Re: Difference in "statistics" for same run of DOSE and DOSE-EQ

From: Lucia Sarchiapone <>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:33:43 +0200 (CEST)


the difference in statistics of the two estimators is reasonable because
they score different quantities, even though they both refer to
While the scoring of ambient dose equivalent is obtained as a
convolution of particles fluence and conversion coefficients (as the
manual says), the dose is based on energy deposition scoring, 'filtered'
through the AUXSCORE card for the particles you're interested in.
Results for fluence converge faster than for energy deposition, this -
in my opinion - explains your difference in statistics.

I hope this helps.



On Jul 13, 2010 08:35 PM, Roger HXlg <> wrote:

> Dear FLUKA experts
> I try to simulate a proton field impinging a cubic water phantom. I am
> interested in scoring neutron dose and neutron dose equivalent.
> Therefore I use USRBIN estimators in combination with AUXSCORE card to
> filter the dose for particle NEUTRON and in case of dose equivalent
> for
> ambient dose equivalent using SDUM AMB74.
> I attached for both cases a depth dose curve along the beam direction.
> My question is now, why does one curve (dose equivalent) look more or
> less smooth and the one of absorbed dose does not? The data is taken
> from the same run, so both estimators should score the same number of
> neutrons shouldn't they?
> The FLUKA input file is also attached.
> Thanks for your help!
> Cheers
> Roger
Received on Wed Jul 14 2010 - 10:11:47 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Jul 14 2010 - 10:11:53 CEST