Use dQ/|Q| for 2-D resolution #209
Conversation
|
ready for testing on Win64 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code looks right though it no longer will allow for dq_x and dq_y to be different (currently is not) but wonder if for some instruments (maybe TOF for example) that would not be a good assumption?
Otherwise functionality is tested and doe in fact fix the aberrant behavior. Suggests Andrew or Richard review regarding first point.
|
Given it is only for pinhole presumably that may be OK .... unless you start worrying about gravity? So question remains if we want to allow asymmetry in dqx and dqy? |
|
Bonse-Hart instruments have factor of 200x (or more) difference between dQx
and dQy.
…On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 6:25 PM Paul Butler ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** approved this pull request.
Code looks right though it no longer will allow for dq_x and dq_y to be
different (currently is not) but wonder if for some instruments (maybe TOF
for example) that would not be a good assumption?
Otherwise functionality is tested and doe in fact fix the aberrant
behavior. Suggests Andrew or Richard review regarding first point.
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#209 (review)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACLKMOloruoSJUplWfxOdqfPl4P4_fqlks5vbkydgaJpZM4brCe8>
.
|
|
... and... B H instruments can be used to collect 1D data. Tedious process
that but there has been at least one series of such measurements.
…On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, 6:25 PM Paul Butler ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** approved this pull request.
Code looks right though it no longer will allow for dq_x and dq_y to be
different (currently is not) but wonder if for some instruments (maybe TOF
for example) that would not be a good assumption?
Otherwise functionality is tested and doe in fact fix the aberrant
behavior. Suggests Andrew or Richard review regarding first point.
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#209 (review)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACLKMOloruoSJUplWfxOdqfPl4P4_fqlks5vbkydgaJpZM4brCe8>
.
|
|
Any more complex resolution calculation is going to require more assumptions or more inputs. I created ticket 1271 (Issue #1290) which suggests defining resolution for the fit page from the resolution calculator panel. Meanwhile, is the current fix sufficient to merge and close the ticket? |
|
Looks fine to approve. Just make sure that #1290 has a reference to these commits to remind whoever works on it. |
Custom pinhole smearing should use dQ/|Q| rather than dQ/Q [http://trac.sasview.org/ticket/1242](Ticket #1268).