From: Zanini Luca (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Jan 19 2006 - 10:27:34 CET
Thank you for the help with the previous problem (it is a problem of my
platform, which we
still have to understand, but it runs on another platform).
I have another question.
I have run a comparison between the new options for radioactive decay in
and the approach I have used before, of coupling FLUKA with ORIHET3.
In the following table I list the activity (Bq) of residual nuclei produced
of protons in copper, after 150 days of irradiation followed by 1 year
In the first column I take the RESNUCLEI output and feed it to ORIHET3.
In the second column only FLUKA is used.
As you see the results compare very nicely.
The only discrepancy is for Co58 and Co60 which have isomeric states.
Unless I am doing some mistakes, in the "FLUKA only" calculation I specified
"patch" the isomeric information with the WHAT(2) card of RADDECAY. I assume
results given in the matrix for these two nuclei is the total activity
(ground state plus isomeric state),
can you confirm that?
In the FLUKA/ORIHET case, I did not use the RADDECAY card and to my
knowledge there is
no other way to patch the isomeric state information. It looks to me that in
this case there is only
the ground state activity, not the total one as I expected. Again, correct
me if I'm wrong.
H 3 1.28E+08 1.28E+08
Mn 54 5.29E+08 5.29E+08
Fe 55 9.24E+08 9.27E+08
Co 57 3.57E+09 3.56E+09
Co 58 3.28E+10 6.58E+10 <<<
Co 60 2.46E+08 4.92E+08 <<<
Co 61 3.12E+05 3.13E+05
Ni 59 5.12E+05 5.40E+05
Ni 63 1.54E+08 1.54E+08
Ni 65 2.53E+06 2.52E+06
Cu 60 1.92E-09 1.92E-09
Cu 61 2.25E+09 2.25E+09
Cu 62 2.15E+10 2.15E+10
Cu 64 9.34E+10 9.35E+10
Zn 62 2.12E+10 2.11E+10
Zn 63 1.47E+00 1.46E+00
Zn 65 4.27E+10 4.27E+10
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu Jan 19 2006 - 13:37:23 CET