Dear Paola
Thank you again for your time.
Then, using USRBDX will only sum the results in the mother region. I think
I will score in each region separately because I need them to behave as
independent pixels.
Thank you for your advice on RPP and planes, I will modify geometry to
avoid these rounding problems at the boundary.
Respect to the PHYSICS cards, I added them because at first I wasn't sure
FLUKA was taking into account the nuclear reaction I was interested in.
Reading and trying to understand the manual led me to add these cards even
if they were unnecessary or default.
Thanks for the clear answer!
Regards
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geser, Federico Alejandro
Lic. in Physics
Doctoral Fellowship - IFEG-CONICET
FAMAF-UNC
Office 232 - Laboratory 448
http://liifamirx.famaf.unc.edu.ar/members/geser/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017-08-30 5:05 GMT-03:00 paola sala <paola.sala_at_cern.ch>:
> Dear Federico
> If you define a row with 50 regions and replicate it, the usrbdx will
> apply also to replicas, summing them together. In each of the 50 usrbdx
> you'll get all particles crossing a column of pixels. Is this what you
> need? If not:
> - to get the "total" usrbdx over all 2500 pixels: add a "dummy" scoring
> region in front of the detector (a thin layer of void) and score there.
> - to separate all the 2500 pixels: not with usrbdx. usrbdx works by
> region, keeps no track of different lattices. One should define 2500
> usrbdx's, not sure that it does not hit some max dimensions (i'll check if
> needed). The only structure that works "by lattice" is the USRBIN "special"
> (what(1)=8). You could use this in fluence mode, with energy as the third
> variable. Needs user routines, and will give the fluence INSIDE the pixels,
> not at the surface
>
> A couple of advices: independently on whether you use lattices or not,
> avoid defining each pixel by a rpp. All these RPP will touch each other,
> potentially giving rounding problems at boundaries: the same boundary will
> be defined by two different, touching, bodies. It would be better to define
> a single RPP containing everytyng and split it with planes. This would also
> make the subtraction from vacuum easier, only one body!
>
> Check your PHYSICS cards:
> the PEATHRESH card, (do you need it? you are working at energy where
> PEANUT is the default. ) If used one should input large values :
> PHYSICS 1000. 1000. 1000. 1000. 1000. 1000. PEATHRES
> If you switch on coalescence and heavy fragment evaporation you should
> also switch on heavy ion transport (card IONTRANS, not IONSPLIT), and if
> the energies go above 100-150 MeV/nucleon link with the RQMD generator.
> The BME card is useless, and please do not set a QMDTHRESH
> Hope this helps
> Paola
>
>
>
> On 08/29/2017 02:10 PM, Federico Geser wrote:
>
> Dear Paola
>
> Thanks for the response!
>
> Yes, I made a mistake when developing the geometry and forgot to subtract
> the container regions from the void. That's easily solvable.
>
> On the other hand, I think I will not segment the single 2x2 mm segments
> any further, I defined them that way because I'm not sure how to assign a
> USRBDX card to the copies. I thought that, assigning a USRBDX card to the
> containers was enough for FLUKA to understand that it should score in each
> of the copies. If this is no the case, then the only solution I see is
> defining a USRBDX card for each region (2500 USRBDX cards), thus using
> lattice is not an advantage in this case. Am I right?
>
> If I define a "master" row of 50 pixels, apply a USRBDX card to each
> pixel, and then use lattic.f to replicate the row, will the copies also be
> scored in with USRBDX?
>
> Thank you again for your attention!
>
> Regards,
>
> Federico.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Geser, Federico Alejandro
> Lic. in Physics
>
> Doctoral Fellowship - IFEG-CONICET
> FAMAF-UNC
>
> Office 232 - Laboratory 448
>
> http://liifamirx.famaf.unc.edu.ar/members/geser/
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> 2017-08-28 7:32 GMT-03:00 Paola Sala <paola.sala_at_mi.infn.it>:
>
>> Dear Federico
>> the problem is in the geometry.
>> The 2450 (! see later..) cells are all overlapping with the VOID region,
>> because they are not subtracted from it. The container (lattice) regons
>> have to be subtracted, otherwise the code cannot know wether the particle
>> is in the VOID or in one of the lattices.
>>
>> Here maybe some doubt about the use of lattices. Do you plan to further
>> segment the single 2x2mm pixel? If not, why do you need to define a
>> lattice based on single simple regions? What is the advantage with respect
>> to define 2550 regions if you have to define 2500 lattices?
>>
>> In your case (but maybe I do not understand well), a possible idea would
>> be to repeat a single row, only 50 times (50 lattices). Your "base unit
>> would be the row that you already defined. Then, one could create 50
>> "container" regions having the dimensions of one row (2mmx10cm)
>> positioned as the rows to be repeated, havin nothing inside, just
>> containers. These will have to be subtracted from the VOID. The lattic.f
>> would simply translate from one row to the "master" row, where the code is
>> then able to see and select the 50 pixels.
>>
>> Hope this helps
>> Paola
>>
>> > Dear FLUKA experts,
>> >
>> > I wrote a geometry using lattice source file, trying to define a
>> detector
>> > made of 50x50 regions. I defined 50 of them (only one row of the array)
>> > that will be the elementary cell (prototypes) for each of the other
>> rows.
>> >
>> > I would like to use the USRBDX card to count photons entering each of
>> the
>> > regions of the cell (such as an imaging detector) discriminating in
>> > energy,
>> > solid angle, or maybe both variables.
>> >
>> > At first, I thought that using the USRBDX card in one of the elementary
>> > cells will be enough for FLUKA to understand that I want to calculate
>> that
>> > quantity in every other lattice cell related to the corresponding
>> > elementary cell, but that is not true.
>> >
>> > The lattice card makes the correct matching of other properties, for
>> > example materials, thresholds, etc, but is there any way that it
>> > automatically understands USRBDX?
>> >
>> > Should I define a USRBDX card for each region of the cell? (there will
>> be
>> > 2500 USRBDX cards!)
>> >
>> > I attach the input, geometry and lattice source files.
>> >
>> > Thank you in advance!
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------------
>> > Geser, Federico Alejandro
>> > Lic. in Physics
>> >
>> > Doctoral Fellowship - IFEG-CONICET
>> > FAMAF-UNC
>> >
>> > Office 232 - Laboratory 448
>> >
>> > http://liifamirx.famaf.unc.edu.ar/members/geser/
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------------
>> >
>>
>>
>> Paola Sala
>> INFN Milano
>> tel. Milano +39-0250317374
>> tel. CERN +41-227679148
>>
>>
>
>
__________________________________________________________________________
You can manage unsubscription from this mailing list at
https://www.fluka.org/fluka.php?id=acc_info
Received on Tue Sep 05 2017 - 15:37:51 CEST