Comparison Between, and Validation Against an Experiment of, a Slowly-Varying Envelope Approximation Code and a Particle-in-Cell Simulation Code for Free-Electron Lasers.

L. Campbell, H. Freund, J. Henderson, B. McNeil, P. Traczykowski, P. Slot
{"title":"Comparison Between, and Validation Against an Experiment of, a Slowly-Varying Envelope Approximation Code and a Particle-in-Cell Simulation Code for Free-Electron Lasers.","authors":"L. Campbell, H. Freund, J. Henderson, B. McNeil, P. Traczykowski, P. Slot","doi":"10.18429/JACOW-FEL2019-TUP050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Free-electron lasers (FELs) operate at wavelengths down to hard x-rays, and are either seeded or start from noise. There is increasing interest in x-ray FELs that rely on Self-Amplified Spontaneous Emission (SASE), and this involves increasing simulation activity in the design, optimization, and characterization of these x-ray FELs. Most of the simulation codes in use rely on the Slowly-Varying Envelope Approximation (SVEA) in which Maxwell's equations are averaged over the fast time scale resulting in relatively small computational requirements. While the SVEA codes are generally successful, the predictions of these codes sometimes differ in various aspects of the FEL interaction. In contrast, Particle-in-Cell (PiC) simulation codes do not average Maxwell's equations and are considered to be a more complete model of the underlying physics.Unfortunately, they require much longer run times than SVEA codes and have not been validated by comparison with experiment as often as the SVEA codes. In order to remedy this, and to resolve issues that arise due to different predictions between the SVEA codes, we present a comparison between one SVEA code (MINERVA) and a PiC simulation code (PUFFIN) with the experimental measurements obtained at the SPARC SASE FEL experiment at ENEA Frascati. The results show good agreement between the two codes and between the codes and the experiment. Since the formulations of the two codes share no common elements, this validates both formulations and demonstrates the capability to model the FEL interaction from the start of teh undulator through the undulator and into deep saturation.","PeriodicalId":8436,"journal":{"name":"arXiv: Accelerator Physics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv: Accelerator Physics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18429/JACOW-FEL2019-TUP050","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Free-electron lasers (FELs) operate at wavelengths down to hard x-rays, and are either seeded or start from noise. There is increasing interest in x-ray FELs that rely on Self-Amplified Spontaneous Emission (SASE), and this involves increasing simulation activity in the design, optimization, and characterization of these x-ray FELs. Most of the simulation codes in use rely on the Slowly-Varying Envelope Approximation (SVEA) in which Maxwell's equations are averaged over the fast time scale resulting in relatively small computational requirements. While the SVEA codes are generally successful, the predictions of these codes sometimes differ in various aspects of the FEL interaction. In contrast, Particle-in-Cell (PiC) simulation codes do not average Maxwell's equations and are considered to be a more complete model of the underlying physics.Unfortunately, they require much longer run times than SVEA codes and have not been validated by comparison with experiment as often as the SVEA codes. In order to remedy this, and to resolve issues that arise due to different predictions between the SVEA codes, we present a comparison between one SVEA code (MINERVA) and a PiC simulation code (PUFFIN) with the experimental measurements obtained at the SPARC SASE FEL experiment at ENEA Frascati. The results show good agreement between the two codes and between the codes and the experiment. Since the formulations of the two codes share no common elements, this validates both formulations and demonstrates the capability to model the FEL interaction from the start of teh undulator through the undulator and into deep saturation.
自由电子激光器慢变包络近似码与细胞内粒子模拟码的比较与实验验证。
自由电子激光器(FELs)的工作波长低至硬x射线,要么是种子,要么是从噪声开始的。人们对依赖自放大自发发射(SASE)的x射线FELs越来越感兴趣,这涉及到在这些x射线FELs的设计、优化和表征方面越来越多的模拟活动。大多数使用的模拟代码依赖于慢变包络近似(SVEA),其中麦克斯韦方程在快速时间尺度上平均,导致相对较小的计算需求。虽然SVEA码通常是成功的,但这些码的预测有时在FEL相互作用的各个方面存在差异。相比之下,粒子单元(PiC)模拟代码不平均麦克斯韦方程组,被认为是一个更完整的基础物理模型。不幸的是,它们比SVEA代码需要更长的运行时间,并且没有像SVEA代码那样经常通过对比实验来验证。为了解决这一问题,并解决由于SVEA代码之间的不同预测而出现的问题,我们提出了一个SVEA代码(MINERVA)和一个PiC模拟代码(PUFFIN)之间的比较,并在ENEA Frascati的SPARC SASE FEL实验中获得了实验测量结果。结果表明,两种规范之间以及规范与实验结果吻合较好。由于两种代码的公式没有共同的元素,这验证了两种公式,并展示了从波动器开始到波动器和深度饱和的FEL相互作用的建模能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信