RE: TCQUENCH parameters from Mario Santana Leitner on 2009-04-03 (fluka discuss archive)

From: Mario Santana Leitner <Mario.Santana_at_cern.ch>
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 18:52:40 +0200

Hi Andrei,

I don't have a computer with FLUKA with me to test what I am suggesting,
but maybe you could try to write the time-cut card in different ways,
e.g

TIME-CUT 1.5E-29 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

also, could you open the output file and see how FLUKA has read and
understood that card?

Mario

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrey Smolyakov [mailto:Andrei.Smolyakov_at_itep.ru]
Sent: Fri 4/3/2009 1:44 PM
To: Andrey Smolyakov; fasso_at_slac.stanford.edu; fluka-discuss_at_fluka.org
Cc: Mario Santana Leitner
Subject: Re: TCQUENCH parameters
=20
(smtp1.mi.infn.it [192.84.138.69]); Fri, 03 Apr 2009 13:45:03 +0200 =
(CEST)
Sender: owner-fluka-discuss_at_mi.infn.it

Hello all,

So, while I'm still at complete loss concerning the apparent failure of
TCQUENCH on my machine (and still I will be grateful for any help
possible!), I came up with another problem, this time with TIME-CUT =
option.

The same simulation -(TCQUENCH options) +(TIME-CUT for protons):
TIME-CUT 1.5E-29 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0

I intentionally used small cut-off times, much smaller then cut-off =
times
used in TCQUENCH so to make sure than my proton beam will be discarded
before being scored in my USRBIN's. But the problem is that the beam IS
scored whatever small time cut-off I input in the CUT-OFF option. I even
tried to input 0.0 cut-off time, still I perfectly score my beam.

It appears (after having fun with both TCQUENCH and TIME-CUT) that I =
have a
problem with using timing parameters in my simulation. As far as I can
understand basically there are three possibilities:
1) Some error in my simulation input (or some parameter missing) that
prevent Fluka from correct processing of the simulation.
2) Some bug in my Fluka compilation, though I tried to compile and use =
both
flukahp and flukadpm, no difference found. Also I tried to run my =
simulation
on other Fluka installations (thanks to some of my colleagues around the
world) and also there was no difference found.
3) Finally, some bug in the implementation of the time cut-offs in the =
Fluka
itself. I tried both Fluka 2008.3.7 and Fluka 2008.3b-0 and have found =
no
difference in respect to my problem.

I'm looking forward for your feedback, :-)
Andrey.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrey Smolyakov" <smolyakov_at_photo2000.ru>
To: "Alberto Fasso'" <fasso_at_slac.stanford.edu>; =
<fluka-discuss_at_fluka.org>
Cc: "Mario Santana Leitner" <Mario.Santana_at_cern.ch>
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 1:12 AM
Subject: Re: TCQUENCH parameters

> Alberto,
>
> Thank you for explanations, it is much more clear now. But still I =
miss
> something...
> I have changed momentum to energy, but it appears not to be the key. =
The
> time expected (as I wrote before) for 100cm-away bin is 2.3E-8s yet I =
got
> 1.13995E-5s.
>
> Another thing which is not clear to me: I have a bin 0.1cm away from =
the
> beam origin position spanning 1cm along the beam axis. And I have =
another
> bin 100.1cm away from the beam origin also spanning 1cm along the beam
> axis. It is essential that I expect to see primary particles in these =
bins
> at different moments of time. Yet I see primaries at _exactly_ the =
same
> time in both binnings (say, at 1.13994E-5s both binnings will see
> nothing), although their borders' distances from beam origin differ by =
a
> factor of 100.
>
> I tried to move "closest" bin even closer to the beam origin, say to =
0.01
> cm distance, and it allowed to see beam particles in the bins at =
different
> times. But, summarizing all this experience, it feels, that it takes =
the
> beam much more time to travel from the origin position to the bin 1 =
(0.1
> cm) than from the bin 1 to bin 2 (100 cm). Looks strange...
>
> I also simulated a beam of particles with Gaussian energy distibution.
> Both bins produced a nice temporal pictures of the Gaussian, but once
> again, completely similar pictures.
>
> So, making the long story short:
> 1) I still get the times much greater than expected
> 2) I get the similar times (and similar images of gaussian spectra) =
for
> binnings placed at different distances from beam origin position.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alberto Fasso'" <fasso_at_slac.stanford.edu>
> To: <fluka-discuss_at_fluka.org>
> Cc: "Andrey Smolyakov" <Andrei.Smolyakov_at_itep.ru>; "Mario Santana =
Leitner"
> <Mario.Santana_at_cern.ch>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 10:57 PM
> Subject: Re: TCQUENCH parameters
>
>
>> Andrey,
>>
>> as the manual says, the meaning of the WHAT(1) parameter in TCQUENCH =
is
>> that of a time cutoff. If a binning has been associated with
>> a certain value of WHAT(1), scoring in that binning will take place
>> only if the current particle age (the value of variable ATRACK in =
COMMON
>> TRACKR) is smaller than the time specified by WHAT(1).
>> Zero time is when a primary particle (defined by the BEAM command, or =
by
>> a SOURCE user routine) starts. Secondary particles inherit the age of
>> their parent at the time they are produced.
>> The reason you don't see the travel times you expect, is that in your
>> input you have not requested kinetic energy 10 MeV, but _momentum_
>> 10 MeV/c, corresponding to a much lower speed (3.2E8 cm/s if I am not
>> wrong). Try it again putting a minus sign -0.01 in the BEAM card.
>>
>> Alberto
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 1 Apr 2009, Andrey Smolyakov wrote:
>>
>>> RE: TCQUENCH parametersHello,
>>>
>>> Yes, I have noticed that attachment didn't find it's way to the
>>> discussion, but anyway...
>>> The trick is that I don't see protons with particular TCQUENCH
>>> parameters... with USRBIN without time cut-off I perfectly see these
>>> protons... and, increasing cut-off time by a few orders of magnitude =
I
>>> also can see them. And the situation is the same for 10 MeV protons.
>>>
>>> Anyway, I went to simplify my model even more, so it is now 10 MeV
>>> protons in vacuum with PRECISIO defaults. For 10-MeV protons I =
estimate
>>> their velocity to 4.3E+09 cm/s. Then I put two USRBIN's 0.1 cm and =
100
>>> cm away from the beam origin position on the beam axis. I expect to
>>> "see" protons in these beams in 2.3E-11s and 2.3E-8s respectively. =
In
>>> fact, I see my protons in both these bins after exactly 1.54932E-4s
>>> which suggests that I deal not with the beam travel time, but some =
other
>>> temporal parameter.
>>>
>>> So, my questions are:
>>> 1) What is the physical meaning of the WHAT(1) parameter in the
>>> TCQUENCH? What is the reference time from which the WHAT(1) seconds =
are
>>> counted?
>>> 2) If the reference is a beam particle origin time, then please help =
me
>>> to find what is going wrong (or what is made wrong) in my =
simulation?
>>>
>>> The input is included below. I run in the latest FLUKA2008 3b.0:
>>>
>>> TITLE
>>> Fluka TCQUENCH study. 1.04.2009. Andrey Smolyakov. ITEP.
>>> *
>>> *
>>> DEFAULTS PRECISIO
>>> *23456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 =
123456789
>>> 123456789
>>> *
>>> *
>>> BEAM 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 =
-1.0
>>> PROTON
>>> BEAMPOS 0.0 0.0 -0.1 0.0 0.0
>>> *
>>> PHYSICS 2.0 EVAPORAT
>>> EVENTYPE 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 =
0.0
>>> DPMJET
>>> *
>>> *23456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 =
123456789
>>> 123456789
>>> *
>>> *
>>> GEOBEGIN COMBINAT
>>> Target - thick
>>> XYP 001 0.0
>>> XYP 002 3.0
>>> *
>>> * GENERAL BODIES
>>> *
>>> SPH 003 0.0 0.0 0.0 50000.0
>>> SPH 004 0.0 0.0 0.0 49600.0
>>> SPH 005 0.0 0.0 0.0 49500.0
>>> END
>>> *23456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 =
123456789
>>> 123456789
>>> *
>>> * Vacuum volumes 1
>>> *
>>> VC1 5 +005
>>> *
>>> * Generic bodies 2,3
>>> *
>>> VAC 5 +004 -005
>>> BHL 5 +003 -004
>>> END
>>> *234 6789 123456 890123 567890 234567 901234 678901 345678 012345
>>> 789012x
>>> GEOEND
>>> *
>>> *23456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 =
123456789
>>> 123456789
>>> *
>>> *
>>> ASSIGNMA 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 0.0
>>> ASSIGNMA 1.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0
>>> *
>>> *
>>> USRBIN 10.0 1.0 21.0 0.5 0.5 =
1.0
>>> TOF_0
>>> USRBIN -0.5 -0.5 0.0 1.0 1.0 =
1.0 &
>>>
>>> *
>>> USRBIN 10.0 1.0 22.0 0.5 0.5 =
101.0
>>> TOF_1
>>> USRBIN -0.5 -0.5 100.0 1.0 1.0 =
1.0 &
>>> *
>>> TCQUENCH 3.0E-11 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 =
0.0
>>> TCQUENCH 3.0E-08 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 =
0.0
>>> *23456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 =
123456789
>>> 123456789
>>> *
>>> USRBIN 10.0 1.0 98.0 0.5 0.5 =
101.0
>>> ETERNAL
>>> USRBIN -0.5 -0.5 100.0 1.0 1.0 =
1.0 &
>>> *
>>> *23456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 =
123456789
>>> 123456789
>>> RANDOMIZE 1.0 5364791.0
>>> START 1E+03
>>> *23456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 =
123456789
>>> 123456789
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: Mario Santana Leitner
>>> To: Andrey Smolyakov ; fluka-discuss_at_fluka.org
>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 11:14 AM
>>> Subject: RE: TCQUENCH parameters
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Andrey,
>>>
>>> I think that you forgot to attach the input file.
>>>
>>> Anyway, one of the reasons why you don't see a signal may well be =
the
>>> energy of your protons (~10 eV?), which is below the transport =
threshold
>>> for charged hadrons (1000 eV, please see
>>> http://www.fluka.org/fluka.php?id=3Dman_onl&sub=3D3), which means =
that your
>>> protons are killed as soon as they are shot and they don't reach =
your
>>> detector.
>>>
>>> Mario
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-fluka-discuss_at_mi.infn.it on behalf of Andrey Smolyakov
>>> Sent: Tue 3/31/2009 4:29 PM
>>> To: fluka-discuss_at_fluka.org
>>> Subject: TCQUENCH parameters
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I'm somehow stuck with the TCQUENCH option in Fluka...
>>> Could you please explain what is exactly the reference time from =
which
>>> the WHAT(1) seconds are counted. Is it a time when primary particle
>>> originated, or a time when the binning in question scored it's first
>>> event? Or what?
>>>
>>> I need to simulate a TOF detector and I started with a simple model
>>> (attached is my input file), where non-relativistic proton beam (~10 =
eV)
>>> originates in vacuum and travels towards the area (100 cm away) =
where I
>>> score protons' track-lenght density with the USRBIN option. Since =
this
>>> is a non-relativistic case I use classical formulas to estimate time =
for
>>> my primary beam to reach the detector, but I can see nothing in the
>>> detector with these times. Increasing scoring time 3 orders of =
magnitude
>>> does help to score something, but still I'm not clear what is wrong.
>>> Well, it may be that I miss out something very simple but in any =
case I
>>> would really appreciate your help as I'm stuck with it %)
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance,
>>> Andrey.
>>
>> --
>> Alberto Fasso`
>> SLAC-RP, MS 48, 2575 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park CA 94025
>> Phone: (1 650) 926 4762 Fax: (1 650) 926 3569
>> fasso_at_slac.stanford.edu
>>
>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C9B47C.997A2D51
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
6.5.7654.12">
<TITLE>RE: TCQUENCH parameters</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>

Hi Andrei, 
 
I don't have a computer with FLUKA with me to test what I am suggesting, =
but maybe you could try to write the time-cut card in different ways, =
e.g 
 
TIME-CUT    1.5E-29       =
0.0       =
1.0       =
0.0       =
0.0       0.0 
 
also, could you open the output file and see how FLUKA has read and =
understood that card? 
 
Mario 
 
 
-----Original Message----- 
From: Andrey Smolyakov [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:Andrei.Smolyakov_at_itep.ru">mailto:Andrei.Smolyakov_at_itep.ru<=
/A>] 
Sent: Fri 4/3/2009 1:44 PM 
To: Andrey Smolyakov; fasso_at_slac.stanford.edu; =
fluka-discuss_at_fluka.org 
Cc: Mario Santana Leitner 
Subject: Re: TCQUENCH parameters 
 
(smtp1.mi.infn.it [192.84.138.69]); Fri, 03 Apr 2009 13:45:03 +0200 =
(CEST) 
Sender: owner-fluka-discuss_at_mi.infn.it 
 
Hello all, 
 
So, while I'm still at complete loss concerning the apparent failure =
of 
TCQUENCH on my machine (and still I will be grateful for any help 
possible!), I came up with another problem, this time with TIME-CUT =
option. 
 
The same simulation -(TCQUENCH options) +(TIME-CUT for protons): 
TIME-CUT     1.5E-29      =
0.0       =
0.0       =
1.0       =
1.0       0.0 
 
I intentionally used small cut-off times, much smaller then cut-off =
times 
used in TCQUENCH so to make sure than my proton beam will be =
discarded 
before being scored in my USRBIN's. But the problem is that the beam =
IS 
scored whatever small time cut-off I input in the CUT-OFF option. I =
even 
tried to input 0.0 cut-off time, still I perfectly score my beam. 
 
It appears (after having fun with both TCQUENCH and TIME-CUT) that I =
have a 
problem with using timing parameters in my simulation. As far as I =
can 
understand basically there are three possibilities: 
1) Some error in my simulation input (or some parameter missing) =
that 
prevent Fluka from correct processing of the simulation. 
2) Some bug in my Fluka compilation, though I tried to compile and use =
both 
flukahp and flukadpm, no difference found. Also I tried to run my =
simulation 
on other Fluka installations (thanks to some of my colleagues around =
the 
world) and also there was no difference found. 
3) Finally, some bug in the implementation of the time cut-offs in the =
Fluka 
itself. I tried both Fluka 2008.3.7 and Fluka 2008.3b-0 and have found =
no 
difference in respect to my problem. 
 
I'm looking forward for your feedback, :-) 
Andrey. 
 
 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Andrey Smolyakov" <smolyakov_at_photo2000.ru> 
To: "Alberto Fasso'" <fasso_at_slac.stanford.edu>; =
<fluka-discuss_at_fluka.org> 
Cc: "Mario Santana Leitner" <Mario.Santana_at_cern.ch> 
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 1:12 AM 
Subject: Re: TCQUENCH parameters 
 
 
> Alberto, 
> 
> Thank you for explanations, it is much more clear now. But still I =
miss 
> something... 
> I have changed momentum to energy, but it appears not to be the =
key. The 
> time expected (as I wrote before) for 100cm-away bin is 2.3E-8s yet =
I got 
> 1.13995E-5s. 
> 
> Another thing which is not clear to me: I have a bin 0.1cm away =
from the 
> beam origin position spanning 1cm along the beam axis. And I have =
another 
> bin 100.1cm away from the beam origin also spanning 1cm along the =
beam 
> axis. It is essential that I expect to see primary particles in =
these bins 
> at different moments of time. Yet I see primaries at _exactly_ the =
same 
> time in both binnings (say, at 1.13994E-5s both binnings will =
see 
> nothing), although their borders' distances from beam origin differ =
by a 
> factor of 100. 
> 
> I tried to move "closest" bin even closer to the beam =
origin, say to 0.01 
> cm distance, and it allowed to see beam particles in the bins at =
different 
> times. But, summarizing all this experience, it feels, that it =
takes the 
> beam much more time to travel from the origin position to the bin 1 =
(0.1 
> cm) than from the bin 1 to bin 2 (100 cm). Looks strange... 
> 
> I also simulated a beam of particles with Gaussian energy =
distibution. 
> Both bins produced a nice temporal pictures of the Gaussian, but =
once 
> again, completely similar pictures. 
> 
> So, making the long story short: 
> 1) I still get the times much greater than expected 
> 2) I get the similar times (and similar images of gaussian spectra) =
for 
> binnings placed at different distances from beam origin =
position. 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Alberto Fasso'" =
<fasso_at_slac.stanford.edu> 
> To: <fluka-discuss_at_fluka.org> 
> Cc: "Andrey Smolyakov" <Andrei.Smolyakov_at_itep.ru>; =
"Mario Santana Leitner" 
> <Mario.Santana_at_cern.ch> 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 10:57 PM 
> Subject: Re: TCQUENCH parameters 
> 
> 
>> Andrey, 
>> 
>> as the manual says, the meaning of the WHAT(1) parameter in =
TCQUENCH is 
>> that of a time cutoff. If a binning has been associated =
with 
>> a certain value of WHAT(1), scoring in that binning will take =
place 
>> only if the current particle age (the value of variable ATRACK =
in COMMON 
>> TRACKR) is smaller than the time specified by WHAT(1). 
>> Zero time is when a primary particle (defined by the BEAM =
command, or by 
>> a SOURCE user routine) starts. Secondary particles inherit the =
age of 
>> their parent at the time they are produced. 
>> The reason you don't see the travel times you expect, is that =
in your 
>> input you have not requested kinetic energy 10 MeV, but =
_momentum_ 
>> 10 MeV/c, corresponding to a much lower speed (3.2E8 cm/s if I =
am not 
>> wrong). Try it again putting a minus sign -0.01 in the BEAM =
card. 
>> 
>> Alberto 
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, 1 Apr 2009, Andrey Smolyakov wrote: 
>> 
>>> RE: TCQUENCH parametersHello, 
>>> 
>>> Yes, I have noticed that attachment didn't find it's way to =
the 
>>> discussion, but anyway... 
>>> The trick is that I don't see protons with particular =
TCQUENCH 
>>> parameters... with USRBIN without time cut-off I perfectly =
see these 
>>> protons... and, increasing cut-off time by a few orders of =
magnitude I 
>>> also can see them. And the situation is the same for 10 MeV =
protons. 
>>> 
>>> Anyway, I went to simplify my model even more, so it is now =
10 MeV 
>>> protons in vacuum with PRECISIO defaults. For 10-MeV =
protons I estimate 
>>> their velocity to 4.3E+09 cm/s. Then I put two USRBIN's 0.1 =
cm and 100 
>>> cm away from the beam origin position on the beam axis. I =
expect to 
>>> "see" protons in these beams in 2.3E-11s and =
2.3E-8s respectively. In 
>>> fact, I see my protons in both these bins after exactly =
1.54932E-4s 
>>> which suggests that I deal not with the beam travel time, =
but some other 
>>> temporal parameter. 
>>> 
>>> So, my questions are: 
>>> 1) What is the physical meaning of the WHAT(1) parameter in =
the 
>>> TCQUENCH? What is the reference time from which the WHAT(1) =
seconds are 
>>> counted? 
>>> 2) If the reference is a beam particle origin time, then =
please help me 
>>> to find what is going wrong (or what is made wrong) in my =
simulation? 
>>> 
>>> The input is included below. I run in the latest FLUKA2008 =
3b.0: 
>>> 
>>> TITLE 
>>> Fluka TCQUENCH study. 1.04.2009. Andrey Smolyakov. =
ITEP. 
>>> * 
>>> * 
>>> DEFAULTS PRECISIO 
>>> *23456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 =
123456789 
>>> 123456789 
>>> * 
>>> * 
>>> =
BEAM           =
0.01       =
0.0       =
0.0       =
0.0       =
0.0      -1.0 
>>> PROTON 
>>> BEAMPOS         =
0.0       =
0.0      =
-0.1       =
0.0       0.0 
>>> * 
>>> PHYSICS         2.0 =
EVAPORAT 
>>> EVENTYPE        =
0.0       =
0.0       =
2.0       =
0.0       =
0.0       0.0 
>>> DPMJET 
>>> * 
>>> *23456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 =
123456789 
>>> 123456789 
>>> * 
>>> * 
>>> GEOBEGIN COMBINAT 
>>>          &=
nbsp;        Target - thick 
>>> XYP  001      0.0 
>>> XYP  002      3.0 
>>> * 
>>> * GENERAL BODIES 
>>> * 
>>> SPH  003      =
0.0       =
0.0       0.0   50000.0 
>>> SPH  004      =
0.0       =
0.0       0.0   49600.0 
>>> SPH  005      =
0.0       =
0.0       0.0   49500.0 
>>> END 
>>> *23456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 =
123456789 
>>> 123456789 
>>> * 
>>> * Vacuum volumes 1 
>>> * 
>>> VC1    5   +005 
>>> * 
>>> * Generic bodies 2,3 
>>> * 
>>> VAC    5   +004   =
-005 
>>> BHL    5   +003   =
-004 
>>> END 
>>> *234 6789 123456 890123 567890 234567 901234 678901 345678 =
012345 
>>> 789012x 
>>> GEOEND 
>>> * 
>>> *23456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 =
123456789 
>>> 123456789 
>>> * 
>>> * 
>>> ASSIGNMA        =
2.0       =
1.0       =
2.0       =
1.0       0.0 
>>> ASSIGNMA        =
1.0       =
3.0       =
3.0       =
0.0       0.0 
>>> * 
>>> * 
>>> USRBIN         =
10.0       =
1.0      =
21.0       =
0.5       =
0.5       1.0 
>>> TOF_0 
>>> USRBIN         =
-0.5      =
-0.5       =
0.0       =
1.0       =
1.0       1.0 & 
>>> 
>>> * 
>>> USRBIN         =
10.0       =
1.0      =
22.0       =
0.5       0.5     =
101.0 
>>> TOF_1 
>>> USRBIN         =
-0.5      -0.5     =
100.0       =
1.0       =
1.0       1.0 & 
>>> * 
>>> TCQUENCH     =
3.0E-11      =
0.0       =
0.0       =
1.0       =
1.0       0.0 
>>> TCQUENCH     =
3.0E-08      =
0.0       =
0.0       =
2.0       =
2.0       0.0 
>>> *23456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 =
123456789 
>>> 123456789 
>>> * 
>>> USRBIN         =
10.0       =
1.0      =
98.0       =
0.5       0.5     =
101.0 
>>> ETERNAL 
>>> USRBIN         =
-0.5      -0.5     =
100.0       =
1.0       =
1.0       1.0 & 
>>> * 
>>> *23456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 =
123456789 
>>> 123456789 
>>> RANDOMIZE       1.0 =
5364791.0 
>>> START          =
1E+03 
>>> *23456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 123456789 =
123456789 
>>> 123456789 
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: Mario Santana =
Leitner 
>>> To: Andrey Smolyakov ; fluka-discuss_at_fluka.org 
>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 11:14 AM 
>>> Subject: RE: TCQUENCH parameters 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi Andrey, 
>>> 
>>> I think that you forgot to attach the input file. 
>>> 
>>> Anyway, one of the reasons why you don't see a signal may =
well be the 
>>> energy of your protons (~10 eV?), which is below the =
transport threshold 
>>> for charged hadrons (1000 eV, please see 
>>> <A =
HREF=3D"http://www.fluka.org/fluka.php?id=3Dman_onl&sub=3D3">http://www.f=
luka.org/fluka.php?id=3Dman_onl&sub=3D3</A>), which means that your 
>>> protons are killed as soon as they are shot and they don't =
reach your 
>>> detector. 
>>> 
>>> Mario 
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message----- 
>>> From: owner-fluka-discuss_at_mi.infn.it on behalf of Andrey =
Smolyakov 
>>> Sent: Tue 3/31/2009 4:29 PM 
>>> To: fluka-discuss_at_fluka.org 
>>> Subject: TCQUENCH parameters 
>>> 
>>> Hello, 
>>> 
>>> I'm somehow stuck with the TCQUENCH option in Fluka... 
>>> Could you please explain what is exactly the reference time =
from which 
>>> the WHAT(1) seconds are counted. Is it a time when primary =
particle 
>>> originated, or a time when the binning in question scored =
it's first 
>>> event? Or what? 
>>> 
>>> I need to simulate a TOF detector and I started with a =
simple model 
>>> (attached is my input file), where non-relativistic proton =
beam (~10 eV) 
>>> originates in vacuum and travels towards the area (100 cm =
away) where I 
>>> score protons' track-lenght density with the USRBIN option. =
Since this 
>>> is a non-relativistic case I use classical formulas to =
estimate time for 
>>> my primary beam to reach the detector, but I can see =
nothing in the 
>>> detector with these times. Increasing scoring time 3 orders =
of magnitude 
>>> does help to score something, but still I'm not clear what =
is wrong. 
>>> Well, it may be that I miss out something very simple but =
in any case I 
>>> would really appreciate your help as I'm stuck with it =
%) 
>>> 
>>> Thanks in advance, 
>>> Andrey. 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Alberto Fasso` 
>> SLAC-RP, MS 48, 2575 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park CA 94025 
>> Phone: (1 650) 926 4762   Fax: (1 650) 926 3569 
>> fasso_at_slac.stanford.edu 
>> 
>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C9B47C.997A2D51--
Received on Fri Apr 03 2009 - 20:16:06 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri Apr 03 2009 - 20:16:07 CEST