-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
coherent synchrotron radiation #23
Comments
Thanx for these interesting tests @berceanu -- we should definitely look into this, |
Hi @hightower8083 indeed, the radiation plugin implementation from PoG is described in some detail here. Would you also require the PoG input files, or just the synchrad input and trajectory data? |
inputs would already be helpful, and I suspect tracks data should be rather large. right now I'd like to understand why all spectrum in synchrad case is coherent -- in general that shouldn't be the case for a finite-size beam. |
Hi @hightower8083 , in the interest of completeness and reproducibility, I am going to link here to the complete data set, including the The total archive size is ~60 GB, so it should be download-able over a standard connection in about 20 minutes (tested on Chrome). To extract, simply run:
|
This might also be of interest for @PrometheusPi by the way, as he is the main person behind |
Than you for the data @berceanu , though its a bit fat for a quick check. As I do not have much doubt on the PIC simulation itself, and I suspect something is happening as the data is passed to |
Of course @hightower8083 , here is a link to the extracted tracks. The Thanks again for taking the time to look at this! |
hi @berceanu I did some tests and found a couple problems:
While first issue is fixed, I'm still not sure which would be the best solution for the second problem. For an ideal case of all macro-particles emitting coherently the same field
I've tried several cases and these solutions seems to give cleaner results though do not show much difference between them (see right panel in fig below). I'm still puzzled why in the case of unity weights there is still an important difference in the incoherent region between coherent and incoherent mappers. In the simple betatron example case below (with unity weights) I see that mappers converge well in the incoherent region and the coherent peak corresponds to the one expected. To conclude, for now I've implemented the correction |
The time issue that @hightower8083 found would definitely cause a significant issue. I would not trust the coherent to incoherent transition from the ensemble average PIConGPU simulation, since this depends heavily on the assumed macro particle shape. (See https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2018.02.020 for details.) But this does not explain why PIConGPU predicts such a high intensity at 1e-3 keV. Without knowing many details of syncrad, I agree with @hightower8083 that the higher result of the coherent calculation compared to the incoherent calculation in the high frequency/incoherent region of the spectrum is strange. |
Hi,
We're looking to check the code corectness for the coherent part of the synchrotron emission spectrum by comparing with the PIConGPU radiation plugin output for a simple LWFA setup.
While we get relatively good agreement for the incoherent part of the spectrum, the coherent part seems to be a global upward shift of the whole spectrum in the case of synchrad, while for PIConGPU, the coherent low-energy part actually has a different shape, as can be seen in the attached figure.
We used this code in the case of synchrad:
adapted from the
Betatron_Example.ipynb
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: