RE: How to simulate the secondary particles of underground muons

From: Chris Theis (Christian.Theis@cern.ch)
Date: Wed Oct 18 2006 - 12:28:33 CEST

• Next message: Harine, Katherine: "libg2c.so Problem"

Hello,

Coming back to the advice of Sebastien to start batches of 10000, 100000 etc. particles. Is there a way, or has anybody ever done something like this, to get some more statistical information out of FLUKA like how the calculated mean per batch develops, the variance of the variance, figure of merit, autocorrelation and so on. These values would be helpful in determining the number of particles required to obtain a reliable result from a statistical point of view.

Cheers
Chris

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-fluka-discuss@fisica.unimi.it
> [mailto:owner-fluka-discuss@fisica.unimi.it] On Behalf Of
> Sebastien WURTH
> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 11:17 AM
> To: Wangrg@mail.ihep.ac.cn
> Cc: fluka-discuss@fluka.org
> Subject: Re: How to simulate the secondary particles of
> underground muons
>
> Hello,
>
> If you do 5 runs of 100 primaries (what I understood), it
> could be possible that you don't have enough statistics (the
> values with 99% error). My advice would be try again with
> 5*10.000, 5*100.000 or 5*1 million primaries.
>
> Regards.
> Sebastien.
>
>
> Wang RuiGuang a écrit :
>
> >Dear Fluka users and authors,
> >
> > I am a new Fluka user. Our aim is to detect neutrons in a
> underground
> >experiment hall. The detector is located in the water pool
> inside of the hall.
> >I want to know the secondary particle's performance of underground
> >muons in rocks, air(a hall) and water pool by Fluka
> simulation. Suppose
> >the incident muons with 100 GeV in position of 2 meters
> inside of rock
> >above the hall. For those secondary particles, I like to
> know their the
> >track length, energy loss, how to decay, .... . Based on a
> sample file,
> >I wrote a input card. A part of it is:
> >
> >*... ....1.... ....2.... ....3.... ....4.... ....5....
> ....6.... ....7.... ....8
> >USRBDX -1.0 209.0 -47.0 3.0 4.0
> 1.0E6 pi1
> >USRBDX 1.0 0.001 100.0
> &
> >USRBDX -1.0 8.0 -47.0 3.0 4.0
> 1.0E6 Neutron1
> >USRBDX 0.05 0.001 50.0
> &
> >USRBDX -1.0 209.0 -48.0 4.0 5.0
> 1.0E6 pi2
> >USRBDX 1.0 0.001 100.0
> &
> >USRBDX -1.0 8.0 -48.0 4.0 5.0
> 1.0E6 Neutron2
> >USRBDX 0.05 0.001 50.0
> &
> >*... ....1.... ....2.... ....3.... ....4.... ....5....
> ....6.... ....7.... ....8
> >USRTRACK 1.0 207.0 -49.0 3.0 1.5E9
> 100. airPi
> >USRTRACK 0.1 0.001
> &
> >USRTRACK 1.0 8.0 -49.0 3.0 1.5E9
> 50. airN
> >USRTRACK 0.5 0.001
> &
> >USRTRACK 1.0 209.0 -50.0 4.0 9.0E8
> 100. waterPi
> >USRTRACK 0.1 0.001
> &
> >USRTRACK 1.0 8.0 -50.0 4.0 9.0E8
> 50. waterN
> >USRTRACK 0.5 0.001
> &
> >*... ....1.... ....2.... ....3.... ....4.... ....5....
> ....6.... ....7.... ....8
> >USRBIN 15.0 8.0 -51.0 500.0 500.0
> 900.0 Neutron
> >USRBIN -500.0 -500.0 0.0 1.0 1.0
> 450.0 &
> >USRBIN 15.0 208.0 -52.0 500.0 500.0
> 900.0 Edeposit
> >USRBIN -500.0 -500.0 0.0 1.0 1.0
> 450.0 &
> >
> >Five runs is ended soon with a start of 100. However, the
> *_sum.lis or
> >*_tab.lis is zero for most fluencies and errors. A very few
> of them is
> >not zero but 99% for errors. I don't know why. hope to get your help!
> >
> >By the way, what available options is more suitable to show
> particle's
> >decay and propagation in the matters, especially for pai and neutron?
> >
> >Best regards
> >
> >R.G. Wang
> >
> >
>
>
>

• Next message: Harine, Katherine: "libg2c.so Problem"

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Wed Oct 18 2006 - 15:33:38 CEST