CEA Codes forum

Dear Didier, yes, if you fully implement the feature, you get practically a second TraceWin project, not a run of a second beam. We are designing a mebt coming from an RFQ, so we use the first beam with the rfq output without the not accelerated particles, and the second beam with the not accelerate...

Dear Didier,
is there any way to adjust the diagnostics differently between the first and second beam?
I mean a way to have different settings or avoid the action of the adjust on the second beam?
Best Regards,
Michele Comunian

Dear Didier, I get a problem of reading the file "Statistic_Errors_1_PAR_tot2.txt" relative to the second beam, in particular, is not show the plot of emitXXp growth with the message: "No data to plot". Instead with the first beam everything works without problem. I've attach the tracewin project. B...

Dear Didier,
thank you!!!
B.R.
Michele Comunian

Dear Didier, as you can image, we are using TraceWin in a lot of various scenarios. When we use it from the command line, i.e. without gui, some times we are not able to reproduce the results of the gui version, because some parameters are not the same in the used .ini file. In my opinion, you can k...

Dear Didier,
is it possible to introduce on TraceWin the value of the magnetic field used for the bending magnet element?
I mean to have the possibility to fix the value of the magnetic field B used in the simulation, independently from the Brho of the beam.
Best Regards,
Michele Comunian

Dear Didier,
what about adding as input variable parameters on the command line, for the no gui tracewin version, the following aspects:
1) Partran space charge options.
2) Input distribution type.
3) Partran energy and phase limits.

My Best Regards,
Michele comunian

Dar All,
I think can be very interesting, for peoples involved on RFQ design, the following my article (open access) with doi:

https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/19/01/P01024

All the simulations has been done with Toutatis.
Please feel free to ask about that.
Best Regards,
Michele Comunian

Dear Hanxj,
may be you can use beam_rot to rotate the BEAM of +90° before the field maps, i..e exchange x<->y and rotate again with beam_rot of -90° after the field maps.
In this way you do not need to touch the field maps.
Best Regards,
Michele Comunian

Dear Romuald, thank you for the suggestions. May be you can try with the fast path 1) and if that is not working you can go to the 2). You can change the error message into a warning, about to create an rfq with large modulation, that can lead to a missing calculation on peak field, and/or other par...