-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
Replace Frame0 with Psd Monitor #72
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
dc331a7 to
20427b3
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The (slightly older) file I have has 2 PSD monitors. Do we need PsdMonitor 1 and 2 (or actually 0 and 1 given the naming in the file)?
What file is that? The coda files only have psd0. I can add a 0 to the name if you think that makes it clearer. |
Some older simulation from Greg?
I think it would make sense anyway: Doesn't "PSD" just say what kind of monitor it is, but not which instance (even if there is only one)? |
😞 The files produced in the nightly tests are not indicative of the real instrument. BIFROST has four monitors (plus the post-sample Bragg diffraction 'monitor'). The primary-spectrometer beam monitors are represented in my simulations as the four
There is an active attempt to correct the NeXus Structure to ensure it matches reality. |
|
We use the Bragg peak monitor differently, so I would not include it in Do you want to call them |
Bifrost does not actually have a frame monitor 0. But it does have a PSD monitor. This PR adjusts the domain types and names accordingly. Unfortunately, the current simulation files don't reflect this. But we don't use the monitors currently anyway.
But this should fix an nightly test, see https://git.esss.dk/dmsc-nightly/dmsc-nightly/-/issues/50 and https://git.esss.dk/dmsc-nightly/dmsc-nightly/-/merge_requests/153