Dear Giuseppe,
your input seems pretty boosted up with every thing is needed.
1) You could go further by including biasing, but if this is done wrong you
risk to spoil the spectrum. The definition of *best* depends heavily on the
what you want to study...
2) You can try to make the volume larger and try to extrapolate the effect
of the volume size on the spectrum definition (both in term of error
evaluation and average value).
3) If you define a region you might be able to force one or more
interaction steps.
I'm afraid your optimization of the simulation will have an iterative
nature, this will clearly have an impact on the total time needed to
perform your study,
Best
Vittorio
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Giuseppe Prestopino <
giuseppe.prestopino_at_uniroma2.it> wrote:
> Dear FLUKA experts,
> I am trying to optimize a simple simulation aimed to score dose in a thin
> volume surronded by water. The thin volume I am using is either water, or
> carbon, or air. I am starting simulating a spectrum of photons, where the
> maximum energy is 6 MeV by using a tabulated spectrum.
> I have the following questions:
> - are the cards that I am using in the input file the best way to simulate
> photon (and secondary radiation) transport/ production?
> - is there a way to reduce error in the scoring of dose in that thin
> volume, avoiding to increase the number of primaries?
> - concerning dose scoring, is it ok to score it by USRBIN in a binned
> volume that covers the whole thin region of interest? Or is it better to
> define a region corresponding to that target volume?
>
> Thank you a lot,
> Giuseppe
>
>
__________________________________________________________________________
You can manage unsubscription from this mailing list at
https://www.fluka.org/fluka.php?id=acc_info
Received on Wed Sep 14 2016 - 22:37:13 CEST