opal AT lists.psi.ch

Subject: The OPAL Discussion Forum

List archive

Re: [Opal] Field Maps Accepted by Solenoid

From: Christof Metzger-Kraus <christof.j.kraus AT gmail.com>
To: Anastasia Ierides <aaierides AT gmail.com>
Cc: opal <opal AT lists.psi.ch>
Subject: Re: [Opal] Field Maps Accepted by Solenoid
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 18:25:20 +0200
Authentication-results: localhost; iprev=pass (mail-io1-f52.google.com) smtp.remote-ip=209.85.166.52; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.a=rsa-sha256; dmarc=pass header.from=gmail.com

Hi Anastasia,

both the solenoid and the RF cavity element accept 1D, 2D and 3D field maps. The parameter KS is always a scaling factor.

It is correct that the magnetic fields provided by 3D field maps are in A/m.

Best regards

Christof

Anastasia Ierides <aaierides AT gmail.com> schrieb am Fr., 7. Aug. 2020, 17:42:

Hi Opal team,

I am trying to implement elements using their field maps in order to perform more accurate beam dynamics calculations.

According to the statement in issue #562 opened 4 weeks ago, a solenoid (only with magnetostatic field maps) or an RF cavity element may be used as a representation of the element with the specified field map.

My question is, can the solenoid read 1D, 2D and 3D magnetostatic field maps or just in 1D?

In this case, would KS be considered a scaling factor for the total field?

Thanks for the assistance,

Anastasia Ierides

P.S. I noticed a discrepancy in the units used between the 1D/2D magnetostatic field maps (T) and the 3D field maps (A/m) in the manual. Just wondering if it is correct.

--
aaierides AT gmail.com
T: (505) 507-4306
Anastasia's LinkedIn Profile

[Opal] Field Maps Accepted by Solenoid, Anastasia Ierides, 08/07/2020
- Re: [Opal] Field Maps Accepted by Solenoid, Christof Metzger-Kraus, 08/07/2020