Re: BXDRAW runtime error

Dear Anna,

thank you very much for your effort.
In practice those fragments are not of importance, though excluding them
from the writeout should not hurt.

The entries with z>40cm I've observed, too, in fact this would have been
my next question. Naively thought the boundary crossing should always
appear exactly at z=40cm. Actually I'm also interested in those
particles which missed the target, i.e. continue to travel in vacuum.
Is it an option/possible to adjust the step size? Or I could redefine
the regions, the material of the target does not count at this point
because only the boundary crossing should be counted.

Cheers
Olaf.

On 02/19/2010 04:39 PM, Anna Ferrari wrote:
> Ciao Olaf,
>
> with your user routines (that I used in a simplified way, without filling
> ntuples and without root) I could finally reproduce your crash.
> It seems to me that this happen when in your BXDRAW entry you want to
> store the informations about the first fragment heavier then alpha, that
> crosses your boundary crossing. For this event, that is normally processed
> if I don't ask about any AM(Jtrack) information, I read:
>
> Icode, Jtrack, Etrack = 49, -8, 5.61523894
>
> I obtain a crash simply asking for a print of Am(Jtrack) in BXDRAW. Since
> you need the Am(Jtrack) value in your BXDRAW entry, you experience the
> crash. The reason is that the infos about heavy fragments produced are
> stored in a special stack, you don't find it in the common TRACKR.
>
> Suggestions (maybe somebody more experienced then me can better comment):
> - to store all the informations about particles, that are NOT heavy ions,
> you can cure the problem simply requiring (Jtrack.GE.-6) before all your
> conditions on the energy and on the rest mass of the particles, and before
> filling your ntuple (I tried and it runs without problems, at least
> for 10^6 events);
> - on the other hand, if you are intersted to save infos about the
> fragments heavier then alpha, you have to access the common FHEAVY: there
> you find for example the variables (I read in the common) Amheav and
> Amnhea, respectively for the atomic and the nuclear mass of the fragment
> (along with the other characteristics of the ion).
>
>
> I would like, also, to bring your attention on another point.
> I'm not sure that your scoring surface (the plane just before the target)
> is doing always what you really want. Looking at some variables, that I
> printed at your boundary crossing, I saw that in some case you have
> particles with Zsco>40 (I put in attachment just an example). This means
> (somebody more experienced then me can correct me, please!) that the step
> in the tracking, that is needed to cross the boundary, is greater then the
> distance between the scoring surface (at z=39.999) and the plane, that is
> parallel to the initial face of the target (at z=40.). Since you score
> between the two regions, that you call PIPE and VOID (and this last does
> not contain your cylindrical target), it seems to me that in this way you
> don't save all these events (many of them are muons), where the step
> needed to cross the boundary is larger then the distance defined above and
> the arrival point is inside the target....
>
> that's all for the moment!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Anna
>
Received on Sat Feb 20 2010 - 12:07:24 CET