Dear Andrea,
Thank you for looking into this problem.
Changing to the PRECISIOn default does indeed fix the problem. However, now
I have an additional question: Is the PRECISIOn default required to score
DOSEQLET correctly? I ask because using the PRECISIOn default greatly
increases the run time (as expected) and provides a level of detail that is
not necessary for the scenario I am trying to simulate. Using the NEW-DEFA
default seems to fix the problem as well. If I do not need the detail of
the PRECISIOn default can I just use NEW-DEFA?
Thanks,
Jeremy
On Sun, Sep 1, 2013 at 5:42 AM, <Andrea.Mairani_at_mi.infn.it> wrote:
> Dear Jeremy,
> Looking at your inputs you have used the following DEFAULTS
> DEFAULTS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
> SHIELDIN
>
> SHIELDINg
>
> * Low energy neutron transport on down the thermal energies included,
> (the neutron high energy threshold is set at 20 MeV)
>
> * Non-analogue absorption for low energy neutrons with probability
> 0.95 for the last (thermal) groups
>
> * Particle transport threshold set at 10 MeV, except neutrons (1E-5
> eV), and (anti)neutrinos (0, but they are discarded by default anyway)
>
> * Multiple scattering threshold for secondary charged particles
> lowered to 20 MeV (= primary ones)
>
> * Both explicit and continuous heavy particle bremsstrahlung and pair
> production inhibited
>
> * EMF off!!! This default is meant for simple hadron shielding only!
>
> As you see the EMF is off and in fort.88 you have
>
> QLTWEI,IJ,ECONTR,KTRACK,MTRACK,ETRACK,AMIJ,IZIJ,MREG,ICALL
> 1.0000000000000000E+030 211 1.0470416009752087E-003
> 0 0 1.0470416009752087E-003 0.0000000000000000
> 0 3 504
> J0TRCK,JTRACK 0 7
>
> which is related to EM below threshold, in fact you have EMF off. If you
> use the PRECISIOn DEFAULTS for example you will not have the problem.
> Please, check if the PRECISIOn DEFAULTS match what you want to simulate.
>
> Best Regards,
> Andrea
>
>
> > Hi Andrea,
> >
> > My input file is attached. It is a simple geometry consisting of an O-18
> > beam incident on steel, followed by concrete, and then finally soil. I am
> > trying to generate a dose equivalent and star density map with USRBIN.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jeremy
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 5:48 AM, <Andrea.Mairani_at_mi.infn.it> wrote:
> >
> >> Dear Jeremy,
> >> This printout occurs if the quality factor turns out to be <0.95 or
> >> >500.
> >> In this case the code set it back to 1 and warns the user. The point is
> >> to understand why the original QLTWEI value falls outside expectations.
> >> Please, can you provide us your input so we can understand better your
> >> problem?
> >> Best Regards,
> >> Francesco and Andrea
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > FLUKA users,
> >> >
> >> > I am attempting to generate a dose equivalent distribution with
> >> > WHAT(2)=DOSEQLET in USRBIN. When I do this a large fort.88 file is
> >> > generated. I have attached a copy of the fort.88 file generated from a
> >> > test
> >> > run of 100 primary particles.
> >> >
> >> > I have two questions:
> >> >
> >> > 1) What is the purpose of this file?
> >> > 2) Is there any way to disable its production? These files becomes
> >> very
> >> > large (easily on the order of GB) for a larger number of primary
> >> > particles.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Jeremy Northum
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
Received on Mon Sep 16 2013 - 22:42:44 CEST