Argonne National Laboratory

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <20102011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  Index 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <20102011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019 
<== Date ==> <== Thread ==>

Subject: RE: Controls & Physics
From: Richard Farnsworth <Richard.Farnsworth@synchrotron.org.au>
To: "Zelazny, Michael Stanley" <zelazny@slac.stanford.edu>, "tech-talk@aps.anl.gov" <tech-talk@aps.anl.gov>
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 10:22:01 +1100
We do something similar here. Matlab in the Accelerator physicists sandbox (They now have several IOC's). Because of the Matlab accelerator toolbox
work, this works well for us too.

We had the idea that once they had finished an application in Matlab, they would pass it over to controls to make robust. This doesn't happen so well - the concept of "finish" seems problematical .


Richard Farnsworth | Head of Computing | Australian Synchrotron
p: (03) 8540 4118 | f: (03) 8540 4200 | m: 0421 082 147
richard.farnsworth@synchrotron.org.au | www.synchrotron.org.au
800 Blackburn Road, Clayton, Victoria 3168



-----Original Message-----
From: tech-talk-bounces@aps.anl.gov [mailto:tech-talk-bounces@aps.anl.gov] On Behalf Of Zelazny, Michael Stanley
Sent: Friday, 26 March 2010 8:26 AM
To: tech-talk@aps.anl.gov
Subject: RE: Controls & Physics

At SLAC, the LCLS physicists asked for a soft IOC to write physics parameters via their Matlab scripts.  This has been wildly successful.

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: tech-talk-bounces@aps.anl.gov [mailto:tech-talk-bounces@aps.anl.gov] On Behalf Of Steiner, Mathias
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 2:08 PM
To: tech-talk@aps.anl.gov
Subject: Controls & Physics

Learned Friends,

Accelerators and beamlines have associated with them some properties of the accelerated particles.

For example, a beamline will usually have a parameter for magnetic and/or electrostatic rigidity, but it might also have beam variables associated with it, such as the charge-to-mass ratio, or the precise mass of a heavy ion.

My question is this:  To what extent are the physics parameters part of the controls?

Should there be channels like "Separator:BeamMass," for example?

My feeling is that the beam, as it were, should be part of the control system from the beginning, but I don't have much to back this up.
What do you think?

Cheers,
             -Mathias




<br>This message and any attachments may contain proprietary or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient or you received the message in error, you must not use, copy or distribute the message. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy the original message. Thank you.

References:
Controls & Physics Steiner, Mathias
RE: Controls & Physics Zelazny, Michael Stanley

Navigate by Date:
Prev: Trying out EPICS on a plug computer Eric Norum
Next: Re: Trying out EPICS on a plug computer Ned Arnold
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <20102011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019 
Navigate by Thread:
Prev: RE: Controls & Physics Zelazny, Michael Stanley
Next: Getting started lectures Steve Kinder
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <20102011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019 
ANJ, 02 Sep 2010 Valid HTML 4.01! · Home · News · About · Base · Modules · Extensions · Distributions · Download ·
· Search · EPICS V4 · IRMIS · Talk · Bugs · Documents · Links · Licensing ·