Skip to content

Fix nbi power: correct shine-through, use plasma-coupled power instead of raw power; corrected wall-plug power conversion#4187

Open
grmtrkngtn wants to merge 3 commits intomainfrom
4186-fix-neutral-beam-shine-through-and-power-accounting-bugs
Open

Fix nbi power: correct shine-through, use plasma-coupled power instead of raw power; corrected wall-plug power conversion#4187
grmtrkngtn wants to merge 3 commits intomainfrom
4186-fix-neutral-beam-shine-through-and-power-accounting-bugs

Conversation

@grmtrkngtn
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Description

  • We were applying f_p_beam_shine_through incorrectly in two ways:
    • f_p_beam_shine_through represents the fraction of beam power that is not absorbed, but we were using (1 - f_p_beam_shine_through)
    • the fraction was only being applied to part of the power term due to operator precedence, rather than the total beam power
  • Fixed ion/electron power split:
    • previously based on injected beam power
    • now correctly based on plasma-coupled beam power
  • Fixed wall-plug power calculation (pwpnb):
    • previously only part of the power term was divided by injector efficiency
    • now the full beam power term is divided by efficiency

Checklist

I confirm that I have completed the following checks:

  • My changes follow the PROCESS style guide
  • I have justified any large differences in the regression tests caused by this pull request in the comments.
  • I have added new tests where appropriate for the changes I have made.
  • If I have had to change any existing unit or integration tests, I have justified this change in the pull request comments.
  • If I have made documentation changes, I have checked they render correctly.
  • I have added documentation for my change, if appropriate.

…d of raw power; corrected wall-plug power conversion
@grmtrkngtn grmtrkngtn requested a review from a team as a code owner April 14, 2026 12:59
@grmtrkngtn grmtrkngtn linked an issue Apr 14, 2026 that may be closed by this pull request
@codecov-commenter
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov-commenter commented Apr 14, 2026

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 66.66667% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 49.61%. Comparing base (dfaa47b) to head (aa6f098).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
process/models/physics/physics.py 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #4187      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   49.61%   49.61%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         148      148              
  Lines       29753    29751       -2     
==========================================
- Hits        14762    14760       -2     
  Misses      14991    14991              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Fix neutral beam shine-through and power accounting bugs

2 participants