CEA Codes forum

Dear Nicolas,
Yes, you are right. I am so happy that the problem is solved. I checked other parts of the simulation but ignored the phase plane.
Thank you very much!

Regards,

Emily

Dear Didier, I used the matching option (1) Calculate input matched beam to calculate matched beam for a FFDD period, and found the calculated result is: Twiss_parameters_of_matched_beam ; Criterion=1.958483e-011 0.5058262122 0.1630822965 0.2914046369 1.8464836872 -1.0570016401 -0.0124267708 but the...

Dear Didier:
OK, I have got it, thank you for your help.

Regards,

Emily

Dear Didier:
I upgraded the code. However, there was still a problem, as shown in the following picture. The synchronous phase changed abruptly at the third period. The synchronous phases follow the rule to keep the constant longitudinal acceptance.

Regards,
Emily

Dear Didier: Yes, you are right, at the first period of the elliptical cavity section, the synchronous phase should double to keep the longitudinal acceptance constant. However, the linac generated by the GenlinWin didn't obey this rule, as shown in the following picture. I don't know why. Regards, ...

Dear Didier: I have a problem about the synchronous phase adjusted for two different sections. As the following linac(please see the attachment), there are two sections, a 324MHz spoke section and a 648MHz elliptical cavity section. For the elliptical cavity section ,why the synchronous phase of the...

Dear Didier:
Thank you! The problem was solved.
At first,I upgraded the software, but the problem wasn't solved. Then I re-downloaded the software again and deleted the old version, and it finally worked.

Regards,
Emily

Dear Didier: I have a question about using acceptance reduction in GenlinWin. I set the const longitudinal acceptance at 80%. I think the acceptance will be reduced gradually over 10 periods. However, at the second period, the acceptance is reduced to 80% of the initial one by abruptly improving the...

Dear Didier,
I checked the beta function, but the calculated beta are different with both beta(env) and beta(par),please see the attached files. Of course, I used the non normalized emittance at the beginning of the structure. Thank you!
Best regards,
Emily

Dear Didier,
However, at the end of the lattice, the rms beam sizes from the envelope plot are exactly same with those from the phase-space plot, as following:
Best regards,
Emily