ת·¢: Deviations of flux caculation results by FLUKA and MCNP

From: walker <wdx456_at_mail.ustc.edu.cn>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 08:14:06 +0800

 

By the way, the source is isotope cylinder shape with energy 14MeV.

 

·¢¼þÈË: owner-fluka-discuss_at_mi.infn.it
[mailto:owner-fluka-discuss_at_mi.infn.it] ´ú±í walker
·¢ËÍʱ¼ä: 2013Äê1ÔÂ29ÈÕ 15:38
ÊÕ¼þÈË: fluka-discuss_at_fluka.org
Ö÷Ìâ: Deviations of flux caculation results by FLUKA and MCNP

 

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

 
Received on Wed Jan 30 2013 - 22:32:37 CET