AW: AW: Energy deposition

Dear Beatrice,
Sender: owner-fluka-discuss_at_mi.infn.it

When rerunning your simulation I found the following lines written in the out and err file:

   *** dp/dx:d,imat,ztar,ij,po,eo -0.00179035082 31 34.6662384 1 0.572616202
   1.09920164 ***
   *** x,xoster,ccster,d0ster -0.214465268 -0.2191 -6.0247 0. ***
   *** dp/dx:d,imat,ztar,ij,po,eo -0.0134390424 31 34.6662384 1 0.618808585
   1.12395685 ***
   *** x,xoster,ccster,d0ster -0.18077257 -0.2191 -6.0247 0. ***
   *** dp/dx:d,imat,ztar,ij,po,eo -0.0225896654 31 34.6662384 1 0.668727261
   1.15219403 ***
   ***

Did you observe the same?
I could be wrong but in my opinion these lines indicate a serious problem in the initialisation
of the stopping power for Uranium dicarbide.
That might be the reason for the negative values in the energy deposition.

You are using Sternheimer parameters and you are assigning the ionization
potential for Uranium dicarbide according to the values that are available
in the flair data base. This is the recommended way to do it.
However I think exactly there is the problem. When I omit Sternheimer values
and ionization potential and run again, I don't get the error messages any more.
I think the transport will still be reasonable without these parameters.

Cheers, Florian

--
Dipl.-Ing. Dr. techn. Florian Sommerer
Physiker
Radiologische Klinik / Heidelberger Ionenstrahl-Therapiezentrum
Florian.Sommerer_at_med.uni-heidelberg.de
Im Neuenheimer Feld 450
69120 Heidelberg
Germany
-----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
Von: beatrice pomaro [mailto:pomaro_at_dic.unipd.it]=20
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. Januar 2011 17:14
An: Sommerer, Florian
Betreff: Re: AW: Energy deposition
Dear Dr. Sommerer,
           I had the same problem but I run flupix-2010 and, by reducing the
number of binning, I had no more problems of stopping because of memory.
I give in attachment the same input file, with less binning (I kept results
  requirement after 1hour, 1year, 10years and 50years from t=3D0, suitably
converted into seconds from the end of radiation profile), but I have the
same problem of negative values and INF values for energy deposition (I put,
in addition, just the USRBIN34 results).
Many thanks for the support,
Sincerely,
Beatrice
At 09.43 26/01/2011, you wrote:
>Dear  Beatrice,
>
>    are you sure that you are using the input  file you attached to the
>previous mail?
>I tried to rerun it (using FLUKA2008.3d.1) but it stops at
>initialisation due to a lack of memory positions. Which is - I guess -
>due to the big number of binnings you are using.
>Can you please send the right file?
>
>Cheers, Florian
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>Dipl.-Ing. Dr. techn. Florian Sommerer
>Physiker
>Radiologische Klinik / Heidelberger Ionenstrahl-Therapiezentrum
>Florian.Sommerer_at_med.uni-heidelberg.de
>Im Neuenheimer Feld 450
>69120 Heidelberg
>Germany
>-----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
>Von: owner-fluka-discuss_at_mi.infn.it
>[mailto:owner-fluka-discuss_at_mi.infn.it] Im Auftrag von beatrice pomaro
>Gesendet: Montag, 24. Januar 2011 18:26
>An: fluka-discuss_at_fluka.org
>Betreff: Energy deposition
>
>Dear Fluka users,
>          can you please have a look to the input file in attachment:
>the problem is represented by a target made of
>UC2 which is directly impinged by a proton beam (300microA, 70MeV),
>within a concrete target bunker. I used IRRPROFI to model a beam
>working 5000hours/year than stopping, for totally 9years
>I am interested in the results in terms of energy deposition
>[Gev/(cm3 primary)] on the slice of shielding just in front of the
>target source. However in the USRBIN files I have negative values of
>energy deposition and 'INF' strings.
>Can you address me where the problem is, please?
>If I do not assign an IRRPROFI card for the beam irradiation profile
>does, in this case, the energy deposition correspond to time?
>
>Many thanks for your help,
>
>Sincerely,
>Beatrice Pomaro