Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- source_regimes [2018/01/24 18:43]
89.103.122.186
+++ source_regimes [2019/03/13 21:21] (current)
pklapetek
@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 An alternative source method is to cast rays from whole computational boundary at once, already assuming that it was totally reflected outside of it - so casting both rays propagating towards sample and mirrored rays. This is done in source method = 1.
-Finally, we can use only the top boundary for casting the rays and let them to periodically repeat. This is the source method 3. In this case we artificially create the periodic boundary near to the computational domain boundary, on basis of the source wavelength. All the rays incoming to this boundary are transversed back to the start of the computational domain. Obviously, this case is suitable only for periodic samples. On the other hand, for such samples it is the only method that can reproduce the realistic behavior of the incoming rays.
+We can also use only the top boundary for casting the rays and let them to periodically repeat. This is the source method 2. In this case we artificially create the periodic boundary near to the computational domain boundary, on basis of the source wavelength. All the rays incoming to this boundary are transversed back to the start of the computational domain. Obviously, this case is suitable only for periodic samples. On the other hand, for such samples it is the only method that can reproduce the realistic behavior of the incoming rays.
+Finally, source method 3 means casting rays only from top, but not doing any periodical repetition. This is usefull namely for debugging the method 2 or when we don't want to have something periodic in our computational domain.
 The different source methods are illustrated on the figure below:
@@ Line 28: / Line 30: @@
 {{ :illumination_methods.png?400 |}}
-There are more aspects that need to be controlled for the source.
+There are more aspects that need to be controlled for the source. First of all, it is the direction, that is again set within the COMP command (see [[running|Running the computation]] section), using the following angles definition:
 {{ :tsf.png?200 |}}
+Then, rays can be coherent or incoherent. To set the coherence and to set the rays phase to 0, you can use this command:
 <code>
 COHERENCE
-integer double
+0
 </code>
-- sets coherence on/off. Default is 0, meaning off. If coherence is switched on, all the rays have the same phase at the beginning and amplitudes are summed instead of intensities. Second parameter is the phase itself, in degrees.
+If coherence is switched on, all the rays have the same phase at the beginning and amplitudes are summed instead of intensities. Second parameter is the phase itself, in degrees.
+Running computation for a single phase might be not enough. We might be interesting on getting a sum output for many different phases. This can be done automatically by command like this:
 <code>
 PHASES
-integer
 </code>
-- sets number of phases to use in calculation, directly prolongs the process. Default value is 1.
+which sets number of phases to use in calculation, directly prolongs the process.
+Here only two phases would be used, but any number, equally distributed along 0-PI region could be used.
+Multiple phases evaluation is important namely in case when the voxel size is larger or similar to wavelength which leads to a moire effect. By using multiple phases evaluation, this effect can be removed as shown below:
+{{ :modes.png?600 |}}
+If we have only single object in the computational domain we might be interested in using only subset of rays that have chance to intersect with it. To search for material with index of 2 and illuminate only areas where it can be reached we can run
 <code>
 SOURCE_MATCUT
-int
 </code>
-- cut source parts not illuminating given material index. 0, which is vacuum, means illuminate all.
+If the parameter is 0, everything is illuminated, otherwise the boundaries of the particular material are found.
+Finally, we list here two simple evaluation techniques that are not related to raytracing. Using the simple regime
 <code>
-SOURCEMULT
+SIMPLE
-double double double
 </code>
-- multiplies apparent source radius in x, y and z direction to create elliptical shape.
+we run a simple analytical calculation assuming that material 2 is the reflecting one, and the XSW orientation is in z. Material and data below surface plane have no meaning and are not evaluated. This method still uses the complete voxel geometry.
+Even simpler approach is
 <code>
-SIMPLE
+MEGASIMPLE
-/1
+ material_index
 </code>
-Run simple calculation according to Bedzyk, X-ray Standing wave techniques, assuming that material 2 is the reflecting one, and the XSW is in z. Material and data below surface plane have no meaning and are not evaluated.
+where only a single material with given index is evaluated without really creating any mesh (only from
+vector data entries). This is used mostly for some debugging purposes.
+An alternative to all the raytracing is use of the matrix method. This is implemented in z (so the computational volume is sliced in z automatically) and can be called as
 <code>
-MEGASIMPLE
+MATRIXBASED
-/1 matindex
 </code>
-Run megasimple calculation according to Bedzyk, X-ray Standing wave techniques, assuming that material 2 is the reflecting one, and the XSW is in z. Only single material is evaluated. Not all the vector commands work properly.
@@ Line 87: / Line 101: @@
-{{ :modes.png?600 |}}

Xraytrace documentation

User Tools

Site Tools

Differences

Page Tools