Re: Fluka Calculation for Induced Activity

Hello,

If using $FLUPRO/flutil/usrsuw on resnuc unformatted files you got two
files : one *_sum.lis and *_tab.lis.
You are talking about *.sum.lis and you got indeed 3 tables.
1) The results in nuclei/primary with relative error for every A
2) The results in nuclei/primary with relative error for every Z
3) The results in nuclei/primary with relative error for every
(possible) element in a matrix

Of course isotopes with A=4,3,2,1 exist, you can see them in the matrix
: it is H3, H2, H1, He3, He4
They are produced in your nuclear reactions.

Hope it helps

Sebastien

V.C.Petwal wrote :

>-----Original Message-----
>
>Dear sir,
>I am simulating the activity induced in a Cu target by bombardment of
>700 MeV electron/proton beam using the fluka code.
>
>I have gone through the references forwarded by uou and found them very
>much useful in understanding the issue of induced activity. However to
>understand the use of RESNUCL card I am running a very simple problem,
>which Input and out put is attached. For the initial run I have not used
>any biasing card.
>
>I have 3 doubts.
>
>In the output I am getting 3 tables
>
>1. The firs table contains yield as function of Mass Number.
> (I understand that for all these isotopes Z is same and for present
>problem it is 29. Could you please comment that whether I have
>understood it correctly. Also please explain the significance of
>isotopes in this table which have A=1,2,3,4. Does they exist at all!!)
>
>2. The second Table contains as a function of Atomic Number
> (I understand that for all these Isotopes A is fixed and for present
>problem it is 63. If my interpretation is correct then I am unable to
>understand the significance of isotopes such as 1H63 or 2He63 etc.
>
>3. The third table contains isotopes arranged in an array Which A and
>Z can be derived from the respective Row and col index.
>
>I request you to kindly help me in understanding the output file.
>
>Encl. Input-output file which can be opened in WordPad
>
>With best regards.
>
>
>V.C.Petwal
>
>
>
Received on Tue Sep 16 14:18:40 2008