-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix on atfastring #314
Fix on atfastring #314
Conversation
In fact, there was a bug on each side ! Though not optimised, it should be ok for the moment. |
For the radiation version of the fast ring, the non-linear and diffusion element are swapped compared to the initial version and to the Matlab version. I think I remember this make a difference (on the equilibrium state) in the first tests we did a long time ago. Are you sure they can swapped ? Maybe @simoneliuzzo or @carmignani remember, I may be wrong… |
@swhite2401 : line 61: what kind of error do you want to ignore ? It would be better to be more precise to avoid ignoring unexpected errors. try:
qd_elem = gen_quantdiff_elem(merged_ring)
fastring.append(qd_elem)
except:
pass |
ibegs = get_refpts(merged_ring, 'xbeg') | ||
iends = get_refpts(merged_ring, 'xend') | ||
markers = numpy.sort(numpy.concatenate((ibegs, iends))) | ||
with warnings.catch_warnings(): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this change is fine, however we generally use fond_orbit_sync for this kind of calculation without radiation. This is why I had suppressed the warning.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Agreed, but in this case, dct=0
is strictly equivalent to dp=0
: it's the on-momentum orbit. And it's the default behaviour.
I think this was a simple way to manage the case where |
Why would this be an issue? |
No idea. I just remember that the equilibrium phase-space when running a large population was different, but again I may be wrong. It could be tested again |
Ok. Do you know what class of error this raises ? If this is not clear, I'll put |
I am not quite sure, I think it is the cholesky transform complaining (ValueError?), I can check that later today, but what you propose is fine |
Well this tool is not so stupid: |
haha ok then I check later today and let you know |
I confirm this is a |
The except clause is now more strict. OK for merging ? |
ok for me! |
Fix the bug reported in #305.