Vignesh Sitaraman
4e6e101370
new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/README.md new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/band_centre.csv new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/cfrac_pred_method.md new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/check_extrapolation.log new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/collect_slices.log new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/fit_function.log new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/function_map.csv new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/make_cfrac_pred.log new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/map_function.log new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/slices_fit.csv new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/solve_z44.7820/README.md new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/solve_z44.7820/anode_dot.csv new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/solve_z44.7820/elmer_phys.log new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/solve_z44.7820/elmer_weight.log new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/solve_z44.7820/elmergrid.log new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/solve_z44.7820/geometry.py new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/solve_z44.7820/probe_fields.py new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/solve_z44.7820/scalars.dat new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/solve_z44.7820/scalars.dat.names new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/solve_z44.7820/scalars_weight.dat new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/solve_z44.7820/scalars_weight.dat.names new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/solve_z44.7820/wires2d.sif new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/solve_z44.7820/wires2d_weight.sif new file: anasen_fem/cfrac_pred_2026-10-28/solve_z44.7820/wires_gmsh2d_bc.py
2.1 KiB
Charge-fraction prediction, 2026-10-28
Four slices solved for the defense figure defense/figures/cfrac_pred.png,
archived here beside the solves that were already in wires2d/vtu_files.
| index | z (mm) | phase in the cell | relative azimuth | anode-cathode gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | 0.0000 | midpoint | 7.500 deg | 6.220 mm |
| 10 | 19.6900 | crossover | 0.037 deg | 4.339 mm |
| 11 | 19.7940 | crossover | 0.003 deg | 4.339 mm |
| 12 | 29.8500 | quarter | 3.794 deg | 4.908 mm |
| 13 | 39.9200 | midpoint, next cell | 7.435 deg | 6.247 mm |
| 14 | 44.7820 | three eighths | 5.625 deg | 5.535 mm |
| 15 | 49.9800 | three quarters | 3.699 deg | 4.925 mm |
Indices 10 and 11 were already here; 12 to 15 were added by this study.
Each index has an elfield_anasen_* (physical solve, anodes at 660 V) and an
elfield_weight_* (Ramo weighting solve, cathode 1 at 1 V) on the same mesh.
The archived 10 and 11 ran at 650 V, the new ones at 660; only ratios are
used, and the extraction reads the electrode potential off the wire interior
rather than assuming it.
dotproduct.py was not run on the new slices: it writes another ~1 GB per
slice and only the anode surfaces are needed. probe_fields.py in the code
below computes the same product straight from the two field VTUs.
Do not take E.E_w from the nodal "electric field" array
FluxSolver recovers the gradient element by element and a degenerate element
puts a spike on a node. The meshes for 12 to 15 carry ~960 nodes above
1e6 V/m where meshes 10 and 11 have none, so the extremum over a wire's
surface nodes lands on a spike: a re-solve of z = 19.794 returned -1.526e12
where the archived value is -2.569e8. Take it from the potential instead, as
surface_field.py does. That is stable to five figures across meshes.
The code
scratch/cfrac_fem_pred_2026-10-28/ in the analysis repository
(github.com/vs19g/ANASEN-Analysis_private, branch devel_vignesh). run_all.sh
reruns everything; collect_slices.py and map_function.py read the VTUs
here. The CSVs in this directory are their output, so the numbers can be read
without re-solving.