[FLASH-USERS] Total energy and Laser Deposition

[Acharya, Nitish]

Thanks Klaus.


Yes, indeed the "energies" in both of the sources have units of energy. Thanks so much for clarifying about it. Right now, I'm having an issue regarding laser energy deposition. How does it compare to total energy? From what I understand, any increase in total energy at any instant should equal total energy deposition until that time. However, I am getting Laser Energy Deposition higher than the total energy at almost all the time instants. Do you have any idea what's going on?


Thanks,

Nitish


________________________________
From: Klaus Weide <klaus at flash.uchicago.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2019 6:23:05 PM
To: Acharya, Nitish
Cc: Scott Feister; flash-users at flash.uchicago.edu
Subject: Re: [FLASH-USERS] Total energy and Laser Deposition

On Tue, 5 Mar 2019, Acharya, Nitish wrote:

> Thanks Scott. I thought it was ergs/g as the energies in FLASH
> calculated seemed to be all specific energies. So, I did multiply the
> energies by mass. Also, since it was a 2D domain, multiplication by mass
> was infact mass per length. This is what I did. And I was wondering what
> length parameter should I use to get the total energy.

The integral quantities written to the flash.dat (or similar) file should
have totals of *energy* in the appropriate columns, at least in 3D
and in lower-D geometries when the "omitted directions" are angles not
lengths. So for 2D cylindrical geometry, they are energies (integration
over a full 2\pi range of azimuthal angle is implied).

The "power" specified for the Laser energy deposition should indeed be
a power (energy / time) also in the 2D cylindrical case, at least if
ed_laser3Din2D is used (not sure about when ed_laser3Din2D is false).
The "energies" in lasslab_LaserEnergyProfile.dat should then indeed
have units of energy, not energy per length.

You should NOT have to multiply by mass if you compare energies from
those two sources (flash.dat and _LaserEnergyProfile.dat files).
And I believe you should not have to multiply (or divide) by a length
either, under the mentioned conditions.

Klaus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://flash.rochester.edu/pipermail/flash-users/attachments/20190310/b87a626b/attachment-0001.htm>