Diagnostics : EM fields on particles #5637
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
…rpX into diags_em_on_particles_2
![github-advanced-security[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/57789?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
ax3l
reviewed
Feb 4, 2025
Comment on lines
+315
to
+322
| tmp.NewRealComp("Ex"); | ||
| tmp.NewRealComp("Ey"); | ||
| tmp.NewRealComp("Ez"); | ||
| tmp.NewRealComp("Bx"); | ||
| tmp.NewRealComp("By"); | ||
| tmp.NewRealComp("Bz"); | ||
|
|
||
| int const Ex_index = tmp.getParticleComps().at("Ex"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There will be a minimal change we need to add to this PR once we merged #5481 (simplification of named SoA bookkeeping), but it will be easy to update once your PR is ready/out-of-WIP.
lucafedeli88
reviewed
Feb 5, 2025
lucafedeli88
reviewed
Feb 5, 2025
| @@ -590,6 +590,9 @@ for (const auto & particle_diag : particle_diags) { | |||
| if ( particle_diag.m_plot_phi ) { | |||
| storePhiOnParticles( tmp, WarpX::electrostatic_solver_id, !use_pinned_pc ); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@RemiLehe , do you know why for storePhiOnParticles we pass !use_pinned_pc instead of full_diag ?
lucafedeli88
reviewed
Feb 5, 2025
lucafedeli88
reviewed
Feb 5, 2025
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
Co-authored-by: Luca Fedeli <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Luca Fedeli <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Luca Fedeli <[email protected]>
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
Removed unnecessary comments
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
grobertdautun
changed the title
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR implements the
EMoption for particles diagnostics output. It is an extension of #4599 and #4839 and works in the same way. It allows the user to output the electromagnetic fields seen by particles.I added a test case
test_2d_particle_EM_diagnosticswith its analysis. This case represents a single particle fixed in a box traversed by a laser pulse, and the analysis verifies that the fields are matching the theoretical ones.I also tested the diagnostics on bigger cases, and I noticed that when writing a lot of timesteps with a lot of particles, reading the diagnostics with
adios2file-based encoding is very slow due to the high number of opening/closing files. Moreover, it appears thatopenpmd-viewerdoes not support reading variable-based encoding, so I wrote some scripts to read them directly using theadios2python API, that I added inTools/PostProcessing/read_variable_based_adios2.pyThere is a small update in the documentation to add the description of both the diagnostics and the script
This diagnostics does not support mesh refinement at the moment, this should be added in a follow up PR