Dear Riccardo and Anna,
Indeed this can give you the *total* energy deposition within regions
you specify, large enough wrt step size. That is, if you don't care how
energy deposition is distributed and you are not worried about stepsize
artefacts. As pointed out earlier: apportioning and QA! You may resort
to coding regions according to scoring needs (as you have shown) of
course.
Such instructions put FLUKA back to prehistoric state, undoing the good
job of code development back in 1990 -- a feat users shouldn't take for
granted. Other codes dealt with apportioning a decade later.
Quoting FLUKA manual:
17.18 Scoring. The stress put on built-in generalised scoring options
is another aspect of FLUKA "philosophy" which differentiates it from
many other programs where users are supposed to write their own ad-hoc
scoring routines for each problem. This characteristics, which was
already typical of the old Ranft codes, has allowed to develop in the
modern FLUKA some rather sophisticated scoring algorithms that would
have been too complex for a generic user to program. For instance the
"track-length apportioning" technique, introduced in 1990 by Fasso' and
Ferrari, used in dose and fluence binning, which computes the exact
length of segment travelled by the particle in each bin of a geometry
independent grid. This technique ensures fast convergence even when the
scoring mesh is much smaller than the charged particle step.
Not only accuracy but also efficiency. Running an electron problem with
USERDUMP WHAT(3)=0, calling at every single step whether it contributes
to the score or not... undo all the optimisation code developers took
pains to implement. Do a tic-toc and see -- please do share your tic-toc
results with the community.
BTW ERULLO doesn't look like any 3D array for event-by-event scoring.
I'm lost! The lines of codes you circulated offer no clue why built-in
scoring cannot be used.
:) mary
On 2017-02-25 00:25, Anna Ferrari wrote:
> ...you were missing all the continous energy losses of e+/e- due to
> the ionization. And as you can see, your control routine works very
> well, as it must do! Good!
>
> I want to add just a thing, for the future: take care if you want to
> use this method with other kind of primaries. If you have highly
> ionizing primaries -like protons- you must consider quenching effects
> in the scintillator. In this case, in order to correctly compute the
> light yield, the value you have to consider for the energy deposited
> in the scintillator- both in MGDRAW and in the ENDRAW entry - is the
> "quenched" one, obtained according with the Birks Law.
>
> You can consider this effect:
>
> (a) by switching on the quenching with the card USERDUMP with
> sdum=UDQUENCH (see the manual for details about the Birks
> coefficients, and look at Note 3 pag. 239)
>
> (b) by using, instead of DTRACK(j) and RULL , the quenched values:
>
> - DTQUEN(j,jbk) in the main MGDRAW
>
> jbk identifies the set of Birks parameters you input via USERDUMP.
> jbk=1 if you use only one set, with two parameters given via what(1)
> and what(2) (it is generalyy the case)
>
> - RULLL in the ENDRAW entry (please check this)
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Anna
>
> Am Fri, 24 Feb 2017 15:07:12 +0100 schrieb
> dal_bello_at_stud.uni-heidelberg.de:
>
>> Dear Anna,
>>
>> thank you a lot for the reply and for the explanation and the
>> solution to the problem.
>>
>> Now my routine gives the correct output:
>>
>> 67 0.27700E-02 0.27700E-02
>>
>> 68 0.34205E-02 0.34205E-02
>>
>> 70 0.45000E-02 0.45000E-02
>>
>> 71 0.40087E-02 0.40087E-02
>>
>> 73 0.17847E-02 0.17847E-02
>>
>> 74 0.26316E-02 0.26316E-02
>>
>> As a summary:
>>
>> 1. The energy deposition along the track is scored in the main part
>> of mgdraw with:
>>
>> CALL GEOR2N ( MREG, NRGNAM, IERR2 )
>>
>> IF (NRGNAM(1:6).EQ.'SCINT0') THEN
>>
>> DO J = 1,MTRACK
>>
>> ERULL0 = ERULL0 + DTRACK(J)
>>
>> ENDDO
>>
>> ENDIF
>>
>> 2. The point-like energy deposition is scored in ENDRAW with:
>>
>> CALL GEOR2N ( MREG, NRGNAM, IERR2 )
>>
>> IF (NRGNAM(1:6).EQ.'SCINT0') THEN
>>
>> ERULL0 = ERULL0 + RULL
>>
>> ENDIF
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Riccardo Dal Bello
>>
>> Quoting Anna Ferrari <a.ferrari_at_hzdr.de>:
>
>>> Dear Riccardo,
>>>
>>> as you suspected, I think you are missing to collect a part of
>>> the
>>>
>>> information. With ENDRAW you (correctly!) collect "spot" energy
>>>
>>> depositions, but you miss the energy that is deposited along a
>>> track.
>>>
>>> To take into account this contribution you have to intercept the
>>>
>>> tracking in the main part of the MGDRAW subroutine: Mtrack in
>>> (TRACKR)
>>>
>>> gives you the number of energy deposition events along the track
>>> and
>>>
>>> Dtrack(j) (with 1<j<Mtrack) the energy deposition of the jth
>>>
>>> deposition event.
>>>
>>> Practically you have to add to your code something like:
>>>
>>> ....
>>>
>>> IF (NRGNAM(1:6).EQ.'SCINT0') THEN
>>>
>>> do j = 1,Mtrack
>>>
>>> ERULL0 = ERULL0 + dtrack(j)
>>>
>>> enddo
>>>
>>> ENDIF
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> in the mgdraw main routine (I maintained the name ERULL0 for the
>>>
>>> variable you use to score the deposited energy)
>>>
>>> Hope it helps,
>>>
>>> kind regards,
>>>
>>> Anna
>>>
>>> Am Fri, 24 Feb 2017 10:15:21 +0100 schrieb
>>> dal_bello_at_stud.uni-heidelberg.de:
>
>> Dear FLUKA users,
>>
>> I have a question regarding the use of the entry ENDRAW in the
>> mgdraw routine.
>>
>> My personalized mgdraw routine scores, among other quantities, the
>> energy deposition in different regions of my detector (primary beam:
>> gamma between 0. and 10. MeV).
>>
>> I tired to score the energy deposition accumulating the value of
>> RULL in ENDRAW, however, I do not get correct value (lower values).
>>
>> I worked around the problem accumulating for each event the energy
>> of gamma, e- and e+ entering and exiting the volumes (done in
>> BXDRAW), but of course it is not a clean way to solve the problem
>> because it slows the simulation and involves considerations about
>> the rest mass of e+/e-, which may lead to errors in subtractions.
>>
>> I accumulate the values of RULL simply with:
>>
>> ENTRY ENDRAW ( ICODE, MREG, RULL, XSCO, YSCO, ZSCO )
>>
>> CALL GEOR2N ( MREG, NRGNAM, IERR2 )
>>
>> IF (NRGNAM(1:6).EQ.'SCINT0') THEN
>>
>> ERULL0 = ERULL0 + RULL
>>
>> ENDIF
>>
>> RETURN
>>
>> Where ERULL0 is a DOUBLE PRECISION variable initialized to 0 and
>> re-set to 0 at the end of each event (EEDRAW).
>>
>> Being the values of energy deposition with RULL smaller than the
>> actual ones, I suspect that RULL includes just some types of energy
>> deposition.
>>
>> Is there a way to score in ENDRAW the correct energy deposition? I
>> looked in previous documentation but unsuccessfully.
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Riccardo Dal Bello
>>
>> -------------------
>>
>> Attached: few energy deposition events in SCINT0 from a 4.5 MeV
>> primary gamma beam
>>
>> 1. column: ID event
>>
>> 2. column: true energy deposition (done in BXDRAW)
>>
>> 3. column: ERULL0 value called in EEDRAW
>>
>> 4 0.39547E-02 0.33276E-03
>>
>> 6 0.45000E-02 0.49065E-03
>>
>> 9 0.37780E-02 0.24186E-03
>>
>> 11 0.28722E-02 0.33501E-03
>>
>> 24 0.39805E-02 0.96697E-04
>>
>> 27 0.13814E-02 0.19710E-03
>>
>> 30 0.41481E-02 0.68106E-03
>>
>> 33 0.26909E-02 0.28380E-03
>>
>> 47 0.34780E-02 0.29714E-03
>>
>> 50 0.39890E-02 0.61295E-03
>>
>> 55 0.67689E-03 0.22618E-03
>>
>> 71 0.43555E-03 0.22666E-03
>>
>> 73 0.39474E-02 0.67036E-03
>>
>>
> __________________________________________________________________________
>>
>>
>> You can manage unsubscription from this mailing list at
>> https://www.fluka.org/fluka.php?id¬c_info
>
>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>
>>> 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
>
>>
> __________________________________________________________________________
>>
>>
>> You can manage unsubscription from this mailing list at
>> https://www.fluka.org/fluka.php?id¬c_info
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> 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
__________________________________________________________________________
You can manage unsubscription from this mailing list at
https://www.fluka.org/fluka.php?id=acc_info
Received on Sat Feb 25 2017 - 10:16:40 CET