Re: [fluka-discuss]: spallation neutron spectrum

From: <>
Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2016 12:43:15 +0530

On 2016-07-09 02:11, Vittorio Boccone wrote:
> Hi Pradeep,
> you know you are scoring all around the block and not only in the
> forward region right. Plus you are scoring a current (and not a
> fluence).
> If you are benchmarking existing data you can probably quote your
> source as we can help you in understanding where the mismatch is
> coming from. Most of the times it’s cause by the interpretation of
> the data and other details about beam parameters and counting
> techniques.
> Best
> Vittorio
>> On 08 Jul 2016, at 08:32, wrote:
>> On 2016-07-08 00:43, Vittorio Boccone wrote:
>> Hi Pradeep,
>> Yes you are scoring the one way current out of target to vacuum. If
>> this is what you need you are on the right track. You can increase
>> the
>> number of bins and eventually place the default to “precisio”
>> instead of “new-defa”. I don’t see any mistakes in your
>> simulation.
>> Best,
>> Vittorio
>> On 07 Jul 2016, at 11:48, wrote:
>> Dear FLUKA experts,
>> I am Pradeep Baraila from India. I am studying spallation using
>> FLUKA. A pencil proton beam of 1.0 GeV hits a cylindrical target of
>> lead along the axis of target. I am interested in the leaked neutron
>> spectrum.The input file is attached herewith this mail. I am not
>> sure whether this is the correct way to get spallation neutron
>> spectrum. Please help me.
>> Thanks.<fast_ADS_target.inp>
> Hi Vittorio,
> Thanks for the reply. I am scoring one way current from target to
> vacuum and this will give me the spectrum of neutrons leaking out of
> the target surface. Is this true? beacause I am benchmarking this
> spectrum with already available data and there is a substantial
> difference between the two data.

Hi Vittorio,
I am attaching the pdf file for the data I am benchmarking. It is
table-2 on page-8. May be the spectrum given in the table is the
representative spallation spectrum. The spectrum I am getting is softer
compared to what is given in the table. So I reduced the thickness of my
target keeping the length same. Now it matches reasonably with the given
spectrum. I don't know whether it's right what I am interpretting.
Please help and sorry for late reply man.

You can manage unsubscription from this mailing list at

Received on Thu Aug 04 2016 - 12:09:43 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Aug 04 2016 - 12:09:47 CEST