Difference in Touschek lifetime
Moderators: cyao, michael_borland
-
- Posts: 23
- Joined: 07 Jul 2022, 01:07
Difference in Touschek lifetime
Hi,
For a bare lattice with identical superperiods, the Touschek lifetime should ideally be the same regardless of whether you specify s_end as one superperiod length or leave it unspecified (assuming it defaults to the whole ring) in the momentum_aperture command. However, I am seeing significant difference in the Touschek lifetime for these two cases although the momentum aperture is consistent in both the cases.
What could be causing this discrepancy? and what should be the correct way of setting the momentum _aperture command.
-Monika
For a bare lattice with identical superperiods, the Touschek lifetime should ideally be the same regardless of whether you specify s_end as one superperiod length or leave it unspecified (assuming it defaults to the whole ring) in the momentum_aperture command. However, I am seeing significant difference in the Touschek lifetime for these two cases although the momentum aperture is consistent in both the cases.
What could be causing this discrepancy? and what should be the correct way of setting the momentum _aperture command.
-Monika
-
- Posts: 23
- Joined: 07 Jul 2022, 01:07
Re: Difference in Touschek lifetime
I have attached the lte and ele files below.
-
- Posts: 2005
- Joined: 19 May 2008, 09:33
- Location: Argonne National Laboratory
- Contact:
Re: Difference in Touschek lifetime
Monika,
Could you also upload your .mmap files for the two cases, along with the touschekLifetime commands you used?
Thanks--Michael
Could you also upload your .mmap files for the two cases, along with the touschekLifetime commands you used?
Thanks--Michael
-
- Posts: 23
- Joined: 07 Jul 2022, 01:07
Re: Difference in Touschek lifetime
Hi, sorry for the late reply.
I have attached the mmap files for both the cases.
The touschek lifetime command I used is:
touschekLifetime -twiss=A2.twi -aperture=A2.mmap A2.lt -charge=0.2 -coupling=0.01 -rf=volt=7.0,harm=1600
Thanks.
-Monika
I have attached the mmap files for both the cases.
The touschek lifetime command I used is:
touschekLifetime -twiss=A2.twi -aperture=A2.mmap A2.lt -charge=0.2 -coupling=0.01 -rf=volt=7.0,harm=1600
Thanks.
-Monika
- Attachments
-
- A2_unit.mmap
- taking s_end= length of one unit cell
- (18.41 KiB) Downloaded 1236 times
-
- A2.mmap
- not taking s_end at all.
- (540.74 KiB) Downloaded 1222 times
-
- Posts: 2005
- Joined: 19 May 2008, 09:33
- Location: Argonne National Laboratory
- Contact:
Re: Difference in Touschek lifetime
Monika,
The problem is that the computation of bunch length doesn't work correctly for a partial ring. If you use the -length option to provide the bunch length instead of the -rf option, you'll get essentially the same answer for both the full ring and the partial ring.
It should be possible to improve this by having the user specify the number of superperiods. I'll look into that.
--Michael
The problem is that the computation of bunch length doesn't work correctly for a partial ring. If you use the -length option to provide the bunch length instead of the -rf option, you'll get essentially the same answer for both the full ring and the partial ring.
It should be possible to improve this by having the user specify the number of superperiods. I'll look into that.
--Michael
-
- Posts: 23
- Joined: 07 Jul 2022, 01:07
Re: Difference in Touschek lifetime
Hi,
Even after replacing -rf with the bunch length, the Touschek lifetime is still different for both the cases (i.e., for a single superperiod and the entire ring). . Furthermore, the .lt file shows the same bunch length for both cases suggesting that the computation of the bunch length is correct even for a partial ring. So, the difference in Touschek lifetime is still not clear to me.
Thanks
-Monika
Even after replacing -rf with the bunch length, the Touschek lifetime is still different for both the cases (i.e., for a single superperiod and the entire ring). . Furthermore, the .lt file shows the same bunch length for both cases suggesting that the computation of the bunch length is correct even for a partial ring. So, the difference in Touschek lifetime is still not clear to me.
Thanks
-Monika
-
- Posts: 2005
- Joined: 19 May 2008, 09:33
- Location: Argonne National Laboratory
- Contact:
Re: Difference in Touschek lifetime
Monika,
I get different results. Here's my script
and the output
You can see that the bunch length and lifetime are different (and wrong) in the second case (unit LMA/twiss plus -rf option), but correct in the third case (unit LMA/twiss plus -length option).
--Michael
I get different results. Here's my script
Code: Select all
#!/bin/bash
touschekLifetime -twiss=A2Twiss.twi -aperture=A2.mmap A2.tlife -charge=0.2 -coupling=0.01 -rf=volt=7,harm=1600
sddsprintout -parameter=sigmaz -parameter=tLifetime A2.tlife -title="Full LMA and twiss files with -rf option"
touschekLifetime -twiss=A2TwissUnit.twi -aperture=A2_unit.mmap A2_unit.tlife -charge=0.2 -coupling=0.01 -rf=volt=7,harm=50
sddsprintout -parameter=sigmaz -parameter=tLifetime A2_unit.tlife -title="Unit LMA and twiss files with -rf option"
length=`sdds2stream -parameter=sigmaz A2.tlife`
touschekLifetime -twiss=A2TwissUnit.twi -aperture=A2_unit.mmap A2_unit.tlife -charge=0.2 -coupling=0.01 -length=`rpnl $length 1e-3 /`
sddsprintout -parameter=sigmaz -parameter=tLifetime A2_unit.tlife -title="Unit LMA and twiss files with -length option"
Code: Select all
Full LMA and twiss files with -rf option
sigmaz (m) = 2.631383e-03 tLifetime (hour) = 1.746720e+01
Unit LMA and twiss files with -rf option
sigmaz (m) = 4.458803e-04 tLifetime (hour) = 2.925825e+00
Unit LMA and twiss files with -length option
sigmaz (m) = 2.631383e-03 tLifetime (hour) = 1.726689e+01
--Michael
-
- Posts: 23
- Joined: 07 Jul 2022, 01:07
Re: Difference in Touschek lifetime
I don't get the same result as you for the unit cell case. Maybe I'd install the latest elegant version and then try again.
Thank you so much.
-Monika
Thank you so much.
-Monika