Search found 54 matches
- 22 Sep 2015, 05:14
- Forum: Parallel Elegant
- Topic: Injection Efficiency with pelegant
- Replies: 4
- Views: 18295
Re: Injection Efficiency with pelegant
Hi Michael it took me some time to check the actual settings and do some tests: A) This are the files I use in my calculation, INJEFF.tar.gz . B) the plot I have posted, with the dramatic change in Inj. Eff. after 1630 turns was indeed produced with an old Pelegant version: 25.2.2 Just to give an id...
- 21 Sep 2015, 04:17
- Forum: Parallel Elegant
- Topic: Injection Efficiency with pelegant
- Replies: 4
- Views: 18295
Injection Efficiency with pelegant
Hi everyone, to speed up the calculation of injection efficiency in Diamond I am using pelegant . I have done a "crash" test with a large number of turns (6000) and 1000 paricles, to determine the minimum number of turns to define this parameter. The puzzling result is that while (plain) elegant sho...
- 10 Jul 2015, 09:44
- Forum: Momentum Aperture
- Topic: TouschekLifetime: machine vs model
- Replies: 11
- Views: 33665
Re: TouschekLifetime: machine vs model
I am getting better with the comparison model / machine, having introduced random + multipole errors, corrected orbit, coupling etc I am off by 20 to 30 % at different RF voltages. I still need to create a calibrated model though. Having said that I have realized that when I measure the LT in the ma...
- 29 Jun 2015, 12:11
- Forum: Momentum Aperture
- Topic: TouschekLifetime: machine vs model
- Replies: 11
- Views: 33665
Re: TouschekLifetime: machine vs model
Nice, thanks very much I will try it asap Another thing, related to the implementation of the LOCO calibrated model. I need to change something like 248 quadrupoles, what's the most effficient way to do it? I am trying renaming the single quads in the .lte file and then using a -macro inline input b...
- 29 Jun 2015, 08:53
- Forum: Momentum Aperture
- Topic: TouschekLifetime: machine vs model
- Replies: 11
- Views: 33665
Re: TouschekLifetime: machine vs model
Naive question on the use of name patterns with wildcards and my epic fails on the subject. in momentum_aperture include_name_pattern allow to select a wide set of elements, in my case I want to select all the sextupoles in the machine so include_name_pattern = TS*, does the job, all the sextupoles ...
- 24 Jun 2015, 10:11
- Forum: Momentum Aperture
- Topic: TouschekLifetime: machine vs model
- Replies: 11
- Views: 33665
Re: TouschekLifetime: machine vs model
Thanks I will replace those QUAD asap, I recall why I had introduced this. When I introduce errors on magnets (KQUAD) I involve the skew quad as well, but I fail to correct the orbit. I am not sure how to exclude the QSKEWs from the error assignment, I can suggest the following &error_element elemen...
- 24 Jun 2015, 09:29
- Forum: Momentum Aperture
- Topic: TouschekLifetime: machine vs model
- Replies: 11
- Views: 33665
Re: TouschekLifetime: machine vs model
Thanks Michael I agree that the ultimate action should be a LOCO calibrated lattice, but this should just trim the result. My case is outrageously wrong, so I first need to tackle something more macroscopic I believe. I have ensured that tune, chro, coupling are in decent agreement with reality. mag...
- 24 Jun 2015, 08:00
- Forum: Momentum Aperture
- Topic: TouschekLifetime: machine vs model
- Replies: 11
- Views: 33665
TouschekLifetime: machine vs model
This is a general question on how to use touschekLifetime in order to have a good match between machine and model. I am using touschekLifetime after running momentum_aperture to calculate the lifetime of my machine. The goal is trying to reproduce a real configuration of our storage ring (Diamond). ...
- 03 Jun 2015, 18:31
- Forum: Optimization and Matching
- Topic: error on optimization
- Replies: 7
- Views: 6199
Re: error on optimization
Thanks a lot Michael! it was really useful and it' s running now My final goal is computing the lifetime in a machine where I have introduced several effects (misalignment errors, gradient errors etc), corrected the orbit, tune, chromaticity, introduced a defined coupling (which is the reason of thi...
- 02 Jun 2015, 04:39
- Forum: Optimization and Matching
- Topic: error on optimization
- Replies: 7
- Views: 6199
Re: error on optimization
thanks Michael I have followed your advice, put the marker, and tried to evaluate the s11,s12 etc. terms at that point. However MRK#1.s11 is not found, while for example MRK#1.s12 is. I have seen that moments_output saves s1 rather than s11, so I have tried to see if I can access that term unsuccess...