Thanks a Lot.
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 10:45 PM, Alberto Fasso' <fasso_at_slac.stanford.edu>
wrote:
> Sanjay,
> I have just noticed that you sent your last emails to me personally, and
> not
> to the discussion list. Please keep the discussion on the list, otherwise
> the other users cannot follow. I send my answer now to the list, and I
> hope that the other users can reconstruct the discussion from what is
> recorded below.
>
> Of course, since you did not give the detector volume (which was 100 cm3),
> the
> program has assumed the volume was 1 cm3, and the results are too high by
> a factor 100!
> We have now 1.24e-05 photons/cm2/primary (analytical) and 1.68E-05 (FLUKA)
> Same order of magnitude but there is still a difference.
> Easy to explain: the photon tracks inside the Al slab are not all
> perpendicular
> to the slab, but many are tilted and therefore longer than the
> perpendicular
> ones. This can easily explain the 35% difference.
>
> Alberto
>
>
> On Tue, 4 Aug 2015, sanjay andola wrote:
>
> Thanks
>> I have not given the detector volume in the usrtrk card, it will give
>> right
>> answer after dividing the volume if it is given in the card. is this logic
>> is correct? sorry for the inconvenience.
>>
>> Sanjay
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 8:55 PM, sanjay andola <andolas.007_at_gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> It may not be. but if i take air attenuation negligible, then the after
>>> 10 mm Al and isotropic X-ray source at 80cm from detector, the fluence
>>> should be less than (1/4*pi*80*80) i.e. 1.24e-05 p/cm2/pr.
>>>
>>> t
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 8:46 PM, Fasso, Alberto <fasso_at_slac.stanford.edu>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> OK, this is much better. Now a question: you say "actual ones. which
>>>> could be 1.24e-05 p/cm2/pr analyticaly?". Analytically how? How did you
>>>> do
>>>> the analytical calculation, and why do you think that the analytical
>>>> result
>>>> is "the actual one"?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Alberto
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> *From:* sanjay andola <andolas.007_at_gmail.com>
>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 4, 2015 8:11 AM
>>>> *To:* Fasso, Alberto
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [fluka-discuss]: Aluminium x ray transmission
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the quick response.
>>>> the USRTRK output (.lis) is attached in along with the email. Fluka
>>>> output is 1.6764028E-03 0.3793046 % p/cmq/pr. the source is kept 80 cm
>>>> from the detector volume.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance
>>>> Sanjay
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 7:59 PM, Fasso, Alberto <fasso_at_slac.stanford.edu
>>>> >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have written already many times and I would like all users to
>>>>> understand that:
>>>>>
>>>>> A CALCULATION RESULT WITHOUT ITS STATISTICAL ERROR IS MEANINGLESS!!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> We will not answer questions expressed without specifying errors.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Alberto
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>> *From:* owner-fluka-discuss_at_mi.infn.it <owner-fluka-discuss_at_mi.infn.it
>>>>> >
>>>>> on behalf of sanjay andola <andolas.007_at_gmail.com>
>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 4, 2015 5:36 AM
>>>>> *To:* fluka-discuss_at_fluka.org
>>>>> *Subject:* [fluka-discuss]: Aluminium x ray transmission
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear FLUKA experts,
>>>>> I want to simulate the simple transmission of x-ray through different
>>>>> thickness aluminium plates. in which USRTRK scoring i have used. the
>>>>> results which I am getting from this is 1.6764028E-03 p/cmq/pr at 80 cm
>>>>> distance from the source. 10 mm aluminium is placed in front of
>>>>> detector
>>>>> volume. I am sending the input file also. why it is so different from
>>>>> actual ones. which could be 1.24e-05 p/cm2/pr analyticaly. please
>>>>> elucidate
>>>>> me.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Sanjay Andola
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
> --
> 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
>
--
संजय अन्दोला
वैज्ञानिक अधिकारी डी,
अनुप्रयुक्त भौतिकी प्रभाग,
भाभा परमाणु अनुसंधान केंद्र ट्रांबे
मुंबई 400085
फोन नं. 022,25591317
__________________________________________________________________________
You can manage unsubscription from this mailing list at https://www.fluka.org/fluka.php?id=acc_info
Received on Tue Aug 04 2015 - 21:29:13 CEST