Dear Sourav
From your answer I understand now that you are NOT using the DPMJET3 as
it is in FLUKA. You are using the standalone DPMJET3 with a very old,
obsolete interface to some parts of FLUKA, and with some add-ons that
are completely out of our control and hardly up-to-date with the current
FLUKA version (and in principle not allowed by the FLUKA license).
Why not to use really the DPMJET-3 that is in FLUKA?
You can use the SPECSOUR fluka card with the PPSOURCE option in order to
perform Au-Au collisions, and inspect the reaction products with
standard scoring or in one of the FLUKA user routines ( for instance
usrein is called after the source event with all secondaries in the
FLUKA stack). If you go this way, feel free to ask for help (and do not
forget to quote both FLUKA and DPMJET-3 in your publications).
Regarding the sqrt(s) = 200 GeV question: I was not saying that there
can be a different effect on light and heavy fragments. I was puzzled by
the fact that with E=100 one can get p>100.
Regards
Paola
On 11/04/2014 11:20 AM, Sourav Tarafdar wrote:
> Dear Paola,
>
> Please find the answers of your questions below along with my
> questions associated with them for my own understanding.
>
>> What do you give exactly as initial energy? Is sqrt(s)=200 GeV,
>> or is two times p=100GeV/c? This question comes because in your
>> plot the average momentum at target mass is larger than 100 GeV/c.
>
>
> I am always using sqrt(s) = 200 GeV. However I am wondering how either
> case mentioned by you is going to affect the average momentum of
> lighter fragments or heavier fragments ? It will be really helpful if
> you please explain.
>
>> Did you enable the evaporation of heavy fragments (physics 3
>> evaporate)?
>
> My apologies I couldn’t understand what "physics 3 evaporate” means.
> For enabling Evaporation process in DPMJET the card uses different
> sets of arguments. The details can be found in
> https://wiki.bnl.gov/eic/index.php/File:Dpmjet3_manual.rtf. I tried
> both with argument 1 and 3 and both gave me same results. In short
> argument 1 for evaporation process in DPMJet3 corresponds to standard
> evaporation level densities with Cook pairing energies while argument
> 3 corresponds to Julich A-dependent level densities.
>
>
>> Is your plot built with momenta as given at the exit from dpmjet,
>> or after
>> evaporation?
>
> My plot is made with final state fragments provided by DPMJet output.
> I guess that’s what was your question ? Please let me know if it
> answers your question.
>
> Thanks
> -Sourav
> On Nov 3, 2014, at 3:51 PM, Paola Sala <paola.sala_at_mi.infn.it
> <mailto:paola.sala_at_mi.infn.it>> wrote:
>
>> Dear Sourav,
>> Some time is needed perform full checks and understand all details,
>> so I
>> would like to ask you for a few days of patience before a real
>> answer can
>> be given. A first guess could be that the behaviour is due to binding
>> energy losses amplified by the Lorentz boost.
>> One sure point is that energy and momentum are conserved within
>> rounding
>> errors in every interaction.
>> May I ask you a couple of details to better understand your plot?
>> What do you give exactly as initial energy? Is sqrt(s)=200 GeV, or is two
>> times p=100GeV/c? This question comes because in your plot the average
>> momentum at target mass is larger than 100 GeV/c.
>> Did you enable the evaporation of heavy fragments (physics 3 evaporat)?
>> Is your plot built with momenta as given at the exit from dpmjet, or
>> after
>> evaporation?
>> Thank you
>> Paola
>>> Dear Fluka users,
>>>
>>> Recently I used DPMJet with Fluka interfaced to it for simulating Au +
>>> Au collision at C.M. energy of 200 GeV/nucleon. However the non
>>> interacting part of Au nuclei (spectators) has average energy less than
>>> 100 GeV/nucleon which is something strange. We expect to see average
>>> energy per nucleon for spectators as 100 GeV. As Fluka is used for
>>> fragmentation in DPMJet so have been wondering what could be the reason
>>> for average energy loss. I have attached a slide with the plots showing
>>> this feature. Any comment or insight on this issue will be really
>>> helpful.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> -Sourav
>>
>>
>> Paola Sala
>> INFN Milano
>> tel. Milano +39-0250317374
>> tel. CERN +41-227679148
>>
>
Received on Tue Nov 04 2014 - 20:45:43 CET