LATTICE and CALCULATE INPUT MATCHED BEAM  [SOLVED]

https://www.dacm-logiciels.fr/tracewin
Post Reply
United States of Americawtam
Skilled
Skilled
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon 7 Dec 2020 06:17
Location: Boston
Country:
United States of America (us)
United States of America

LATTICE and CALCULATE INPUT MATCHED BEAM

Post by United States of Americawtam »

Hi Colleagues,

When I use "lattice" and "set_adv" to "calculate input matched beam", can I set constraints to the resulting twiss parameters? For example, if I want the resulting input beam to be a round beam.

Best regards,
Wai-Ming
User avatar
FranceDidier
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 978
Joined: Wed 26 Aug 2020 14:40
Country:
France (fr)
France

Re: LATTICE and CALCULATE INPUT MATCHED BEAM

Post by FranceDidier »

Dear Wai-Ming,

I don't see any way to do that except to average the results.

Regards,

Didier
United States of Americawtam
Skilled
Skilled
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon 7 Dec 2020 06:17
Location: Boston
Country:
United States of America (us)
United States of America

Re: LATTICE and CALCULATE INPUT MATCHED BEAM

Post by United States of Americawtam »

Dear Didier,

Is it possible to start with a known input beam and use "adjust" on a few quadrupoles to match the beam at the beginning of a "lattice"?

Best regards,
Wai-Ming
User avatar
FranceDidier
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 978
Joined: Wed 26 Aug 2020 14:40
Country:
France (fr)
France

Re: LATTICE and CALCULATE INPUT MATCHED BEAM

Post by FranceDidier »

Dear Wai-Ming,

I think that yes, it is necessary to put diagnostics of type "DIAG_DSIZE2" in the first lattice (at least, 5 I think) so as to force the matching. By the way, this is the way we calculate the beam to inject in the SPIRAL2 accelerator. Experimentally validated method.

Regards,

Didier
United States of Americawtam
Skilled
Skilled
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon 7 Dec 2020 06:17
Location: Boston
Country:
United States of America (us)
United States of America

Re: LATTICE and CALCULATE INPUT MATCHED BEAM

Post by United States of Americawtam »

Dear Didier,

Could you please show me how to use "DIAG_DSIZE2" on Q1 and Q2 in the example project (attached) to match the input beam calculated by "LATTICE" at the beginning of the lattice itself?

Best regards,
Wai-Ming
Attachments
match.dat
(637 Bytes) Downloaded 177 times
match.ini
(43.77 KiB) Downloaded 189 times
User avatar
FranceDidier
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 978
Joined: Wed 26 Aug 2020 14:40
Country:
France (fr)
France

Re: LATTICE and CALCULATE INPUT MATCHED BEAM

Post by FranceDidier »

Dear Wia-Ming,

Below is an example of how to use the DIAG_DSIZE2 diagnostics. Now starting with a round beam it is virtually impossible to get a perfect matching in your channel.
Another point, while working on your example I noticed a bug in the GAP element, which I corrected in the latest online version.

Regards,

Didier

match.cal
(77 Bytes) Downloaded 169 times
match.dat
(791 Bytes) Downloaded 184 times
match.ini
(43.77 KiB) Downloaded 192 times
United States of Americawtam
Skilled
Skilled
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon 7 Dec 2020 06:17
Location: Boston
Country:
United States of America (us)
United States of America

Re: LATTICE and CALCULATE INPUT MATCHED BEAM

Post by United States of Americawtam »

Dear Didier,

It is great! Thanks!
Two follow up questions:
(1) Does a "DIAG" statement count as an element? It seems it does but it does not affect the lattice periodicity.
(2) See attached. I keep commenting out the "DIAG_DSIZE2" statement one by one but the matching still works fine. I don't think I understand how it work.

Best regards,
Wai-Ming
Attachments
match.ini
(43.77 KiB) Downloaded 190 times
match.dat
(811 Bytes) Downloaded 179 times
User avatar
FranceDidier
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 978
Joined: Wed 26 Aug 2020 14:40
Country:
France (fr)
France

Re: LATTICE and CALCULATE INPUT MATCHED BEAM  [SOLVED]

Post by FranceDidier »

Dear Wia-Ming,

1) Yes DIAG are element but they are not counted in the periodicity for convenience
2) As long as there are at least 2 DIAG_DSIZE2, the adaptation is theoretically always feasible, but most of the time more are needed to ensure continuity of the focus channel, it depends very much on the machine.

Regards,

Didier
Post Reply