Hello again,
Probably I should have also added the importance of studying the pure spectators in H.I. collision. Studying it also provides us the information about initial geometry of the collision.
Best regards
Sourav
________________________________________
From: Sourav Tarafdar
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2014 4:44 PM
To: Anna Ferrari
Cc: Francesco Cerutti; fluka-discuss_at_fluka.org
Subject: Re: [fluka-discuss]: Heavy Ion collision using DPMJET in FLUKA framework
Dear Anna,
Thanks for confirmation. That’s really unfortunate.
To answer your question, I am interested in studying spectators in heavy Ion collision. As per the definition , spectators are the remnants of nuclei from colliding species which don’t participate in H.I interaction, mostly because of large impact parameter. They may arise either from fragmentation or from nuclear evaporation. In FLUKA primary stack aka FLKSTK the protons and neutrons are either from the collision itself or from nuclear evaporation. Though the spectators are supposed to have momentum/energy close to beam energy itself , still there is high possibility of protons and neutrons produced in heavy ion collision having energy close to beam energy. In this case pure spectator protons and neutrons are contaminated with produced protons and neutrons. So having a tag mentioning the process (H.I. collision, fragmentation, evaporation) giving rise to hadrons and fragments helps us to clearly select the pure spectators.
Thanks
-Sourav
On Dec 3, 2014, at 4:12 PM, Anna Ferrari <a.ferrari_at_hzdr.de> wrote:
> Dear Sourav,
> technically the answer is no. We wonder why are you considering of great help this information...
>
> Best regards,
> Anna
>
> Am Tue, 2 Dec 2014 12:42:57 +0000 schrieb Sourav Tarafdar <Sourav.Tarafdar_at_weizmann.ac.il>:
>> Dear Francesco,
>> Unfortunately I am still stuck at classifying protons and neutrons of FLKSTK in H.I. collision based on the Physics processes producing them. Is there any way to find out whether these FLKSTK protons and neutrons are produced H.I. interaction or from evaporation of nuclear fragments or intranuclear cascade process ? Any insight into this will be of great help.
>> Thanks
>> -Sourav On Nov 28, 2014, at 4:17 PM, Sourav Tarafdar <Sourav.Tarafdar_at_weizmann.ac.il> wrote:
>>> Dear Francesco,
>>> Thanks for the clarification. I have couple of questions mostly concerning to protons and neutrons.
>>>>> Do it also contain intranuclear
>>>>> cascade protons and neutrons along with the ones produced in H.I. collision ?
>>>> yes.
>>> Any way of disentangling the protons and neutrons coming from different processes in FLUKA ? As you confirmed protons and neutrons are also from H.I. collision so these as per spectator definition won’t be called as spectators. So I am mostly interested in selecting protons and neutrons from Fragmentation or Evaporation process. Unfortunately I don’t see any variable in FLKSTK which can distinguish protons / neutrons coming from different process.
>>>>> 2) Does the FLKSTK stores final state nuclear fragments ? By final state I mean which
>>>>> has already undergone fragmentation and evaporation .
>>>> yes.
>>> I think you also mean the deuteron, H3, He3, He4 are in final state ?
>>> Thanks
>>> -Sourav
>>> On Nov 28, 2014, at 3:49 PM, Francesco Cerutti <Francesco.Cerutti_at_cern.ch> wrote:
>>>> Dear Sourav
>>>>> Do it also contain intranuclear
>>>>> cascade protons and neutrons along with the ones produced in H.I. collision ?
>>>> yes.
>>>>> 1) As I have only Evaporation as Physics process in my input file
>>>> be careful. In your input file you are not switching on evaporation (which is always on), you are just saying that you want the most accurate version of evaporation, more CPU-consuming but including as emission channels also heavier fragments. As a general rule, in FLUKA (all) physics processes are on by default and are not intended to be manipulated by the user, apart from few exceptions - like heavy evaporation, coalescence, photonuclear reactions - which require to be switched on by the user when they are relevant.
>>>>> 2) Does the FLKSTK stores final state nuclear fragments ? By final state I mean which
>>>>> has already undergone fragmentation and evaporation .
>>>> yes.
>>>>> 3) Further the heavy fission fragments in FLKSTK has id based on the recipe of -((Z*1000)
>>>>> +A )*100. I noticed the last digit varies between 7-12. Is it associated with the ID in
>>>>> FHEAVY stack?
>>>> Exactly.
>>>> Ciao
>>>> Francesco
>>>> **************************************************
>>>> Francesco Cerutti
>>>> CERN-EN/STI
>>>> CH-1211 Geneva 23
>>>> Switzerland
>>>> tel. ++41 22 7678962
>>>> fax ++41 22 7668854
>>>> On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Sourav Tarafdar wrote:
>>>>> Dear Francesco,
>>>>> Thanks for your detailed explanations. I have couple of questions for which I have
>>>>> attached a file with plots from FLUKA. 1) As I have only Evaporation as Physics process in my input file so is it that the free
>>>>> protons and neutrons are coming only from evaporation of non interacting part of Au nucleus in H.I. collision ? Do it also contain intranuclear
>>>>> cascade protons and neutrons along with the ones produced in H.I. collision ? 2) Does the FLKSTK stores final state nuclear fragments ? By final state I mean which
>>>>> has already undergone fragmentation and evaporation . 3) Further the heavy fission fragments in FLKSTK has id based on the recipe of -((Z*1000)
>>>>> +A )*100. I noticed the last digit varies between 7-12. Is it associated with the ID in
>>>>> FHEAVY stack or they directs to some physics process contribution to their production ?
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> -Sourav
>>>>> On Nov 24, 2014, at 5:48 PM, Francesco Cerutti <Francesco.Cerutti_at_cern.ch> wrote:
>>>>>> Dear Sourav,
>>>>>> your message below is - among the 4 you circulated last week on the same subject - the
>>>>> one closest to the correct procedure to adopt for your purposes, according to what I
>>>>> suggested you at the beginning. In the following ones, apart from repeated typos in the
>>>>> linking command (whose right version is just what you had written here, although "-m
>>>>> fluka" is not needed since it is already included inside ldpmqmd), you decided to go with
>>>>> other strategies (usreou.f and USDRAW of mgdraw.f) which cannot work.
>>>>>> So let's stay with usrein.f - which as I said does not require any associated input
>>>>> card in order to be activated -, remove the pointless INTEGER definition, write your own
>>>>> output on a file with logical unit number > 20 (instead of LUNOUT, avoiding in addition
>>>>> unit numbers already used in scoring cards present in the inp file), and forget about
>>>>> FHEAVY.
>>>>>> Among the NPFLKA Au+Au reaction products available in FLKSTK, you may find also nuclear
>>>>> fragments (probably what you call spectator fragments) which are just the ones identified
>>>>> by the strange IDs you were worrying about. In fact ILOFLK(II) = -6214308
>>>>>> means 143Sm, according to the coding recipe (you can see for instance also in the
>>>>> source.f user routine): - ((Z * 1000) + A) * 100.
>>>>>> Best wishes
>>>>>> Francesco
>>>>>> **************************************************
>>>>>> Francesco Cerutti
>>>>>> CERN-EN/STI
>>>>>> CH-1211 Geneva 23
>>>>>> Switzerland
>>>>>> tel. ++41 22 7678962
>>>>>> fax ++41 22 7668854
>>>>>> On Wed, 19 Nov 2014, Sourav Tarafdar wrote:
>>>>>>> Dear Francesco, Eventually I can extract the kinematic information of particles in
>>>>>>> FLKSTK . It will be helpful if you please confirm whether the steps followed by me is
>>>>> in
>>>>>>> order.
>>>>>>> 1) Customizing usrein.f routine involves adding following lines in the routine
>>>>>>> INCLUDE '(FLKSTK)’
>>>>>>> INTEGER:: ii
>>>>>>> DO ii = 1, NPFLKA
>>>>>>> WRITE(LUNOUT, *) Iloflk(ii), Pmoflk(ii), Loflk(ii), Zflk(ii)
>>>>>>> ENDDO
>>>>>>> 2) Compiling usrein.f :
>>>>>>> $FLUPRO/flutil/fff usrein.f generates usrein.o
>>>>>>> 3) Creating executable with link to DPMJET-III generator :
>>>>>>> $FLUPRO/flutil/ldmqmd -o executable_name -m fluka usrein.o
>>>>>>> 4)Running Fluka
>>>>>>> $FLUPRO/flutin/rfluka -e executable_name input_file
>>>>>>> So now I am getting the particle kinematics information in my standard fluke output
>>>>> file.
>>>>>>> It will be helpful if you please confirm whether this is the right way to extract the
>>>>>>> kinematic information of the particles and nuclear remnants from beam after H.I.
>>>>>>> collision. Further I have few questions.
>>>>>>> 1) So far I didn’t see any variable to distinguish between spectator fragments and
>>>>>>> produced particles in Heavy Ion collision for FLKSTK. Can you please tell me whether
>>>>>>> there is any tag to distinguish between spectator fragments and produced particles ?
>>>>> If
>>>>>>> not will it be more appropriate to look at contents of FHEAVY which will most probably
>>>>>>> will contain spectator fragments ? But somehow I am worried that FHEAVY don’t provide
>>>>> the
>>>>>>> information of free protons and neutrons as it works from deuteron ?
>>>>>>> 2) In the output for FLKSTK I noticed some of the particles had ID "-6214308 “ or is
>>>>>>> short having 7 digits. What are these particles ?
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>> -Sourav
>>>>>>> On Nov 17, 2014, at 7:02 PM, Sourav Tarafdar <Sourav.Tarafdar_at_weizmann.ac.il> wrote:
>>>>>>> Dear Francesco,
>>>>>>> Thanks for your help. Eventually it is running without any crash. However I
>>>>>>> am still stuck at retrieving the kinematic information of particles and
>>>>>>> nuclear fragments remained after H.I. collision. As per your suggestion I
>>>>>>> needed to look at the FLKSTK content by adding INCLUDE (FLKSTK) in usrein.f
>>>>>>> routine. However I am not sure which scoring card I need to use in my fluke
>>>>>>> inout file for dumping out FLKSTK variables ? Further I am wondering if in
>>>>>>> FLUKA no scoring card exist which can dump out FLKSTK variables in output
>>>>>>> file then shall I have to customize usreou.f routine specifically for that
>>>>>>> purpose ?
>>>>>>> I have another confusion. Looking at FLUKA user manual it says if primaries
>>>>>>> are loaded by input option “BEAM” then there is one source particle per
>>>>>>> event. In my case as I am using “BEAM” for defining type of beam , so I am
>>>>>>> wondering whether the FLKSTK will store only my colliding beam kinematic
>>>>>>> information or also all the particles and nuclear remnants from H.I.
>>>>>>> collision ?
>>>>>>> It will be really helpful if I get step by step procedure to extract the
>>>>>>> kinematic information of particles and nuclear fragments remained after H.I.
>>>>>>> collision.
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>> -Sourav
>>>>>>> On Nov 13, 2014, at 11:43 PM, Francesco Cerutti <Francesco.Cerutti_at_cern.ch>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Dear Sourav,
>>>>>>> i. your previous crash is due to the fact that your colliding
>>>>>>> nuclei are ... not colliding, since in SPECSOUR you input the
>>>>>>> same lab momentum for both, whereas they should have opposite
>>>>>>> direction (i.e. negative z-component for one of the two).
>>>>>>> ii. Then please note that SPECSOUR requires the total momentum,
>>>>>>> while HEAVYION in the BEAM card requires momentum or kinetic
>>>>>>> energy per nucleon (in fact per nuclear mass unit). Moreover, in
>>>>>>> the presence of SPECSOUR, the only relevant parameters in BEAM
>>>>>>> are the particle species and the energy/momentum, with the latter
>>>>>>> just used for transport initialization purposes (the upper limit
>>>>>>> of stopping power tabulations is defined based on it).
>>>>>>> iii. You do not need EVENTYPE (obsolete), IONTRANS (ion transport
>>>>>>> and interaction already on by default for HEAVYION beams), nor
>>>>>>> the DPMJET card (whereas you obviously have to use - as I believe
>>>>>>> you are doing - an executable where dpmjet is linked, like
>>>>>>> flukadpm3 generated by the ldpmqmd script). You need instead a
>>>>>>> PHYSICS card with SDUM=LIMITS, specifying an upper threshold for
>>>>>>> nucleon CMS momentum (110 GeV/c is fine for your case). Standard
>>>>>>> USERDUMP is not an useful option here.
>>>>>>> iv. Note also that the simulated Au-Au collisions are nuclear
>>>>>>> non-elastic reactions, disregarding electromagnetic dissociation
>>>>>>> (which has a much higher cross section, but in the present
>>>>>>> release is not yet available for source collisions).
>>>>>>> v. Your XYP plane is useless since you set it exactly upon the
>>>>>>> RPP downstream face, this way your regAu4 is empty (i.e. has got
>>>>>>> zero volume). The two VACUUM ASSIGNMA are odd, since the first in
>>>>>>> fact applies only to regAu4 (FROM regAu4 TO regAu3, but the
>>>>>>> respective region numbers are such as 2[regAu3] < 3[regAu4]) and
>>>>>>> the second anyway redefines the regAu4 material (keeping in mind
>>>>>>> that this region is meaningless as just said).
>>>>>>> vi. Concerning CPU time, a 100GeV/n Au + 100GeV/n Au event takes
>>>>>>> on my machine a bit more than half a second, so 1E5 collisions
>>>>>>> require less than 20 hours of CPU, i.e. less than 2h on 10 cores,
>>>>>>> which looks to me as a reasonable time.
>>>>>>> Kind regards
>>>>>>> Francesco
>>>>>>> **************************************************
>>>>>>> Francesco Cerutti
>>>>>>> CERN-EN/STI
>>>>>>> CH-1211 Geneva 23
>>>>>>> Switzerland
>>>>>>> tel. ++41 22 7678962
>>>>>>> fax ++41 22 7668854
>>>>>>> On Mon, 10 Nov 2014, Sourav Tarafdar wrote:
>>>>>>> Dear Fluka experts,
>>>>>>> In continuation of the problem I came up with couple
>>>>>>> of days ago I want to add few more
>>>>>>> things. After removing “SPECSOUR” card from my input
>>>>>>> file while keeping DPMJET physics
>>>>>>> process and executing FLUKA after linking DPMJET to
>>>>>>> it , “core dump” problem got removed.
>>>>>>> So basically the input file is with just
>>>>>>> unidirectional Au beam with momentum of
>>>>>>> 100GeV/nucleon. For p+p collision by keeping
>>>>>>> “SPECSOUR” card it takes forever to finish
>>>>>>> even 1 FLUKA cycle. Is it some limitation regarding
>>>>>>> SPECSOUR card for invoking heavy ion
>>>>>>> collision or something related to it is missing in my
>>>>>>> input file ? I am hereby attaching
>>>>>>> my input file. The collision vertex is defined in
>>>>>>> vacuum within +/- 0.001 cm along X-Y-Z
>>>>>>> coordinate and it has been divided into upstream and
>>>>>>> downstream along Z axis by XYP cut
>>>>>>> plane.
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>> -Sourav
>>>>>>> On Nov 9, 2014, at 12:44 PM, Sourav Tarafdar
>>>>>>> <Sourav.Tarafdar_at_weizmann.ac.il> wrote:
>>>>>>> Dear Francesco,
>>>>>>> Thanks for the suggestions. I implemented your
>>>>>>> suggestions as far as defining the
>>>>>>> collision vertex is concerned , i.e., inclusion of
>>>>>>> BEAM card and HI-PROPE card on
>>>>>>> top of SPECSOUR card. Also I removed Au material
>>>>>>> region relevant for my collision
>>>>>>> vertex. However I got the error on my terminal which
>>>>>>> looks like
>>>>>>> ======================= Running FLUKA for cycle # 1
>>>>>>> =======================
>>>>>>> $FLUPRO/flutil/rfluka: line 359: 13280 Floating point
>>>>>>> exception(core dumped)
>>>>>>> "${EXE}" < "$INPN" 2> "$LOGF" > "$LOGF"
>>>>>>> Just wondering whether I am missing something in my
>>>>>>> input file ? My error file and
>>>>>>> output file are completely empty.
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>> -Sourav
>>>>>>> On Nov 9, 2014, at 12:28 AM, Francesco Cerutti
>>>>>>> <Francesco.Cerutti_at_cern.ch> wrote:
>>>>>>> Dear Sourav,
>>>>>>> 1) Shall I have to define Target region of
>>>>>>> Au material at
>>>>>>> collision vertex
>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>> not at all (unless your collisions are supposed
>>>>>>> to take place in gold
>>>>>>> instead of vacuum...). You defined the second
>>>>>>> beam species in the
>>>>>>> SPECSOUR card, where you have also said that your
>>>>>>> first beam is made by
>>>>>>> HEAVYIONs. So you need a HI-PROPE card to specify
>>>>>>> the HEAVYION nature.
>>>>>>> And you still need a BEAM card (where you shall
>>>>>>> put HEAVYION - making
>>>>>>> redudant your SPECSOUR WHAT(11) setting - and an
>>>>>>> energy per nucleon
>>>>>>> exceeding 100 GeV/n for transport initialization
>>>>>>> purposes).
>>>>>>> 2) Which scoring card should be used in
>>>>>>> order to retrieve
>>>>>>> kinematic
>>>>>>> information of produced particles and
>>>>>>> nuclear remnants
>>>>>>> after H.I. collision
>>>>>>> ? So far I have used ???USRYIELD??? card.
>>>>>>> USRYIELD does not work yet for the SPECSOUR
>>>>>>> collision event. You can
>>>>>>> inspect the properties of the products by
>>>>>>> customizing the usrein.f
>>>>>>> routine - which is automatically called before
>>>>>>> source particles start
>>>>>>> to be transported - in order to look at the
>>>>>>> FLKSTK content (to this
>>>>>>> purpose remember to add the
>>>>>>> INCLUDE '(FLKSTK)'
>>>>>>> statement).
>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>> Francesco
>>>>>>> **************************************************
>>>>>>> Francesco Cerutti
>>>>>>> CERN-EN/STI
>>>>>>> CH-1211 Geneva 23
>>>>>>> Switzerland
>>>>>>> tel. ++41 22 7678962
>>>>>>> fax ++41 22 7668854
>>>>>>> On Sat, 8 Nov 2014, Sourav Tarafdar wrote:
>>>>>>> Dear Fluka users,
>>>>>>> I have been trying to simulate Au+Au
>>>>>>> collision at C.M.
>>>>>>> energy of 200
>>>>>>> GeV/nucleon using DPMJET3 within FLUKA
>>>>>>> framework. For
>>>>>>> defining the colliding
>>>>>>> beam I used SPECSOUR card with PPSOURCE
>>>>>>> type. I am mostly
>>>>>>> interested in
>>>>>>> getting the kinematic variables (px, py,
>>>>>>> pz, energy , pid
>>>>>>> etc) of the
>>>>>>> particles after the collision and also the
>>>>>>> remnants of the
>>>>>>> nuclei after
>>>>>>> collision. My questions are
>>>>>>> 1) Shall I have to define Target region of
>>>>>>> Au material at
>>>>>>> collision vertex
>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>> 2) Which scoring card should be used in
>>>>>>> order to retrieve
>>>>>>> kinematic
>>>>>>> information of produced particles and
>>>>>>> nuclear remnants
>>>>>>> after H.I. collision
>>>>>>> ? So far I have used ???USRYIELD??? card.
>>>>>>> Any suggestions will be of great help.
>>>>>>> Please find the attached input file for
>>>>>>> FLUKA and the
>>>>>>> output file after
>>>>>>> executing FLUKA using the command
>>>>>>> $FLUPRO/flutil/rfluka -e
>>>>>>> flukadpm3 test
>>>>>>> Any suggestions will be of great help.
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>> -Sourav
>>>>>>> <fluka_dpm_wotarg.inp>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Dr. Anna Ferrari
> Institute of Radiation Physics
> Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf e.V.
> Tel. +49 351 260 2872
> a.ferrari_at_hzdr.de
> http://www.hzdr.de
>
> Vorstand: Prof. Dr. Dr. h. c. Roland Sauerbrey, Prof. Dr. Dr. h. c. Peter
> Joehnk
> Vereinsregister: VR 1693 beim Amtsgericht Dresden
Received on Wed Dec 03 2014 - 17:29:49 CET