Re: Mismatch of coordinates in the ENDRAW entry and the TRACKR common

Dear Vassili,

I apologize: I have been too quick in both my responses.
The TRACKR variables related to position and direction are not relevant in case
of a particle at rest, but the age (ATRACK) is. You can use it safely
for timing.
I will send a separate mail about the useful energy.

Alberto

On Tue, 27 Apr 2010, Vassili Maroussov wrote:

> Dear Alberto,
>
> then how can I get out the time of energy deposition? Actually in 99.9%
> cases (It was a misprint, not in 99%) the (XSCO, YSCO, ZSCO) point
> coincides with the(XTRACK(1),YTRACK(1),ZTRACK(1)) point in the TRACKR
> common, so I assumed the ATRACK of TRACKR gives me the time - and this
> output is looking extremely reasonable... What is a correct way to find
> the timing for each energy deposition?
>
> Regards,
>
> Vassili
>
> On 04/27/2010 02:20 PM, Alberto Fasso' wrote:
>> Dear Vassili,
>>
>> the variables in the TRACKR COMMON refer to particle tracks (as the name
>> suggests), not to particles at rest.
>> In the ENDRAW ENTRY, all the useful quantities (region, position,
>> quantity
>> to be deposited) are made available via the CALL arguments.
>>
>> Alberto
>>
>> On Tue, 27 Apr 2010, Vassili Maroussov wrote:
>>
>>> Dear FLUKA experts,
>>>
>>> I've found that for ~1% energy depositions obtained by the ENDRAW entry
>>> of MGDRAW the coordinates (XSCO, YSCO, ZSCO) do not coincides with ones
>>> in the TRACKR common; neither with XTRACK(0),YTRACK(0),ZTRACK(0) nor
>>> XTRACK(1),YTRACK(1),ZTRACK(1). All these cases corresponds to ICODE=22:
>>> EMFSCO, below threshold, iarg=2 (BTW, what the iarg means?). What is a
>>> reason for that?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Vassili
>>
>
>

-- 
Alberto Fasso`
SLAC-RP, MS 48, 2575 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park CA 94025
Phone: (1 650) 926 4762   Fax: (1 650) 926 3569
fasso_at_slac.stanford.edu