Re: residual nucleus infomation

From: Mary Chin <>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 23:34:21 +0100

Hi Shirley,

If we take the following collision as an example:
p + 12C -> 7Be + n + p + a

7Be, 1H and 4He are going to get scored as RESNUCLE i.e. we get three out
of a single collision. USDRAW is called once. USRRNC is called three

If we try to print out from a USDRAW call, without any looping (over an
array or something), we can't possibly get more than one output.

To do the cross-check you intend to, I would loop through NP and NPHEAV in
USDRAW to get the full suite of products following a collision. (I have
done that before, they matched all right!)

:) mary

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013, Shirley Li wrote:

> Hi Mary,
> Thank you very much for your explanation!
> So, if I check ICRES from mgdraw.f and IZ from usrrnc, should I expect exactly the same number? I'm
> running 1000 muons through oil (CH2) to get isotope production. I print out ICRES, IBRES and WTRACK
> from mgdraw.f and IZ, IA, WEE from usrrnc.f. However, the numbers don't always match. E.g., I got 20
> 7Be from mgdraw.f and 33 7Be from usrrnc.f. I understand that I can get isotope production from
> RESNUCLEi scoring, but I just want to make sure that everything is consistent.
> Thanks a lot!
> Shirley
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Mary Chin <> wrote:
> Dear Shirley,
> ICRES is a variable in RESNUC, which is an include file.
> IZ is an argument for USRRNC, which is a subroutine.
> ICRES will remain undefined unless the user routine contains the line:
> Incidently, in the usrrnc.f template distributed, this line is absent.
> If IZ is already available as an argument in usrrnc.f, why would one attempt/wish to use
> ICRES instead? One would use ICRES, for example, in mgdraw.f, where the atomic number is
> not readily available as an argument.
> :) mary
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2013, Shirley Li wrote:
> Dear FLUKA users,
> I'm not sure what's the difference between ICRES (residual nucleus atomic
> number) in RESNUC and IZ
> (also residual nucleus atomic number) in usrrnc.f. Could anyone explain this
> to me?
> Thank you very much!
> Best,
> Shirley
Received on Sun Jan 27 2013 - 19:52:49 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sun Jan 27 2013 - 19:52:50 CET