Plasma Wakefield: Difference between revisions

From PBTWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 1: Line 1:
AWAKE Simulations
AWAKE Simulations


== Poster Simulation 09-09-22 ==
=== [[/Poster_Simulation_09-09-22|Poster Simulation 09-09-22]] ===


Simulation of short driver bunches. Beams are defined directly within the configuration and beamfiles run through lem.py for diagnostics.  
Simulation of short driver bunches. Beams are defined directly within the configuration and beamfiles run through lem.py for diagnostics.  


(LCODE configuration takes m/q, but resulting beamfiles are in q/m).
(LCODE configuration takes m/q, but resulting beamfiles are in q/m).
=== [[/Poster_Simulation_09-09-22|Poster Simulation 09-09-22]] ===





Revision as of 22:34, 9 September 2022

AWAKE Simulations

Poster Simulation 09-09-22

Simulation of short driver bunches. Beams are defined directly within the configuration and beamfiles run through lem.py for diagnostics.

(LCODE configuration takes m/q, but resulting beamfiles are in q/m).


Run Number Base Configuration Window Width Window Length q/m Total Weight (pC) LCODE ampl LCODE Beam Current LCODE Beam Length Beam Length (um) Energy (approx) (GeV) Comments
1 short_bunch - DAC 3 10 1.0 -2045.504558 1 -3.6 0.1 3.63 30 Default DAC short_bunch.cfg
2 short_bunch - DAC 3 10 0.00054 -2045.504558 1 -3.6 0.1 3.64 30 Only change made to cfg m/q for protons. Ez plots for 1 and 2 are identical.
3 short_bunch - DAC 3 20 1.0 -2045.504558 1 -3.6 0.1 3.64 30 Plot x-range increases with window length increase.
4 short_bunch - DAC 3 100 1.0 -2045.504558 1 -3.6 0.1 3.63 30 Expecting Ez fall off with distance. Do observe this.
5 short_bunch - DAC 3 100 0.00054 -2045.504558 1 -3.6 0.1 3.64 30 Checking to see if Ez attenuation with distance is different for q/m=1/1836 (proton ). Identical plots.
6 short_bunch - DAC 3 20 0.00054 -2045.504558 -1 -3.6 0.1 3.64 30 Can compare this with run 3 as mass not impacting currently. Identical despite ampl=-1 meaning should be opposite charge. Will set this directly in m/q next.
7 short_bunch - DAC 3 20 1.0 -2045.504558 1 -3.6 0.1 3.63 30 Despite setting m/q=1 in cfg, lem still shows positive and so results identical to run 3.
8 short_bunch - DAC 3 20 1.0 -2045.504558 -1 -3.6 0.1 3.63 30 Keeping m/q as negative and making ampl=-1. Still no change. It seems (from previous knowledge) only changing the sign of the beam current in cfg makes a difference to m/q sign.
9 short_bunch - DAC 3 20 1.0 2045.504558 1 +3.6 0.1 3.63 30 Return to run 3 parameters but set current to positive. Saying q/m is +1 still, but total weight is now positive, suggesting previous runs have been negative species and this is positive.