice.
Siwei