AW: spikes or bands: multigroup fingerprints

Dear Mary,

my guess is that the observed difference is due to the improved gamma
production in the 260 gruop library. There are now 42 gamma groups
compared to the 22 in the old version. Additionally the data is
extracted from the latest evaluated data files. However, your
observation could be also due to something else, a problem of statistics
maybe.
Without knowing precisley what you have simulated (which isotope, which
temperature, which scoring,...) it is not possible to answer your
question.
If you need a more precise answer please send plots of the old and the
new spectrum and also all files necessary to reproduce your results.

Cheers, Florian

-----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
Von: owner-fluka-discuss_at_mi.infn.it =
[mailto:owner-fluka-discuss_at_mi.infn.it] Im Auftrag von Mary Chin
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 15. Oktober 2009 12:20
An: fluka-discuss_at_fluka.org
Betreff: spikes or bands: multigroup fingerprints

Hi,

The following is not a problem. Just asking.
If I look at the energy of neutrons simulated with the multigroup =
structure, I find:
- discrete spikes, as opposed to bands. A few years ago (using the =
old/coarse multigroup structure) when I was looking at the energy of =
generated gammas, I found smeared bands, not spikes. What is the =
difference between the two cases? Aren't bands a better representation =
than spikes?
- the discrete spikes lie *somewhere* between the energies listed in =
Table 10.1 of the manual, not on the border and not really at the centre =
of the group boundaries. How are the discrete energies chosen?

Many thanks.

:) mary
Received on Fri Oct 16 2009 - 16:05:34 CEST