Export error

[RomualdDuperrier]

Hi

I see that your injected beam (beam.dst) has an energy of 663 keV while the RFQ is designed for 40 keV (linac 1 0.04 81.25 15.88123667 5.0 in machine). Thus I am not surprised that the code does not like so much the setup and I would be surprised that the previous version liked it either. Could you please confirm your input data?

Best,

Romuald

[Vyacheslav]

Dear Romuald,
thanks for the help.

Yes, I confirm the input data sent.

Regards, Vyacheslav.

[Vyacheslav]

Dear Romuald,

more over, with the Fixed files I have problems also with this project (see attachment).

Fig.

Error 3.jpg (327.62 KiB) Viewed 12843 times

Regards, Vyacheslav

[Vyacheslav]

Dear Romuald,

Even more, without files you shared before, Toutatis treats the attached corrected project, but with the Fixed files it still send a massages presented above with the errors.

What can it be?

Regards,
Vyacheslav

[RomualdDuperrier]

Hi

Please find below a new exe to test.

https://we.tl/t-Ud5yvTpRFl

There were several issues with the new code but also with your inputs. By the way, I do not think your previous simulations with the older version were correct either.

At the moment the energy of your beam is 663 keV, with the older version, you can not declare 40 keV at the linac line. I changed the code to handle this, so now, no matter. The result was that the beam phase extent was shrunk and you did not simulate the bunching of a continuous beam.

Also, the reference beta in .inp (derived from cell length) and the average beta in your .dst do not match by a few percents.

Best,

Romuald

[Vyacheslav]

Dear Romuald,

thanks a lot.

I'll try a new one.

Regards,
Vyacheslav

[Vyacheslav]

Dear Romuald,

unfortunately, with the use of the last fixed files of the program, that was shared by you, a message below appeared for the attached project.

Fig. 1

message_1.png (322.3 KiB) Viewed 12793 times

Under the original file it calculates dynamics whatever it is not perfect.

Fig. 2

message_2.png (240.57 KiB) Viewed 12793 times

Is it correct?

Regards,
Vyacheslav

[RomualdDuperrier]

Hi

based on the output, I see that you are using the older version. With the new version, results on my platform are however similar:

Centroid position 5.114 m, NGood = 1961, NBad = 1038 -> trans. 65.39 %
Centroid position 5.123 m, NGood = 1961, NBad = 1038 -> trans. 65.39 %
Output RMS characteristics of the beam for accelerated particles:

Emittance norm. X: 0.24036 Pi.mm.mrad | alphaX: 0.56472 | betaX: 0.091409 m/rad

Emittance norm. Y: 0.42663 Pi.mm.mrad | alphaY: -2.8881 | betaY: 0.31189 m/rad

Emittance Z: 0.97941 deg.MeV | alphaZ: 0.19511 | betaZ: 57.713 deg/MeV
(inside DW_FILTER = 0.5 MeV)

Output RMS characteristics of the beam for all particles:

Emittance norm. X: 1.7639 Pi.mm.mrad | alphaX: 0.90201 | betaX: 0.098242 m/rad

Emittance norm. Y: 3.5977 Pi.mm.mrad | alphaY: 0.21614 | betaY: 0.079765 m/rad

Emittance Z: 326.7 deg.MeV | alphaZ: 0.032046 | betaZ: 10.265 deg/MeV
(total)

Transmission -> Total 65.39 % (W = 9.01046 MeV) & Accelerated (W+/-DW= 12.85646 +/- 0.500 MeV) 44.61 %


I have not seen anything wrong in the simulation and the results seem consistent with design parameters.

Best,

Romuald

[Vyacheslav]

Dear Romuald,

the problem is that with the use last updated version of the file, shared by you, on my PC the calculation stopped on the FIG.1 from my previous message, namely, on the string "There are only 2999 ..." and no other actions were taken.

What can it be?

Regards,
Vyacheslav

[RomualdDuperrier]

Hi

I ran your case with my current version that shoulf be as recent as yours. It worked. Anyhow, I will retry by Monday to run your case. If it works, I will send you the executable I used and then let me know what happened.

Best

Romuald