"Six-dimensional" closed orbit
Posted: 13 Aug 2021, 16:33
Hi,
I am doing comparisons between AT and elegant tracking, and now I want to compare the closed orbits. With rf turned on and with deterministic synchrotron radiation losses, AT has a function "findorbit6" which calculates a closed orbit that includes the variation in energy, and I think it also requires the time of flight to be an integer multiple of the RF period.
Is there an equivalent command in elegant? Does closed_orbit actually include the variation in energy but only reports the initial energy offset?
I can see how using rf_setup would in effect do a similar thing, by tuning the rf so the closed orbit sits on the nominal momentum. Is it expected that the single-turn variations in energy will not be significant enough to impact the closed orbit?
Finally, I have so far only seen values of 0 for the delta and lengthError parameters, even with errors, does that mean I'm missing something to force it to pay attention to longitudinal effects?
My typical function call is something like
&closed_orbit
output = %s.clo,
closed_orbit_accuracy = 1e-9,
closed_orbit_iterations = 500,
verbosity = 1,
&end
Thanks,
Gregg
I am doing comparisons between AT and elegant tracking, and now I want to compare the closed orbits. With rf turned on and with deterministic synchrotron radiation losses, AT has a function "findorbit6" which calculates a closed orbit that includes the variation in energy, and I think it also requires the time of flight to be an integer multiple of the RF period.
Is there an equivalent command in elegant? Does closed_orbit actually include the variation in energy but only reports the initial energy offset?
I can see how using rf_setup would in effect do a similar thing, by tuning the rf so the closed orbit sits on the nominal momentum. Is it expected that the single-turn variations in energy will not be significant enough to impact the closed orbit?
Finally, I have so far only seen values of 0 for the delta and lengthError parameters, even with errors, does that mean I'm missing something to force it to pay attention to longitudinal effects?
My typical function call is something like
&closed_orbit
output = %s.clo,
closed_orbit_accuracy = 1e-9,
closed_orbit_iterations = 500,
verbosity = 1,
&end
Thanks,
Gregg