Difference between revisions of "Mar 13, 2020 Meeting Minutes"

From Ciswikidb
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 5: Line 5:
  
 
==Post-meeting notes==
 
==Post-meeting notes==
* asdf
+
* Josh presented GPT simulations of a single bunch going through stationary ions to see the effect of space charge
 +
* Need to check CST model's accuracy
 +
* Make the time step different after the electron bunch passes through the ions
 +
* Make DC beam simulations (i.e. through 100us)
 +
* Make DC ion beam instead of electron beam? (w/ higher timestep)
  
 
[[Ionization Effects Meetings | Return to Ionization Effects Meetings]]
 
[[Ionization Effects Meetings | Return to Ionization Effects Meetings]]
  
 
[[Weekly phone call - Mar 13, 2020 | Go to Meeting Page]]
 
[[Weekly phone call - Mar 13, 2020 | Go to Meeting Page]]

Revision as of 15:37, 24 March 2020

Emails/attachments sent during the previous week

  • Email chain subject name: Investigating EField on axis between 0.1 and 0.3
    • Date: Mar 9, 2020
    • Description: Josh sent plots of Ez vs z between 0.1 and 0.3m to see if there is indeed a bump in the electric field. These plots showed no bump in the e-field, even at small stepsizes. Cristhian said that one possible reason for a bump in his e-field plots is because he is solving the E-field using Neumann boundary conditions at the end of the beamline.

Post-meeting notes

  • Josh presented GPT simulations of a single bunch going through stationary ions to see the effect of space charge
  • Need to check CST model's accuracy
  • Make the time step different after the electron bunch passes through the ions
  • Make DC beam simulations (i.e. through 100us)
  • Make DC ion beam instead of electron beam? (w/ higher timestep)

Return to Ionization Effects Meetings

Go to Meeting Page