Re: Deviations of flux caculation results by FLUKA and MCNP

From: Paola Sala <paola.sala_at_mi.infn.it>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 08:39:26 +0100 (CET)

Dear Walker,
it is difficult to answer without more information:
What is your primary particle? Its energy? Which particles are you scoring?
Do you see some pattern in the differences? For instance, do they depend
on the position , on the material, or other?
Regards
Paola
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> Recently, I was trying to calculate flux distribution of a model via FLUKA
> and MCNP respectively (in order to verify the correctness of my result).
>
>
>
> The model was made up of over 100 regions and the materials included : C,
> V
> , Cr, Mn, Fe, Ta, W, H, He, Li, Pb, Ni, etc.
>
> About 50 regions' fluxes were scored.
>
>
>
> I tried several ways to decrease the relative error. For example, the same
> volume values were input into FLUKA and MCNP for flux calculation; the
> primary particles were increased from 1.0e6 to 1.0e7 to 1.0e8; the
> selfshielded material in FLUKA was also chosen.
>
>
>
> However, the FLUKA and MCNP results seemed not to match ideally: about 25
> regions had deviation less than 1%; about 20 ones had deviation between 1%
> and 2 %; most of the left ones had deviation beside 10% with the max
> deviation 19%. Both the max statistical discrepancies of FLUKA and MCNP
> are
> no bigger than 1%.
>
>
>
> I' m wondering if my calculation result is correct. What's the reasonable
> flux deviation of FLUKA and MCNP? How about 10%?
>
>
>
> Looking forward to any suggestion.
>
>
>
>
>
> Best wishes
>
> Walker
>
>
>
>


Paola Sala
INFN Milano
tel. Milano +39-0250317374
tel. CERN +41-227679148
Received on Wed Jan 30 2013 - 22:29:31 CET