Extension/issue 85 #151
Extension/issue 85 #151
Conversation
imbeauf
requested review from
DavidPCoster,
SimonPinches,
aksinghh,
medvedevsyu,
olivhoenen,
pankin,
qsthayashi,
simpla-fusion and
yegakjh
as code owners
schemas/utilities/dd_support.xsd
Outdated
| </xs:element> | ||
| <xs:element name="motion_invariants_volume" type="generic_grid_scalar"> | ||
| <xs:annotation> | ||
| <xs:documentation>Volume of the invariants of motion space volume elements</xs:documentation> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a simpler way to say this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would use "Normalised volume of the CoM (constants of motion) cell elements". Constant is a more widely used terminology in the EP community than invariant.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If it's normalized, to what is it normalized ? And what should be the units of this ? For the moment I indicated T.m^2.J
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For the energy I use eV instead of J, so that the CoM volume unit is T.m^2.eV.
The normalised CoM volume is normalised by the cartesian CoM volume element defined by the CoM grid steps ,stored in the GGD, \Delta V_{CoM} = \Delta Pphi \Delta \lambda \Delta E. In some parts of CoM space, this volume element is reduced when approaching the topological boundaries of the domain, which is why a 3D array is necessary for storing the volume element around each CoM cell.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Definition clarified after talking to Guillaume, see last commit.
The CoM volume is normalised, so its units is "1", but we have restored "eV" for the energy since it makes sense for a single particule or particules distributions. This is allowed by the DD rules"SI+eV" and is used in several places of the DD for particle energies.
|
I asked some of the fast particle people about this proposed change, and received the following: Dave, is seems the removing E is not what Guillaume wants: E should be the particle energy and not the electric field! Phase is probably the gyrophase in case we have a fully kinetic particle orbit. (add to description for clarity). Maybe E has already been fixed meanwhile? Did Guillaume comment on this? Best, Philipp |
DavidPCoster
left a comment
DavidPCoster
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Has the comment from Philipp Lauber been addressed?
|
@brochag, do you have any comments on this PR? |
Co-authored-by: Simon Pinches <SimonPinches@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Simon Pinches <SimonPinches@users.noreply.github.com>
I have added "gyro"phase to the description. |
|
Hi all, Sorry for my late response, I'm in between institutions and I haven't been given a work email yet ... Hopefully soon. Indeed when storing the midplane invariants on the CoM grid, the energy leaf is redundant when using a constants of motion (CoM) grid that has energy as one of the dimension. As of now the only CoM grid option is (Pphi : toroidal canonical momentum, \lambda = mu B_0/E : pitch angle, E : energy). However I will add later different options for the CoM grid dimensions (magnetic moment mu instead of energy E for example), so actually in that case the energy leaf will not be redundant anymore. I didn't think of that. So in conclusion, we should leave the energy leaf structure. Sorry for the inaccurate request Frédéric. Indeed the phase is the gyro phase when considering full-orbit particles. Guillaume |
|
Ok, energy added again |
Co-authored-by: Simon Pinches <SimonPinches@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Simon Pinches <SimonPinches@users.noreply.github.com>
…me element + restore eV for the energy
…tionary-5547 into extension/issue-85
|
What do you think about integrating the two remaining ongoing PRs ?
|
8 participants
Closes #85
📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://imas-data-dictionary--151.org.readthedocs.build/en/151/