Re: FLUKA: Re: Gb comments in case of lack EMF

[Helmut Vincke <Helmut.Vincke@cern.ch>]

Or just replace your vacuum by a material with extremly low density. That 
means like a
vacuum in real vacuum tubes or outer space. This should remove the message 
without
having undesired collisions.

You are right, EM is very time consuming and therefore it should be switched 
off if it
is not needed.

Helmut

Dominik Dworak wrote:

>  Hi Helmut,
> Thank you, your explanation looks sensible.
> The problem is that you not always need to develop e-m cascades
> (what is usually extremely time consuming).
> If you are right the problem can be solved by surrounding the
> system by any artificial, external material with max high
> energy thresholds for all particles to stop they in place.
> But of course, the EMF option has to be switched on anyway.
>                            Wishing nice days, Dominik
>
> On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, Helmut Vincke wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think the situation is as follows.
> > If a particle is decaying into an electron, positron or gamma then it is 
>dumped
> > on the spot of its formation in case EMF is switched off. If this particle
> > decays in material, FLUKA does not complain. In case it decays in vacuum 
>FLUKA
> > complains since it does not make sense to have energy deposits in vacuum. 
>For
> > example if  you have a lot of muons decaying in a vacuum region into 
>electron+mu
> > neutrino+electron neutrino. The electron is dumped in this vacuum and the 
>energy
> > deposition in this vacuum region is increased by the energy of the 
>electron.
> > Since this deposition in vacuum is not really logic FLUKA complains.
> > It would certainly help to transport those particle to the next material
> > boundary in order to dump them there or just to remove this error 
>message. Both
> > can be done only by the authors.
> >
> > If EMF is switched on this message disappears because those particles
> > responsible for this deposit are further transported.
> >
> > Cheers,  Helmut