Generic wls fiber #183
Generic wls fiber #183
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The geometry assumes now that the external coating will always be TPB, and that won't always be the case. Also, I don't see any optical material properties attached to the inner volumes of the fiber. Those should be incorporated into this class, giving the user the option to pass them via a function, as we do in the generic photosensor.
FabianKellerer
force-pushed
the
GenericWLSFiber
branch
from
f5e540b to
1553c97
Compare
|
Hello, I was wondering if there were any updates about this. If the code is fine it would be helpful for us working on fibers simulations to merge it. |
|
@jmalbos is the reviewer, how is it going, Justo? |
I'll try to finish the review asap, but, most likely, I won't be able till next week. |
soleti
force-pushed
the
GenericWLSFiber
branch
from
1889ca1 to
1553c97
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Apart few small things, I don't see any obvious problem in the code (which I have been using for a while after all...). However, before merging, I think it would be nice to verify that we reproduce some fundamental properties of the WLS fibers. At least two plots might be added for completeness to this PR (maybe they already exist but I couldn't find them on DocDB):
- attenuation length: light collected as a function of the distance from a generic photosensor
- trapping efficiency: amount of light collected by generating photons at the center of the fiber.
| fiber_mat_->SetMaterialPropertiesTable(opticalprops::EJ280()); | ||
| } | ||
| else if (fiber_mat_name_ == "EJ286") { | ||
| fiber_mat_ = materials::EJ280(); // Same base material than EJ280 | ||
| fiber_mat_ = materials::PVT(); // Same base material than EJ280 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
By looking at the code PVT is not exactly the same as the EJ280 material you are deleting. Can you explain why?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In a previous comment, @jmalbos said that EJ280 is the same as PVT, except for the doping. However, this is not what our code says (the composition in terms of H and C is different). We need to be sure about what was wrong in the code, before eliminating EJ280 instead of PVT, for instance.
|
@FabianKellerer, how is this PR going? |
This information can be found in the attached file. The trapping efficiency given by the manufacturer is reproduced very well, and the attenuation is aprrox. 60% per meter. |
|
Thank you @FabianKellerer for the slides, very informative. The only remaining doubt I have is about the attenuation length. For e.g. Kuraray Y11 fibers that have an attenuation length of >3.5 m we should lose only ~25% of the light and not 60% after 1 m. Or am I misinterpreting your numbers? Thanks! |
|
@FabianKellerer, could you have a look at this last question from Roberto, so that we can approve the PR? Thanks! |
paolafer
force-pushed
the
GenericWLSFiber
branch
from
ce39503 to
cc17309
Compare
FabianKellerer
force-pushed
the
GenericWLSFiber
branch
from
cc17309 to
0dbc3de
Compare
I made a plot comparing light loss in the simulation to the light loss measured by Kuraray (Link) The agreement seems quite good. |
|
This looks good to me! I approve the PR. |
|
The code is not compiling! |
|
My compiler is also issuing the following compilation warning: To avoid this kind of warnings, it is a good rule to declare variables in the header file and to initialize them in the |
Added the GenericWLSFiber geometry. Updated the MaterialsList to include the EJ-286 fiber core material.