Plasma Wakefield/DriverStudy: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
FernPannell (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
FernPannell (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Electron and Positron beams generated with DEFAULT JPF witr.py beamfile generator, run through lem.py for beam diagnostics, and used with JPF base0.cfg (edited for increased duration and format of outputted results). | Electron and Positron beams generated with DEFAULT JPF witr.py beamfile generator, run through lem.py for beam diagnostics, and used with JPF base0.cfg (edited for increased duration and format of outputted results). | ||
A positive q/m is obtained by changing the sign of the bunch charge in witr.py and the sign of Qw (hmmmmmm) | |||
{| class="wikitable" | {| class="wikitable" | ||
| Line 13: | Line 15: | ||
!LCODE Beam Length | !LCODE Beam Length | ||
!Beam Length (um) | !Beam Length (um) | ||
!Energy (approx) ( | !Energy (approx) (MeV) | ||
!Comments | !Comments | ||
|- | |- | ||
|1 || | |1 || electron || base0.cfg (JPF) || 3.84 || 10 || -1.0 || -49.980500 || n/a || n/a || n/a || 59.755747 || 150 || Result as expected, but need to run over greater plasma depth. | ||
|- | |||
|2 || electron || base0.cfg (JPF) || 3.84 || 100 || -1.0 || -49.980500 || n/a || n/a || n/a || 59.755747 || 150 || Longer run. | |||
|- | |||
|3 || positron || base0.cfg (JPF) || 3.84 || 100 || 1.0 || 49.976500 || n/a || n/a || n/a || 60.038280 || 150 || Identical to electrons which isn't right. Just changing bunch charge sign for next run in case of cancelling effect? | |||
|- | |||
|4 || positron(?) || base0.cfg (JPF) || 3.84 || 100 || 1.0 || 49.976500 || n/a || n/a || n/a || 59.844681 || 150 || test | |||
|- | |- | ||
Latest revision as of 13:04, 29 September 2022
Electron and Positron beams generated with DEFAULT JPF witr.py beamfile generator, run through lem.py for beam diagnostics, and used with JPF base0.cfg (edited for increased duration and format of outputted results).
A positive q/m is obtained by changing the sign of the bunch charge in witr.py and the sign of Qw (hmmmmmm)
| Run Number | Driver Description | Base Configuration | Window Width | Window Length | q/m | Total Weight (pC) | LCODE ampl | LCODE Beam Current | LCODE Beam Length | Beam Length (um) | Energy (approx) (MeV) | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | electron | base0.cfg (JPF) | 3.84 | 10 | -1.0 | -49.980500 | n/a | n/a | n/a | 59.755747 | 150 | Result as expected, but need to run over greater plasma depth. |
| 2 | electron | base0.cfg (JPF) | 3.84 | 100 | -1.0 | -49.980500 | n/a | n/a | n/a | 59.755747 | 150 | Longer run. |
| 3 | positron | base0.cfg (JPF) | 3.84 | 100 | 1.0 | 49.976500 | n/a | n/a | n/a | 60.038280 | 150 | Identical to electrons which isn't right. Just changing bunch charge sign for next run in case of cancelling effect? |
| 4 | positron(?) | base0.cfg (JPF) | 3.84 | 100 | 1.0 | 49.976500 | n/a | n/a | n/a | 59.844681 | 150 | test |