Talk:Level 1 data (velocity profilers): Difference between revisions
From Atomix
Created page with "~~~~ I think dimension N_BEAM has to be the beam numbers for the beams with the standard beam angle - so typically 3 or 4. If we allow it to include beam 5, we run into a pro..." |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[User:Brian scannell|Brian scannell]] ([[User talk:Brian scannell|talk]]) 15:36, 22 December 2021 (CET) | [[User:Brian scannell|Brian scannell]] ([[User talk:Brian scannell|talk]]) 15:36, 22 December 2021 (CET) | ||
I think dimension N_BEAM has to be the beam numbers for the beams with the standard beam angle - so typically 3 or 4. If we allow it to include beam 5, we run into a problem with the variables for which N_BEAM is a dimension. | I think dimension N_BEAM has to be the beam numbers for the beams with the standard beam angle - so typically 3 or 4. If we allow it to include beam 5, we run into a problem with the variables for which N_BEAM is a dimension. | ||
[[User:Brian scannell|Brian scannell]] ([[User talk:Brian scannell|talk]]) 15:38, 22 December 2021 (CET) | |||
Are there any designs out there with three angled beams plus a vertical beam? If so, perhaps rather than R_DIST5 etc we should use R_DISTV to indicate vertical - although it also has the advantage of being the Roman 5... | |||
Revision as of 14:38, 22 December 2021
Brian scannell (talk) 15:36, 22 December 2021 (CET) I think dimension N_BEAM has to be the beam numbers for the beams with the standard beam angle - so typically 3 or 4. If we allow it to include beam 5, we run into a problem with the variables for which N_BEAM is a dimension.
Brian scannell (talk) 15:38, 22 December 2021 (CET) Are there any designs out there with three angled beams plus a vertical beam? If so, perhaps rather than R_DIST5 etc we should use R_DISTV to indicate vertical - although it also has the advantage of being the Roman 5...
