Dear Vittorio,
Thanks for your kind reply.
Attachment is the ionization-chamber-type detector model, the region named "detector"(filled with Ar+ nitrogen mixed gas) is defined as the sensitive volume. I simply simulate the detector response to a beam loss and find which particle in the mixed radiation field(generated by beam loss on tube) has a main contribution to the detector signal.
"Another option could be define a special material for the detector and to change the electron generation and transport threshold: in this way all the energy deposition will be attributed to the particle which first interact in the detector."
What is "a special material" mentioned above? BLACKHOLE? And electron generation and transport threshold, i.e., setting in the EMFCUT card, but what value is to be set? Based on what is considered?
I think the detector geometrical effects cannot be ignored. In the simulated detector response to specific particle, response should also correspond to a specific incident angle as shown in the response function of LHC beam loss monitors(attached file: ResponseF.pdf).
Best regards
Yang
-----原始邮件-----
发件人: "Vittorio Boccone" <dr.vittorio.boccone_at_ieee.org>
发送时间: 2016年11月27日 星期日
收件人: "YANG Tao" <yangt_at_ihep.ac.cn>
抄送: "fluka-discuss_at_fluka.org" <fluka-discuss_at_fluka.org>
主题: Re: [fluka-discuss]: Contribution of different particles to the detector signal !
Dear Yang,
I would suggest you to go thought the course lectures and the manual.There you will find all the details of interaction handling along the particle history and the explanation about how scoring is evaluated.
1. The "n-th generation particles" mentioned in my last email are created in the detector sensitive volume causing by gamma or neutron interaction with the detector, but energy deposition by the "n-th generation particles" are not seem to be attributed to the incident gamma or neutron according to the USRBIN+AUXSCORE results.
If a n-th generation particle is not a delta ray (i.e. a higher energy electron, gamma, neutron or what else) the energy will not be attributed at the particle which generated (n-1)-the generation particle. That’s because the (n-1)-th generation particle was also maybe generated by a (n-2)-th events whose particle identity was maybe different. Even if you do a two-step simulation you will always be hitting this problem. You might then run independent simulation for the different particle family you obtain from the first step if this might help you. In my opinion this is more difficult then folding the spectra. Another option could be define a special material for the detector and to change the electron generation and transport threshold: in this way all the energy deposition will be attributed to the particle which first interact in the detector (you will loose off course all the information of the successive generations secondaries. I know nothing about your detector type and I can’t be effective in suggesting you a better solution.
2. The convolution method you mentioned mainly consists of the particle fluences and the detector response to the specific particles, the particle fluences at the detector could be obtained by USRTRACK and USRYIELD cards, however, how do you deal with the detector response to the specific particle interaction? The detector response to specific particle incident involves the incident degree between the particle and the detector,in real mixed radiation field, the incident particles almost have all of possible angles,obviously, we cannot provide the detector response of all possible angles in advance, should I calculate the average incident degree of the specific particles in the real mixed field?
This is only if you take in account the geometrical effects. It also depends if you are doing a benchmark or just running some simulation where you are interested in the general picture. Again I know nothing about your detector type and I can’t be effective in suggesting you a better solution.
Best,
Vittorio
__________________________________________________________________________
You can manage unsubscription from this mailing list at
https://www.fluka.org/fluka.php?id=acc_info
Received on Sun Nov 27 2016 - 10:22:09 CET