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.T. Campbell, H.P. Freund, J.R. Henderson, B.W.J. McNeil, P. Traczykowski, P.J.M. van der Slot

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contributionAcademicpeer-review

4 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Free-electron laser simulation codes employ either the Slowly-Varying Envelope Approximation (SVEA) or a Particle-in-Cell (PiC) formulation. Maxwell’s equations are averaged over the fast time scale in the SVEA so that there is no need to resolve the wave period. In contrast, the fast oscillation is retained in PiC codes. As a result, the SVEA codes are much less computationally intensive and are used more frequently than PiC codes. While the orbit dynamics in PiC codes and some SVEA Codes (MEDUSA and MINERVA) use the full unaveraged Lorentz force equations, some SVEA codes use the Kroll-Morton-Rosenbluth (KMR) approximation (GENESIS, GINGER, FAST, and TDA3D). Steady-state simulation comparisons [1] have appeared in the literature between different codes using the averaged and unaveraged particle dynamics. Recently, a comparison between three KMR SVEA codes (GENESIS, GINGER, and FAST) and the PUFFIN PiC code in the time-dependent regime has been reported [2]. In this paper, we present a comparison between the unaveraged PiC code PUFFIN, the unaveraged SVEA code MINERVA for the time-dependent simulation of SASE free-electron lasers with the experimental measurements from SPARC SASE FEL at ENEA Frascati.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProceedings 39th International Free-Electron Laser Conference
Pages153-156
VolumeFEL19
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2019

Fingerprint

Free electron lasers
Lorentz force
Experiments
Maxwell equations
Orbits

Cite this

Campbell, L. T., Freund, H. P., Henderson, J. R., McNeil, B. W. J., Traczykowski, P., & van der Slot, P. J. M. (2019). 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. In Proceedings 39th International Free-Electron Laser Conference (Vol. FEL19, pp. 153-156) https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-FEL2019-TUP050
Campbell, L.T. ; Freund, H.P. ; Henderson, J.R. ; McNeil, B.W.J. ; Traczykowski, P. ; van der Slot, P.J.M. / 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. Proceedings 39th International Free-Electron Laser Conference. Vol. FEL19 2019. pp. 153-156
@inproceedings{f0f04120daae4942bcc9fba9298e3ecd,
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",
abstract = "Free-electron laser simulation codes employ either the Slowly-Varying Envelope Approximation (SVEA) or a Particle-in-Cell (PiC) formulation. Maxwell’s equations are averaged over the fast time scale in the SVEA so that there is no need to resolve the wave period. In contrast, the fast oscillation is retained in PiC codes. As a result, the SVEA codes are much less computationally intensive and are used more frequently than PiC codes. While the orbit dynamics in PiC codes and some SVEA Codes (MEDUSA and MINERVA) use the full unaveraged Lorentz force equations, some SVEA codes use the Kroll-Morton-Rosenbluth (KMR) approximation (GENESIS, GINGER, FAST, and TDA3D). Steady-state simulation comparisons [1] have appeared in the literature between different codes using the averaged and unaveraged particle dynamics. Recently, a comparison between three KMR SVEA codes (GENESIS, GINGER, and FAST) and the PUFFIN PiC code in the time-dependent regime has been reported [2]. In this paper, we present a comparison between the unaveraged PiC code PUFFIN, the unaveraged SVEA code MINERVA for the time-dependent simulation of SASE free-electron lasers with the experimental measurements from SPARC SASE FEL at ENEA Frascati.",
author = "L.T. Campbell and H.P. Freund and J.R. Henderson and B.W.J. McNeil and P. Traczykowski and {van der Slot}, P.J.M.",
year = "2019",
month = "8",
doi = "10.18429/JACoW-FEL2019-TUP050",
language = "English",
isbn = "ISBN 978-3-95450-210-3",
volume = "FEL19",
pages = "153--156",
booktitle = "Proceedings 39th International Free-Electron Laser Conference",

}

Campbell, LT, Freund, HP, Henderson, JR, McNeil, BWJ, Traczykowski, P & van der Slot, PJM 2019, 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. in Proceedings 39th International Free-Electron Laser Conference. vol. FEL19, pp. 153-156. https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-FEL2019-TUP050

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. / Campbell, L.T.; Freund, H.P.; Henderson, J.R.; McNeil, B.W.J.; Traczykowski, P.; van der Slot, P.J.M.

Proceedings 39th International Free-Electron Laser Conference. Vol. FEL19 2019. p. 153-156.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contributionAcademicpeer-review

TY - GEN

T1 - 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

AU - Campbell, L.T.

AU - Freund, H.P.

AU - Henderson, J.R.

AU - McNeil, B.W.J.

AU - Traczykowski, P.

AU - van der Slot, P.J.M.

PY - 2019/8

Y1 - 2019/8

N2 - Free-electron laser simulation codes employ either the Slowly-Varying Envelope Approximation (SVEA) or a Particle-in-Cell (PiC) formulation. Maxwell’s equations are averaged over the fast time scale in the SVEA so that there is no need to resolve the wave period. In contrast, the fast oscillation is retained in PiC codes. As a result, the SVEA codes are much less computationally intensive and are used more frequently than PiC codes. While the orbit dynamics in PiC codes and some SVEA Codes (MEDUSA and MINERVA) use the full unaveraged Lorentz force equations, some SVEA codes use the Kroll-Morton-Rosenbluth (KMR) approximation (GENESIS, GINGER, FAST, and TDA3D). Steady-state simulation comparisons [1] have appeared in the literature between different codes using the averaged and unaveraged particle dynamics. Recently, a comparison between three KMR SVEA codes (GENESIS, GINGER, and FAST) and the PUFFIN PiC code in the time-dependent regime has been reported [2]. In this paper, we present a comparison between the unaveraged PiC code PUFFIN, the unaveraged SVEA code MINERVA for the time-dependent simulation of SASE free-electron lasers with the experimental measurements from SPARC SASE FEL at ENEA Frascati.

AB - Free-electron laser simulation codes employ either the Slowly-Varying Envelope Approximation (SVEA) or a Particle-in-Cell (PiC) formulation. Maxwell’s equations are averaged over the fast time scale in the SVEA so that there is no need to resolve the wave period. In contrast, the fast oscillation is retained in PiC codes. As a result, the SVEA codes are much less computationally intensive and are used more frequently than PiC codes. While the orbit dynamics in PiC codes and some SVEA Codes (MEDUSA and MINERVA) use the full unaveraged Lorentz force equations, some SVEA codes use the Kroll-Morton-Rosenbluth (KMR) approximation (GENESIS, GINGER, FAST, and TDA3D). Steady-state simulation comparisons [1] have appeared in the literature between different codes using the averaged and unaveraged particle dynamics. Recently, a comparison between three KMR SVEA codes (GENESIS, GINGER, and FAST) and the PUFFIN PiC code in the time-dependent regime has been reported [2]. In this paper, we present a comparison between the unaveraged PiC code PUFFIN, the unaveraged SVEA code MINERVA for the time-dependent simulation of SASE free-electron lasers with the experimental measurements from SPARC SASE FEL at ENEA Frascati.

U2 - 10.18429/JACoW-FEL2019-TUP050

DO - 10.18429/JACoW-FEL2019-TUP050

M3 - Conference contribution

SN - ISBN 978-3-95450-210-3

VL - FEL19

SP - 153

EP - 156

BT - Proceedings 39th International Free-Electron Laser Conference

ER -

Campbell LT, Freund HP, Henderson JR, McNeil BWJ, Traczykowski P, van der Slot PJM. 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. In Proceedings 39th International Free-Electron Laser Conference. Vol. FEL19. 2019. p. 153-156 https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-FEL2019-TUP050