From: Lindley Winslow (LAWinslow@lbl.gov)
Date: Sat Feb 17 2007 - 04:30:20 CET
Paola,
Thank you. I have used fluence to do independent calculations of
nuclei production and I realize that for most problems what you want
is some measure of path length density which USRBIN and USRTRACK
provide for you since that provides more information on interactions
and energy deposition.
However my problem is that large scintillating or water detectors
quote neutron yields in N per muon or N per muon g/cm2 so you need
to score neutrons more like the scoring with RESNUC does for nuclei.
I could get this number from mgdraw.f but then you run into
complications with the treatment of low energy neutrons,
I am afraid that I may be missing something obvious so any help would
be greatly appreciated,
Thank you,
Lindley
On Feb 16, 2007, at 1:00 PM, paola sala wrote:
> Hi Lindley,
>
> yes, you are missing interactions from low energy neutrons: they
> are not
> considered in the "inelastic interactions" usryield scoring. The
> problem, however, is that this use of USRYIELD in a thick target makes
> no sense ( as you already realized). This option is useful for thin
> target studies, when the interest is on one specific reaction.
> In a full shower, the quantity that better characterizes the particle
> fields is the fluence, that you can score either with USRBIN or with
> USRTRACK ( this last gives also an energy spectrum). Fluence is the
> quantity directly related to the response of a detector exposed to the
> particle field.
> ( parenthesis : be sure to activate also photon induced nuclear
> interactions, they play a non-negligible role in problems involving
> muon
> induced showers)
> Paola
>
> On Thu, 2007-02-15 at 15:53 -0800, Lindley Winslow wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> This is a followup to a previous post about using USRYIELD to score
>> particle yields and possible double counting. My goal is to score
>> both particles made in muon and secondary interactions.
>>
>> The previous post can be found here:
>> http://www.fluka.org/web_archive/earchive/new-fluka-discuss/0793.html
>>
>> I wrote a user defined routine to correct for scoring of particles'
>> scattering, spallation etc. which brought my results with ~10% of the
>> published result at 270GeV. I then tried to reproduce results for
>> 10.3GeV muons and I am getting 1.4 instead of 2.5 n per muon g/cm2
>> and 0.1 instead of 0.3 pion+ per muon g/cm2.
>>
>> I realized by scoring inelastic collisions I was missing particle
>> decays which I thought was a small correction. I think I may also be
>> missing particles created in Low Energy Neutron interactions. If so
>> what is the proper way to score these particles? or may be more
>> generally what is the proper way to score particle yields in thick
>> detectors? (Detectors where total amount produced is more important
>> than what escapes).
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Lindley
>>
>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Sat Feb 17 2007 - 15:01:38 CET