Dear Fluka users
I need to implement in my detector geometry an Aluminum honeycomb structure (about 1m2),
made of about 10000 hexagonal cells with thin (~0.5 mm) walls.
I approximated the structure with a homogeneous box, filled with a diluted “aluminum” material.
I tried two different material descriptions.
In the first one, I define a compound of Al and Air with density calculated by diluting the Al density
by the packing fraction (i.e. the ratio of the Al covered to total area) of the honeycomb.
The volume fraction for Al corresponds to the packing fraction.
Here is the code
MATERIAL 13.0 26.98 2.700 10.0 ALUMINUM
MATERIAL 0.00121 31.0 AIR
COMPOUND -0.75 NITROGEN -0.237 OXYGEN -0.013 ARGON AIR
MATERIAL 0.32963 32.0 HCOMB
COMPOUND -12.2 -ALUMINUM -0.878 -AIR HCOMB
As a second option, I simply defined an Al material with low density (calculated as above), in this way
MATERIAL 13.0 26.98 0.32963 32.0 HCOMB
LOW-MAT HCOMB 0.00 0.0 0.0 ALUMINUM
I would like to have your opinion about my method.
Is it reasonable to describe a honeycomb in this way?
Which material definition (1st or 2nd option) is better in my geometrical approximation?
Can you suggest a better method to model the structure ?
Thank you
Best regards
Paolo Maestro
__________________________________________________________________________
You can manage unsubscription from this mailing list at
https://www.fluka.org/fluka.php?id=acc_info
Received on Sat Sep 26 2015 - 09:53:24 CEST