Electromagnetic Processes

Help: Forums, postings and threads

Forums, postings and threads

Click on the Forum title, e.g. on the "Forums by Category" page, to read a sequence of postings to the Forum and its threads all in one page. If you are only interested in one thread or the thread following a specific posting, click the thread or the posting, which takes you to a smaller page, which contains only the part you are interested in and may be easier to navigate.

Layout of the posting thread(s)

The posting threads can be shown with/without the text of the postings ("Inline depth"). In addition the depth of the thread can be controlled ("Outline depth"). For both cases several values are provided, which can be toggled. Note that the displayed values are those, which can be chosen, they do not correspond to the actual display status of the thread(s).

Add message

Add a new posting thread to this Forum

Show subscribers

Click "Show subscribers" to get the List of all subscribers, who receive e-mail from postings to this Forum, if they have not explictly unsubscribed from a posting thread. This includes:

Subscribers to the forum
Explicit subscribers to the posting or any of its ancestors
The author of the posting (if he has not unsubscribed)
The authors of any ancestor posting (if they have not unsubscribed)

Some browsers display old pages from the cache

Some browsers (e.g. Firefox) display a page from the cache even though the page has been updated. As a result, one may not get the latest messages in the forum's outline or the logon ID of the previous session appears on the upper right corner. If one suspects that he or she does not get the latest content of a page, try clearing up the personal data from the browser's cache as the following:

Tools -> Clear Private Data -> Clear Private Data (from browser Firefox)

Tools -> Delete Private Data (from browser Opera)

then reflesh the current page to get the latest content.

Details on "Inline depth" and "Outline depth"

Threads and the follow-up messages are numbered. There is one line per posting, normally starting with the posting number. The URLs of a posting and its responses reflect the depth of the follow-up postings. Watch the URLs to see how this is done. Depending on the chosen display options, the thread-display may be incomplete; the number of messages at the next level is, however, displayed, e.g. "…3 message(s)". You may not see all contributors unless you choose "All".

Messages are "chained" if there are only replies at the first level, i.e. 1/1.html, 1/1/1.html etc. In case of "chained" messages the message number is replaced by the icon and there is no indentation.

Inline: Display the subject line only or also the text of the posting(s); for the choice "All" the "Outline" choices are switched off.

Argument Default value Alternative Comment

1 0 1 no text / full text of posting

2 1 All text for level 1 only / text for All postings

Argument	Default value	Alternative		Comment
1	0	1		no text / full text of posting
2	1	All		text for level 1 only / text for All postings

Outline: Choose the depth of the posting thread, successive toggle controls provide increasing detail.

Argument Default value Alternative Comment

1 2 1 2 levels / 1 level (original posting)

2 3 2 3 levels / 2 levels

3 3 All 3 levels / all levels (all postings)

The electromagnetic forum deals with processes involving photons and charged particles and their interactions with matter.

Argument	Default value	Alternative	Comment
1	2	1	2 levels / 1 level (original posting)
2	3	2	3 levels / 2 levels
3	3	All	3 levels / all levels (all postings)

/run/particle/storePhysicsTable by Guillaume Landry <Guillaume Landry>, Nov 23, 00:28 Hi, I am having trouble printing physics tables for the non migrated low energy gamma processes. Is this possible? Thanks Guillaume

Combining Geant4 DNA and Livermore physics processes by Stephen McMahon <Stephen McMahon>, Nov 18, 07:59 Hello, I have been working with the Geant4 low-energy models to study the effects of high-Z contrast agents on radiation dose. While these models are useful on a macroscopic scale, I am interested in studying the effects on a much smaller scale, which the Geant4 DNA models seem ideally suited to describe. I've been looking at the models in the Geant4 9.3 release, and test simulations in water volumes appear to work well. However, since these models are only valid for water, introducing the contrast agent is somewhat problematic. Ideally, I would like to be able to propagate particles using the Geant4 DNA models in water volumes, and fall back to the Livermore models for volumes where they are not supported. Obviously this will introduce some systematic errors in the interface regions where very low energy particles are not simulated by the Livermore models, but it should be sufficient for a preliminary investigation. The issue I've encountered is that I can't find an elegant way to achieve this selection of processes - while I found methods facilitating the selection of models for a given process by region, I didn't find any facilitating process selection by region. At present, I'm considering introducing process wrappers which restrict the action of the Geant4 DNA and Livermore processes based on the volume material which should (I believe) allow for all the processes to be registered at once, and ensure only the appropriate ones act in a given volume. However, such a solution is rather inelegant, and I was wondering if anyone knew if there were any more straightforward methods to combine these physics processes that I've overlooked? Thanks, Stephen McMahon

Penelope gamma conversion cross-sections by Wm. Heintzelman <Wm. Heintzelman>, Nov 17, 07:10 I am working with geant4.9.0.p01. I have compared the cross sections for gamma conversion applied at low energies in simulations by the different Geant4 models with outputs from the NIST website at http://physics.nist.gov/PhysRefData/Xcom/Text/XCOM.html. As one approaches the energy threshold at 1.022 MeV, the Penelope cross-section drops off sharply beginning at 1.25 MeV, whereas the low-energy EPDL model continues to match the NIST results down to 1.025 MeV. The reason is of course that aside from a very small value at 1.022 MeV, the data tables for the Penelope model have no entries below 1.25, whereas the low-energy EPDL tables continue to have entries down to 1.025 MeV. At higher energies the Penelope and EPDL models are virtually identical, and consistent with the NIST outputs. Is there any reason why the EPDL data files should not be used with the Penelope model, simply by changing the line G4String crossSectionFile = "penelope/pp-cs-pen-"; in function G4PenelopeGammaConversion::BuildPhysicsTable to G4String crossSectionFile = "pair/pp-cs-"; as in G4LowEnergyGammaConversion::BuildPhysicsTable? Bill Heintzelman

GEANT4.9.3 and Livermore migrated low energy physics by Guillaume Landry <Guillaume Landry>, Nov 16, 07:27 Hi, After upgrading to GEANT4.9.3b01 I see discrepancies between simulations using G4LowEnergyXXXX gamma processes ("old") and simulations using the new G4LivermoreXXXXModel ("migrated") with G4XXXX where XXXX is a gamma process. Results obtained using G4LowEnergyXXXX gamma processes match those from 9.2p02. My simulations are basic validations where mono energetic gamma point sources (10-50 keV range) are placed in the middle of a uniform water sphere. Dose is scored in thin concentric spherical shells (using the post step point). Furthermore, a large electron range cut insures that no secondaries are produced. I see a significant difference in dose distribution between "old" and "migrated" em processes. Same simulations with the Penelope "old" and "migrated" packages give results very close to the "old" low energy EM. By running simulations at 15 keV with only the photoelectric effect turned on or only the Compton effect turned on, it seems the discrepancy stems from the Compton process. This discrepancy is significant below 30 keV. Running simulations with photoeffect+rayleigh also show discrepancies, indicating a "problem" with rayleigh as well. Is this behavior expected from migrating the low energy EM processes? Thank you, Guillaume Landry

Is GEANT4 capable of simulating brehmsstrahlung for energies ranging from 10 Kev to 14 Mev? by Yuriy Semiletko <Yuriy Semiletko>, Oct 29, 00:07 Dear all, I look for a software capable of modeling bremsstrahlung for the energy range from 10 Kev to 14 Mev. Would someone be so kind to tell me if GEANT4 is capable of simulating brehmsstrahlung for this energies ranging? Thanks in advance for your time and help, Yuriy Semiletko.

Counting all ionization electrons in an event by Clarisse <Clarisse>, Oct 22, 05:51 I have written a code to simulate a He3 tube with a radial electric field in it. I am throwing thermal neutrons at it and getting the right amount of energy deposit. What I want to do is figure out the amount of charge collected at the anode in pC. For this I need the total number of ionization electrons that were produced, including those in the avalanche near the anode. I wrote code which I thought would give this to me: for each hit in an event I define a SetSecondaries member function and I use that in my detectorSD with something that reads: newHit->SetSecondaries((aStep->getSecondary())->size()); Then, I loop over all hits and sum all secondaries in all the hits in the event. My code compiles fine, but, the numbers I get are at most a few dozens of secondaries, which seems exceedingly low for an avalanche. Anyone has a clue about what I am doing wrong and what I should be doing instead? Thank you, Clarisse

Difference in low energy physics g4.9.0 -> g4.9.2 by Estela Suarez <Estela Suarez>, Oct 19, 12:18 Hi, I have been working for several months with geant4.9.0.p01. Recently I installed geant4.9.2.p02, together with its new data libraries and I see some significant differences between both versions that I do not quite understand. To show the differences, I have to first explain a bit how is the system that I am simulating. I am simulating a detector to measure the polarization direction of hard X-rays (50 keV to 500 keV). The instrument consists basically of a plastic scintillator target divided into almost 2000 scintillator bars. Each incoming X-ray photon interacts with the target exciting one or more of the scintillator elements. Since the direction of scattering of the photons in the target depends on their polarization direction, it is possible to measure the polarization of the incoming flux by looking at the angular distribution of the hits. To do so, for each incoming particle we select the two largest energy depositions and calculate the azimuthal angle between the positions of the two corresponding scintillator elements (defined respect to the X-axis of the detector). So, with geant4 I defined my detector and I used the low energy electromagnetic libraries that describe polarized low energy Compton effect, low energy photoelectric effect, and e- multiple scattering. I have an input file that contains the information on the incoming photons (their energy, momentum, initial position, and polarization direction). Then I introduce this input file in my simulation, compiled either using g4.9.0 or g4.9.2. The detector geometry is exactly the same in both cases, only the version of geant4 is changing. The software used to analyze the output file is also the same in both cases. This software first of all sums per each event all the energy depositions inside the same bar, and then orders the hits in descendent value of deposited energy. Then it calculates the distribution of scattering angles between the two largest energy depositions. What I observe is the following: the angular distribution of the two largest energy depositions per event is changing dramatically from g4.9.0 to g4.9.2. The amplitude of this modulation curve increases far above the statistic uncertainty. The attached figure 1 shows the modulation curve obtained with g4.9.0 (blue line) and g4.9.2 (red line). I have looked at many other parameters (energy released, distance between the selected hits, position of the hits, etc, and I do not see anything that justifies the striking difference in this angle. Looking event per event at the verbose output of both simulations I observed that in the old version very often the energy deposited in the step was directly deposited by the incoming photon, whether in the g4.9.2 version I always see a recoil electron that deposits the energy in the step. I am not sure if this is at all related with the difference in the final output. But it seems to me that some difference must have been introduced that changes the energy distribution along the multiple interactions of the photon in the detector. Maybe some cross sections for Compton scattering or for multiple scattering have been modified, so that the two largest energy depositions are now more correlated with the incoming photon polarization. I would like to understand which of the changes between g4.9.0p01 and g4.9.2p02 could explain the difference on my output. I would be very thankful if somebody could give me some indication. Thank you very much in advance, Estela. Attachment: http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/10/19/11.45-54520-fig1.pdf

G4hLowEnergyIonisation step length for low energy particles by Edward Santos <Edward Santos>, Oct 16, 07:33 Hi, all! In G4hLowEnergyIonisation process, why do we have a nonrandom step in the low energy range? Is there any physical reason for this, or is it just to minimise computational time? My question concerns the piece of code that follows, which you can find in G4hLowEnergyIonisation.cc: //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// if (fRangeNow > r) { stepLimit = dRoverRange*fRangeNow + r*(1.0 - dRoverRange)*(2.0 - r/fRangeNow); if (stepLimit > fRangeNow) stepLimit = fRangeNow; } // compute the (random) Step limit in standard energy range if(tscaled > highEnergy ) { // add Barkas correction directly to dedx fdEdx += fBarkas; if(stepLimit > fRangeNow - dx*0.9) stepLimit = fRangeNow - dx*0.9 ; // Step limit in low energy range } else { G4double x = dx*paramStepLimit; if (stepLimit > x) stepLimit = x; } return stepLimit ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Low energy muons - how to limit their step length by Kamil Sedlak <Kamil Sedlak>, Oct 07, 01:47 Dear All, I would like to ask you for an advice with the following simulation. THE EXPERIMENT TO SIMULATE: I simulate a muSR experiment, i.e. muons with initial momenta of approx. 28 MeV/c ( = kinetic energy of 3.65 MeV) hit a sample (e.g. a Copper plate), stop inside it and decay into e+ or e- and neutrinos. Unlike in high-energy particle physics, muons at this energy scale have much shorter range than the e+ or e- from the muon decay (e- and e+ have the energy range 0 - 52MeV). THE PROBLEM: When using the default cuts, muons hitting the sample stop within one single step in the Cu sample. The graph showing the stopping range of the muons in the Cu plate is not smooth at all (it has some artificial bumps, see http://www-hep2.fzu.cz/~ksedlak/penetrationDepthInCuPlate_rough.png if you are interested), even though the mean value and the spread of the muon range distribution are more or less OK. Numerically, the mean value of the muon range is approx. 200 microns. THE TEMPORARY FIX: I can fix the problem (non-physical shape of the range distribution) by setting the "SetMaxAllowedStep" to 10 microns for the sample volume, and for all volumes in front of the sample that could be potentially hit by the muons. However, this is not very convenient, and in addition (I think) it also slows down the tracking of electrons (and consequently the whole simulation), for which such a small steps are not necessary. UNSUCCESSFUL TRIAL OF THE FIX: I tried to use command SetCutValue(cutForMuon, "mu+"); in the myPhysicsList::SetCuts(), but it seems to be ignored for muons (as reported also at other places in this forum). MY QUESTIONS: 1) What would be the ideal way/method to limit the step length of muons without affecting the step length of other particles? 2) How do I find the proper step length cut for the muons in different materials? Any comments are welcome, Kamil Sedlak

1 Re: Low energy muons - how to limit their step length (Vladimir Ivanchenko - Oct 09, 03:19)

2 Re: Low energy muons - how to limit their step length (Gumplinger Peter - Oct 09, 14:13)

1 Re: Low energy muons - how to limit their step length (Vladimir Ivanchenko - Oct 10, 10:46)

3 Re: Low energy muons - how to limit their step length (michel maire - Oct 11, 14:55)

4 Re: Low energy muons - how to limit their step length (michel maire - Oct 11, 15:20)

5 Re: Low energy muons - how to limit their step length (Kamil Sedlak - Oct 14, 02:18)

1 Re: Low energy muons - how to limit their step length (michel maire - Oct 14, 11:28)

Which Physics List should I use to simulate low energy heavy Ions? by Edward Santos <Edward Santos>, Oct 01, 03:29 Hello, all: I want to study the energy loss of low energy (<100 keV) heavy ions. My first try was to use G4ionLowEnergyIonisation, but I've seen this disapproved somewhere in this forum. So, I would like to know if this really is the best choice or if I should go for G4hLowEnergyIonisation or G4ionIonisation instead. kind regards, Edward Santos

Deposited energy greater than kinetic energy for electrons? by Kareem Kazkaz <Kareem Kazkaz>, Sep 30, 15:17 Hello everyone. I am running a simulation where I am shooting 122-keV gammas into a volume of liquid xenon. I have this line in my UserSteppingAction: G4cout << theTrack->GetDefinition()->GetParticleName() << " #" << theTrack->GetTrackID() << ", " << "step eKin = " << theStep->GetPreStepPoint()->GetKineticEnergy() << ", " << "track eKin = " << theTrack->GetKineticEnergy() << ", " << "eDep = " << theStep->GetTotalEnergyDeposit() << ", " << "deltaE = " << theStep->GetDeltaEnergy() << G4endl; Here is the output from several events: EVENT 1 gamma #1, step eKin = 0.122, track eKin = 0, eDep = 0.001122, deltaE = -0.122 e- #2, step eKin = 0.120878, track eKin = 0.0177671, eDep = 0.103111, deltaE = -0.103111 e- #2, step eKin = 0.0177671, track eKin = 0, eDep = 0.0280091, deltaE = -0.0177671 e- #2, step eKin = 0, track eKin = 0, eDep = 0, deltaE = 0 EVENT 2 gamma #1, step eKin = 0.122, track eKin = 0, eDep = 0.0047747, deltaE = -0.122 gamma #3, step eKin = 0.0297813, track eKin = 0, eDep = 0.0051039, deltaE = -0.0297813 e- #4, step eKin = 0.0246774, track eKin = 0, eDep = 0.0398681, deltaE = -0.0246774 e- #4, step eKin = 0, track eKin = 0, eDep = 0, deltaE = 0 e- #2, step eKin = 0.087444, track eKin = 0, eDep = 0.174888, deltaE = -0.087444 EVENT 3 gamma #1, step eKin = 0.122, track eKin = 0, eDep = 0.0047747, deltaE = -0.122 gamma #3, step eKin = 0.0297813, track eKin = 0, eDep = 0.0054169, deltaE = -0.0297813 e- #4, step eKin = 0.0243644, track eKin = 0, eDep = 0.0401791, deltaE = -0.0243644 e- #4, step eKin = 0, track eKin = 0, eDep = 0, deltaE = 0 e- #2, step eKin = 0.087444, track eKin = 0, eDep = 0.103789, deltaE = -0.087444 e- #2, step eKin = 0, track eKin = 0, eDep = 0, deltaE = 0 Note that in all three of these events, at some point the energy deposited by an electron is greater than the kinetic energy of the electron. I get this kind of error occurring often in the output, not just the first three events. Note also that in event 2, at one point the energy deposited is greater than the energy of the primary particle. How is this possible? I am using the QGSP_HP_BIC and Livermore physics lists. Any and all help would be greatly appreciated. Kareem

why polarization vector is not perpendicular to momentum ? by <zhangyf@ihep.ac.cn>, Sep 29, 05:46 Hi, Thanks Peter for your nice guiding firstly! When I run the Pol01 (extented/polarisation/Pol01) program, the problem that has been showed in "Paticle" Category in this forum happens again. Changes in the Pol01: (1) the material of Box was changed to be G4_PLASTIC_SC_VINYLTOLUENE (2) boxSizeZ = 50. *mm (3) 122.1 keV gamma rays Results: >> gun/polarization 1 0 0 >> tracking/verbose 3 >> run/beamOn 1 ... ----------------------------------------------------------------------- StepPoint Information PreStep PostStep ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Position - x (mm) : 0 0 Position - y (mm) : 0 0 Position - z (mm) : -25 13.0631383823411 Global Time (ns) : 0.08339102379953801 0.2103559869486146 Local Time (ns) : 0.08339102379953801 0.2103559869486146 Proper Time (ns) : 0 0 Momentum Direct - x : 0 -0.1869627173785501 Momentum Direct - y : 0 -0.9193385470136727 Momentum Direct - z : 1 0.3462103093283293 Momentum - x (MeV/c): 0-0.01974379366979246 Momentum - y (MeV/c): 0-0.09708476021009742 Momentum - z (MeV/c): 0.1221 0.03656079142181843 Total Energy (MeV) : 0.1221 0.1056028386120239 Kinetic Energy (MeV): 0.1221 0.1056028386120239 Velocity (mm/ns) : 299.792458 299.792458 Volume Name : G4_PLASTIC_SC_VINYLTOLUENEG4_PLASTIC_SC_VINYLTOLU ENE Safety (mm) : 0 11.9368616176589 Polarization - x : 1 -0.9794236864290253 Polarization - y : 0 -0.1386048373629611 Polarization - Z : 0 0 Weight : 1 1 Step Status : Geom Limit PostStep Proc Process defined Step: Transportation pol-compt ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Questions: According to those results (assumed to be calculated in the world frame), in the poststep, the angle between momentum and polar vector of gamma ray is about 72 degree. Why did they not perpendicular to each other? What's wrong? Thanks for your help! Best Regards! zhangyf

Electron Stripping From Ions by James Service <James Service>, Aug 28, 03:36 I am currently working on a simulation involving H- ions, and I was wondering if there was a way to model the ionisation probabilistically. The current approach using G4ionIonisation gives strange results like all of the ions being completely stripped in 2mm of very low pressure (10^(-4) Pa) air. The code that I inherited is currently compiled against version 9.0. I am aware that a more recent version of geant4 introduced a new G4ionGasIonisation process. Will this fix the problem?

eV energy process by hemiao <hemiao>, Aug 18, 23:18 In my simulation, I need to count the secondary electron number produced by 2.3keV X-ray in CsI(100nm). During interaction, the elctron energy will be at several eV less than 250eV. Is the reason that I can not get all the number of secondary electron by using Livermore or standard process? then where I can get the correct physics process for less than 250eV to get correct secondary electron number? Is there any example for this microdosimetry? thanks

Aluminum Stopping Power Validation by Patrick Cruce <Patrick Cruce>, Aug 10, 15:55 Hello, I'm trying to verify GEANT4 v6.0 before using it on a more complex problem. In my GEANT setup, I'm firing electrons of various energies at a block of aluminum 100 m on a side. I use track length of each fired electron when it dissipates all its energy to calculate the electron stopping power of aluminum. And I've been comparing it to ESTAR data to validate(http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/Star/e_table.pl) To calculate the stopping power from GEANT, I'm running 10,000 events, at each initial electron energy. I find the the maximum track length out of all 10,000 events at a particular initial energy and calculate stopping power using the following equation: Stopping_Power = Initial_Energy/(Maximum_Track_Length(cm)*Aluminum_Density) I've been getting good agreement until initial energies above 900 KeV. Then the results start to deviate significantly. I've also tried this calculation using the median track length for all events, and the result appears to match even more poorly.(Better at high energies worse at low) I've attached a plot with my results. I aggregate the track lengths using hits from a sensitive detector for the block of aluminum. I've attached the important parts of my code, I don't use any special cuts and it essentially uses the defaults from some of the examples. My suspicion is that I don't have some important process turned on. I found some plots from a talk by Maria Grazia Pia online, and it showed nearly perfect agreement between ESTAR and GEANT4 for aluminum. So there must be some way to make it work. I'm just not sure how. Attachment: http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/08/10/15.54-88375-GEANT4STP.png http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/08/10/15.54-20127-physlistcode.txt http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/08/10/15.54-45916-detectorconstruction.txt http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/08/10/15.54-1766-primarygenerator.txt http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/08/10/15.54-5723-main.txt

gap in energy by Daniel Rodr�guez <Daniel Rodr�guez>, Jul 24, 01:50 Hi, I am just creating a monochromatic electron beam and look to the energy deposited in a plastic scintillator. Without including resolution from the detector, what I oserve is a peak at 3 MeV an then a tail starting about 10 keV below the peak down to 0 eV. I have done the same with a diferent material an the gap differs. I have included low energy processes but I am afraid is just something related to the step in the simulation. Can anyone tell me how to correct/change this? Thankyou very much best regards Daniel

gap in energy by Daniel Rodr�guez <Daniel Rodr�guez>, Jul 24, 01:49 Hi, I am just creating a monochromatic electron beam and look to the energy deposited in a plastic scintillator. Without including resolution from the detector, what I oserve is a peak at 3 MeV an then a tail starting about 10 keV below the peak down to 0 eV. I have done the same with a diferent material an the gap differs. I have included low energy processes but I am afraid is just something related to the step in the simulation. Can anyone tell me how to correct/change this? Thankyou very much best regards Daniel

Correlated polarized photons in GEANT4 by Estela Suarez <Estela Suarez>, Jul 23, 08:46 Hello, I would like to simulate a laboratory setup in which two photons are correlated. This means, that they're produced in two opposite directions with perpendicular polarization vectors. Actually, to be more precise, the generated photon hasn't got a polarization direction until you measure it, and this fixes the polarization of the correlated photon. Is it this phenomena already implemented in Geant4? And if not, can somebody suggest me some way in which I can implement it? I've tried to launch a photon in one direction, and when it is detected in my detector, to launch the second one from the initial point with opposite momentum and perpendicular polarization. The problem is that those two photons are not really correlated, and G4 treats them as completely independent photons (so the polarization that I get as a result is not correct). I would be very thankful if somebody could suggest how to accurately reproduce that phenomena. Thanks in advance, Estela.

Spikes in photo-neutron energy spectra by Kyle Pastor <Kyle Pastor>, Jul 20, 10:13 Hello all, I am currently simulating the creation of photo-neutrons in low Z materials for a mine detection application. In order to make sure the predefined physics lists are working (ex. QGSP_BERT_HP) I am first simulating high Z materials and checking to see if the neutron energies make sense. Attached is a histogram of the photo-neutron energy spectrum from natural lead with 8.998MeV incident gammas. Attachment: http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/07/20/10.11-90665-t_8.998MeV_QGSP_BIC_HP.ps The one thing that concerns me is the sharp spikes at what seems to be the ground state neutrons. I was wondering if anyone has any input for why this is occurring and/or if it is expected. Thanks for any help, -Kyle

Problem in visualization by Morad Hamad <Morad Hamad>, Jul 01, 08:25

hello every body... I have a problem in the visualization: I always get this message: " *** VRML 1.0 File g4_05.wrl is generated. Graphics systems deleted. Visualization manager deleting... "
I wonder if any body have an Idea to solve it...
N.B the simulation is running correctly.
cheers,

Compton Scattering? Fail to understand the result. by Pradip Datta <Pradip Datta>, Jun 23, 01:25

Hi all,
I have made a segmented Ge detector. In this detector, I have recorded segment no of the hit, hit position, the energy deposited by a gamma ray in each step and the physical process of the interactions. The energy deposited by the gamma ray is calculated from the difference in kinetic energy of the gamma ray before and after the scattering. Every things seems working fine. But when I try to calculate the scattering angle and the energy deposition in a compton scattering process, I am getting wrong result in some cases. One of such case is given below where a gamma ray of energy 500 keV incidents on the detector.
In the 1st scattering, the gamma ray looses 177 keV energy. This corresponds to a scattering angle of ~ 64 deg. But if I try to calculate the angle between the tracks, it comes out to be ~ 57 deg. Which is quite different (leads to energy difference of ~ 23 keV). Compton scattering formula and its implementation in Geant4 must be well tested by many users and beyond any question but I am failing to identify the problem. It will be great help if any body can point out my mistake or give some suggestion/idea.
Regards,
Pradip

********************************************************************************************************* * G4Track Information: Particle = gamma, Track ID = 1, Parent ID = 0 *********************************************************************************************************

Step# Copy# X Y Z KineE dEStep Process 0 0 0 fm 0 fm -25 cm 500 keV 0 eV initStep 12 -3.04 cm 2.1 cm 9.51 mm 177 compt 13 -1.62 cm 1.09 cm 2.13 cm 130 compt 13 -1.5 cm 1.13 cm 2 cm 13.7 compt 13 -1.3 cm 1.42 cm 1.85 cm 50.8 compt 13 -1.29 cm 1.43 cm 1.91 cm 128 phot

------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I am also attaching the part of SteepingVerbose.cc file which generates this printout
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

G4int copyNo=fStep->GetPreStepPoint()->GetTouchableHandle()->GetCopyNumber() ; // Gives Segment No.

E_dep_array[fTrack->GetCurrentStepNumber()]=(fTrack->GetKineticEnergy())/keV ; // Record Energy dep in each step

if(((E_dep_array[fTrack->GetCurrentStepNumber()-1] - E_dep_array[fTrack->GetCurrentStepNumber()])!=0) && (fStep->GetPostStepPoint()->GetProcessDefinedStep()->GetProcessName() =="compt" || fStep->GetPostStepPoint()->GetProcessDefinedStep()->GetProcessName() =="phot")) { G4cout << std::setw(6) << " " << std::setw(4) << copyNo << " " << std::setw(6) << G4BestUnit(fTrack->GetPosition().x(),"Length") << std::setw(6) << G4BestUnit(fTrack->GetPosition().y(),"Length") << std::setw(6) << G4BestUnit(fTrack->GetPosition().z(),"Length") << std::setw(7) << " " << std::setw(1) << " " << std::setw(5) << " " << (E_dep_array[fTrack->GetCurrentStepNumber()-1] - E_dep_array[fTrack->GetCurrentStepNumber()])

<< std::setw(10) << fStep->GetPostStepPoint()->GetProcessDefinedStep()->GetProcessName() << " ";

G4cout << G4endl; ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

/gun/ion 6 12 6 by wangym <wangym>, Jun 21, 03:06 \9.1\geant4_9_1_p02\geant4_9_1_p02\examples\extended\electromagnetic\TestEm7 snr.mac file, /gun/particle ion /gun/ion 6 12 6 /gun/energy 3.5 GeV what is the 6 12 6 mean ?

simulating X-ray spectra from low energy electrons by <DRo>, Jun 19, 02:29 I am comparing the results of different Monte Carlo codes to simulate X-ray spectra from low energetic electrons (30 keV) impinging onto an infinitely thick slab of material. The problem I have with GEANT4.9.2p02 is that the ratio of characteristic K X-ray line intensities to the bremsstrahlung continuum is too low when compared to experimental results. My target material is Copper (Cu) and the ratio is too low by a factor > 10+. So my question is if this is "normal", because of the low energy/models, or have I done something wrong in my code? I have tried both the standard and low energy models, but the results don't differ much from each other. Another, somewhat related, question is that for scoring the X-ray spectrum I store the X-ray energy and track weight: G4Track* thisTrack = aStep->GetTrack(); G4double TrackWght = thisTrack->GetWeight(); G4double particleE = aStep->GetPreStepPoint()->GetKineticEnergy(); The track weight for the produced gamma's always seems to be 1.0 .. is that normal? I am simulating a total of 100,000,000 histories to ensure decent statistics on the resulting X-ray spectra. Any comments or suggestions are greatly appreciated, Regards, David ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// (1) The physicslist I am using is following (using the LowEnergy models): -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- if (particleName == "gamma") { // gamma G4LowEnergyPhotoElectric* LowPhotoElectric = new G4LowEnergyPhotoElectric(); LowPhotoElectric->ActivateAuger(true); LowPhotoElectric->SetCutForLowEnSecPhotons(1.0*keV); LowPhotoElectric->SetCutForLowEnSecElectrons(1.0*keV); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(LowPhotoElectric); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyCompton()); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyRayleigh()); } else if (particleName == "e-") { //electron G4LowEnergyIonisation* LowIonProcess = new G4LowEnergyIonisation("IONI"); LowIonProcess->ActivateAuger(true); LowIonProcess->SetCutForLowEnSecPhotons(1.0*keV); LowIonProcess->SetCutForLowEnSecElectrons(1.0*keV); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering,-1, 1,1); pmanager->AddProcess(LowIonProcess, -1, 2, 2); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4LowEnergyBremsstrahlung, -1, -1, 3); } else if (particleName == "e+") { //positron pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering,-1, 1,1); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eIonisation, -1, 2,2); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eBremsstrahlung, -1, 3,3); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eplusAnnihilation, 0,-1,4); } -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (2) I have set the cuts for electrons and gammas to 10nm SetCutValue(10*nm, "gamma"); SetCutValue(10*nm, "e-"); -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (3) The target material is defined as: G4Material* Cu = new G4Material("Copper",Z=29, A=63.54*g/mole, 8.92*g/cm3); -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (4) The gun has following definition: G4int n_particle = 1; particleGun = new G4ParticleGun(n_particle); G4ParticleTable* particleTable = G4ParticleTable::GetParticleTable(); G4ParticleDefinition* particle = particleTable->FindParticle("e-"); particleGun->SetParticleDefinition(particle); particleGun->SetParticleEnergy(30.0*keV); particleGun->SetParticlePosition(G4ThreeVector(0*cm, 0*cm, 15*cm)); particleGun->SetParticleMomentumDirection(G4ThreeVector(0,0,-1)); --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Strange proton behavior by chen <chen>, Jun 03, 01:34 dear all, In my simulation,I want to calculate the deposited energy in semiconductor by 100 MeV Proton.my simulation result is very strange.G4MultipleScattering never happened and sometime,proton lost 0.1MeV energy in one step.the step length is 0.5um.anyone can help me ? physicslist: void ShieldPhysicsList::ConstructEM() { theParticleIterator->reset(); while( (*theParticleIterator)() ){ G4ParticleDefinition* particle = theParticleIterator->value(); G4ProcessManager* pmanager = particle->GetProcessManager(); G4String particleName = particle->GetParticleName(); if (particleName == "gamma") { // gamma pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyPhotoElectric); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyCompton); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyGammaConversion); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyRayleigh); } else if (particleName == "e-") { //electron pmanager->AddProcess(new G4LowEnergyIonisation, -1, 1, 1); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4LowEnergyBremsstrahlung, -1,-1, 2); } else if (particleName == "e+") { //positron pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eIonisation, -1, 1, 1); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eBremsstrahlung, -1, 2, 2); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eplusAnnihilation, 0,-1, 3); } else if( particleName == "mu+" || particleName == "mu-" ) { //muon pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MuIonisation, -1, 1, 1); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MuBremsstrahlung, -1, 2, 2); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MuPairProduction, -1, 3, 3); } else if (particleName == "He3" ) { pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering,-1, 1,1); G4hLowEnergyIonisation*ion= new G4hLowEnergyIonisation; ion->SetNuclearStoppingOn(); ion->SetStepFunction(0.01,1e-9*m); pmanager->AddProcess(ion,-1, 2,2); } else if (particleName == "alpha"||particleName =="GenericIon" ) { pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering,-1, 1,1); G4hLowEnergyIonisation* ahadronLowEIon = new G4hLowEnergyIonisation; ahadronLowEIon->SetNuclearStoppingOn(); ahadronLowEIon->SetStepFunction(0.01,1e-9*m); pmanager->AddProcess(ahadronLowEIon, -1, 2, 2 ); }else if ((!particle->IsShortLived()) && (particle->GetPDGCharge() != 0.0) && (particle->GetParticleName() != "chargedgeantino")) { //all others charged particles except geantino pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering,-1, 1,1); G4hLowEnergyIonisation* ahadronLowEIon = new G4hLowEnergyIonisation; pmanager->AddProcess(ahadronLowEIon, -1, 2, 2 ); } } }

Energy Loss Validation by Tom Roberts <Tom Roberts>, 22 May, 2009 As a basic test of energy loss in Geant4 9.2.p01, I ran a series of simulations that measure the energy loss of mu+ on Cu, reproducing fig. 27.1 of the PDG book (attached). The red dots are the simulation using QGSP_BERT with Decay disabled. Each point is a separate run, with each thickness of the Cu absorber adjusted so <KEout/KEin> is in the range 0.95-0.96; there are 10,000 mu+ in each point, so the errorbars are smaller than the dots. Agreement is excellent below about 200 GeV/c, all the way down to 0.1 MeV/c (48 eV kinetic energy, beta=0.001). This is a comparison of models, not any experiment. Does anyone know which model is better or more believable above ~200 GeV/c? Attachment: http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/05/22/08.54-94214-Eloss.png

Polarized photons by <farnea@pd.infn.it>, 19 May, 2009 I am trying to evaluate the response of my detectors to linearly polarized photons emitted with isotropical distribution from a point source. I have included the relevant processes (G4PolarizedComptonScattering or G4LowEnergyPolarizedCompton) in my PhysicsList. I understand I should now define a polarization vector which should be passed to the G4ParticleGun via the SetParticlePolarization method. I cannot understand whether should I pass the Stokes vector in the particle frame or should I transform it to the World frame (the Stokes "vector" should transform differently than a standard vector, as far as I know). Anybody can give me suggestions? Any good example?

Problem with electron stopping power with the LowEnergy Package by Isabelle Fonteille <Isabelle Fonteille>, 18 May, 2009 Attachment: http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/05/18/01.12-98811-electron.txt http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/05/18/00.54-66624-ueStandard_StepFun1um.gif http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/05/18/00.54-9017-eLivermore_StepFun1um.gif Hello everyone, In order to verify the accuracy of the stopping power of electrons in water, I modified the code in the Stepping Action class of the TestEm18 example. For each step, I keep in a TTree the energy before the step, the size of the step and the energy loss (not deposit) during the step : if ( ( step->GetTrack()->GetDefinition()->GetParticleName() == "e-") { G_EnergiePreStep[G_NbrInteractions] = step->GetPreStepPoint()->GetKineticEnergy(); G_DeltaEnergieTotStep[G_NbrInteractions] = step->GetPreStepPoint()->GetKineticEnergy() - step->GetPostStepPoint()->GetKineticEnergy(); G_DeltaXStep[G_NbrInteractions] = step->GetStepLength(); G_DeltaETotSurDeltaXStep[G_NbrInteractions] = G_DeltaEnergieTotStep[G_NbrInteractions] / G_DeltaXStep[G_NbrInteractions] ; } After, with a root programme, I draw an a unique graph : - G_DeltaETotSurDeltaXStep as a function of G_EnergiePreStep, for every kind of interaction (in gray on the figure) - the collision and radiation stopping power of the NIST ESTAR database (respectively in red and blue on the figure) I made a simulation with the attach file electron.txt, first with the standard PhysicList and then with the LowEnergy Livermore PhysicList. You can find as attach files the two figures of the result, where we can see : - with the standard PhysicList, the result correspond to theory - with the livermore PhysicList, there is an inchoerence for energies below ~2 or 3 keV. Is there an explanation for this observation??? I also have another question : is the command /process/eLoss/StepFunction working with the LowEnergy packages?? Thanks for your help, Isabelle

e+ process manager problem by Davinder Siwal <Davinder Siwal>, 12 May, 2009

Hii all
i am trying to calculate the intrinsic efficiency of a 1''x1''x1'' Germanium crystal i am getting the following message durin runtime
[root@localhost Linux-g++]# ./test1 vis1.mac

************************************************************* Geant4 version Name: geant4-09-00 (29-June-2007) Copyright : Geant4 Collaboration Reference : NIM A 506 (2003), 250-303 WWW : http://cern.ch/geant4 *************************************************************

Visualization Manager instantiating... Visualization Manager initialising... Registering graphics systems...

You have successfully registered the following graphics systems. Current available graphics systems are: ASCIITree (ATree) DAWNFILE (DAWNFILE) G4HepRep (HepRepXML) G4HepRepFile (HepRepFile) RayTracer (RayTracer) VRML1FILE (VRML1FILE) VRML2FILE (VRML2FILE) FukuiRenderer (DAWN) OpenGLImmediateX (OGLIX) OpenGLStoredX (OGLSX) OpenGLImmediateXm (OGLIXm) OpenGLStoredXm (OGLSXm) RayTracerX (RayTracerX) VRML1 (VRML1) VRML2 (VRML2)

Registering model factories...

You have successfully registered the following model factories. Registered model factories: generic drawByCharge drawByParticleID drawByOriginVolume drawByAttribute

Registered filter factories: chargeFilter particleFilter originVolumeFilter attributeFilter G4VisManager: Using G4TrajectoryDrawByCharge as default trajectory model. See commands in /vis/modeling/trajectories/ for other options. HepRepFile writing to G4Data0.heprep /tracking/storeTrajectory 1 WARNING: Trajectory storing has been requested. This action may be reversed with "/tracking/storeTrajectory 0". WARNING: The scene, "scene-0", of viewer "viewer-0 (G4HepRepFile)" of scene handler "scene-handler-0" has changed. To see effect, "/vis/viewer/select viewer-0" and "/vis/viewer/rebuild". G4VUserPhysicsList::PreparePhysicsTable : No Process Manager for e+ e+ should be created in your PhysicsList

*** G4Exception : No process manager issued by : G4VUserPhysicsList::PreparePhysicsTable e+

Segmentation fault
did anybody knows the answer

default cut value for thin absorber by Sang-jun Lee <Sang-jun Lee>, 07 May, 2009 I'm trying to simulate isotropic 60 keV gamma-lay emission inside 4pi gold absorber. The thickness of the gold foil is 1 X 2 um ~ 60 X 2 um. At first, I set the default cut value to 20 um. I just modified a program from my colleague, so I had no idea of proper cut value. Meanwhile I came to think that when the gold absorber is as thin as 20 um or thinner than that, the cut value of 20 um might not be appropriate. Now I changed it into 1 um. However, I still have no idea of proper value for my simulation. Could you please give me some hint? Geant4 version : 4.9.1 CLHEP version : 1.9.2.1 defaultCutValue = 0.001*mm; cutForGamma = defaultCutValue; cutForElectron = defaultCutValue; cutForPositron = defaultCutValue;

GetToTalEnergyDiposit() in step include secondary particle energy loss ? by <viet.nga.thi.la@cern.ch>, 30 Apr, 2009 Hi all, I use GetToTalEnergyDiposit() in G4Step to get energy loss in my detector. But I don't know this energy loss includes secondary particles energy loss ? Thanks very much. Viet Nga

questions on mean free path of positron and its continuous-slowing-down approximation range by long <long>, 29 Apr, 2009 Dear friends, I am puzzled by the value of the MFP(mean free path) of positron and its CSDA (continuous-slowing-down approximation range). My view is that CSDA should be bigger than MFP at least for high energy positron. But the value calculated by equation(8.41) in PhysicsReferenceManual.pdf is much bigger than the value of CSDA. Here I use the CSDA of electron with the same energy as the positron since these two have the same mass and charge amount. Two calculated data group are listed here: E=0.5MeV CSDA=0.17mm, MFP=0.9mm ; E=1MeV, CSDA=0.4mm, MFP=1.24373mm Could somebody help me to solve this question. Thanks in advance! long

Relativistic rise in energy loss by <viet.nga.thi.la@cern.ch>, 27 Apr, 2009 Hi everybody, I am trying to implement the energy loss in a thin (250 microns) Si layer using the standard electromagnetic process in Geant4. Even with very high energy muons, I do not observe any relativistic rise of the deposited energy. It seems that the density effect (described in PDG p. 269) is not activated. How can I activate it ? Many thanks in advance for any help from anybody. VietNga

shooting CsI targets with electrons by <csi505>, 22 Apr, 2009 Hi, In my simulation I'm shooting CsI targets with electrons which can have energies between 29-120 keV.These electrons will emit a cascade of delta electrons producing clusters of eV secondary electrons because of the extraordinarily low work function (0.1-0.2 eV) of CsI. The thickness of CsI is about 100 nm. I think I will get many electrons leaving the CsI bulk,but I got a few. So what's the problem? Here is part of my PhysicsList: defaultCutValue = 0.000001*mm; cutForGamma = defaultCutValue; cutForElectron = defaultCutValue; cutForProton = 0.001*mm; SetVerboseLevel(1); G4ProductionCutsTable::GetProductionCutsTable()->SetEnergyRange(100.*eV, 1*GeV); if (particleName == "gamma") { // gamma pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4PenelopePhotoElectric); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4PenelopeCompton); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4PenelopeGammaConversion); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4PenelopeRayleigh); } else if (particleName == "e-") { //electron pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering, -1, 1, 1); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4PenelopeIonisation, -1, 2, 2); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4PenelopeBremsstrahlung, -1,-1, 3); } else if (particleName == "e+") { //positron pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering, -1, 1, 1); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4PenelopeIonisation, -1, 2, 2); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4PenelopeBremsstrahlung, -1,-1, 3); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4PenelopeAnnihilation, 0,-1, 4); } It seems when the low energy electrons are created in the CsI bulk most of them will not leave CsI bulk because of a very short range in CsI. I also have used LowEnergy PhysicsList, but the result is still wrong. what's the problem?

How to Distinguish Fluorescence Photon from Bremsstrahlung Photon. How to tell the process creating them different? by Colin Huang <Colin Huang>, 17 Apr, 2009 Hi there, I have put this question at Event and Track Management for more than two weeks but no answer was got. Since it is more related to the Electromagnetic processes, so I moved it to here. The original questions are: I am doing simulation with electron of 55~80keV hitting Gd target. Both bremsstrahlung photon and fluorescence photon are created, but I am interested in counting only the photons created by fluorescence. My questions are: 1. How can I count only the fluorescence photon? I am thinking about using check the process that creat the track. Is this reasonable? 2. In order to get fluorescence photons, should I just use G4LowEnergyIonisation? Can I use G4PenelopeIonisation to get these photons? 3. In order to trace the process creating the track of fluorescence photon, what is the right code to do that? I did some research on this part but still didn't get clue what should I write. Could anybody familiar with this kind of simulation please give me several lines of code that I can make use of, or tell me which example program has similar functions that I can refer to, of tracing the process that creats fluorescence photon or any other particles. Any suggestion and help of any kind are highly appreciated. Sincerely, Colin

Unexpected Energy Deposit in low density gas by Peter T. <Peter T.>, 02 Apr, 2009 Hello, I'm confused with an observation I make with the following setup: - A sensitive volume filled with Xenon Gas - a beam of 10 keV gammas that hit the detector - the energy deposit is extracted and filled into a histogram essentially by this code: G4bool GPSTrackerSD::ProcessHits(G4Step* aStep,G4TouchableHistory*) { G4double edep = aStep->GetTotalEnergyDeposit(); if(edep==0.) return false; G4StepPoint* point1 = aStep->GetPreStepPoint(); G4double x = point1->GetPosition().x(); G4double y = point1->GetPosition().y(); G4double z = point1->GetPosition().z(); exGPSAnalysisManager::getInstance()->Fill_Z_depositionHisto(z, edep); return true; } When looking at the histogram one can see the exponential decay. The observation that I do not understand is that the bucket in the histogram which corresponds to the first slice in the detector has a very high value which does not follow the exponential behavior. The attached plots show this data for two different gas densities that are defined as: 1) G4Material* Xenon = new G4Material("XenonGas", z=54., a=131.29*g/mole, density= 5.458*mg/cm3 ); 2) like 1) but density= 54.58*mg/cm3 What is the reason for this effect? How to deal with this behavior? Thank you very much for any support! Best regards Peter Attachment: http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/04/02/04.01-91738-osit_Xe_54.58__mg_cm3.png http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/04/02/04.01-50262-osit_Xe_5.458__mg_cm3.png

Low energy Bremsstrahlung in Low density targets by Erwann Rault <Erwann Rault>, 01 Apr, 2009 Dear all, I am simulating bremsstrahlung photons produced by the electrons of Yttrium-90 (maximum energy of 2.2 MeV) in water with GATE (using GEANT4-09-00-patch02). However, I experience some problems with the validation. The simulated spectrum detected on a gamma camera (already validated model for different gamma emitters) seems to be shifted towards the low energies compared to the measured spectrum (bigger proportion of low energy photons simulated). I would like to know if a validation of the emission of bremsstrahlung photons from electrons of low energies (50 keV to 2 MeV) in low Z materials have already been validated. I saw some validation results but it was just for photons of energies upper than 2 MeV in high Z targets. I already compared the 3 models included in GEANT4 (G4eBrems, G4LowEnergyBrems, and Penelope) but they gave the same results, and the angular dependency has no importance in my case. Another parameter of the emission is the emission of the electrons. I am using the ion to simulate the emission of the electrons. Could that be a problem? Thanks in advance for your time and help, Erwann Rault

training lecture problem by wangym <wangym>, 28 Mar, 2009 In training lecture,"Particles and Processes",page 12 , you write "Apply PostStepDoIt() action(s) sequentially, as long as the particle is alive �apply PostStepDoIt() of the process which proposed the smallest step length" But in my opinion , in one step ,the first ,determine the step length , the second, determine which process occure .they are independent from each other. I do not know why you white this. Attachment: http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/03/28/07.30-17683-E._processes.pdf

how to active Auger? by <wangzhg123@gmail.com>, 26 Mar, 2009 I used Low energy package to study the Electromagnetic process.In my program the energy deposited by electron was accumulated in a event. When looking for the interaction of gamma(5.9 keV) with Ar, I find a energy peak around 2.7keV, but can not find another energy peak which should appear around 5.33keV. It seems that there are not the production of Auger electrons,how to resolve this problem ? Below is my PhysicsList: void myPhysicsList::ConstructEM() { theParticleIterator->reset(); while( (*theParticleIterator)() ){ G4ParticleDefinition* particle = theParticleIterator->value(); G4ProcessManager* pmanager = particle->GetProcessManager(); G4String particleName = particle->GetParticleName(); if (particleName == "gamma") { // gamma LePeprocess = new G4LowEnergyPhotoElectric(); LePeprocess->ActivateAuger(true); LePeprocess->SetCutForLowEnSecPhotons(0.250 * keV); LePeprocess->SetCutForLowEnSecElectrons(0.250 * keV); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(LePeprocess); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyCompton); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyRayleigh()); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyGammaConversion()); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4StepLimiter(), -1, -1, 3); } else if (particleName == "e-") { //electron pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering,-1, 1,1); LeIoprocess = new G4LowEnergyIonisation("IONI"); LeIoprocess->ActivateAuger(true); //eIoProcess = new G4eIonisation("stdIONI"); LeIoprocess->SetCutForLowEnSecPhotons(0.25*eV); LeIoprocess->SetCutForLowEnSecElectrons(0.25*eV); pmanager->AddProcess(LeIoprocess, -1, 2, 2); LeBrprocess = new G4LowEnergyBremsstrahlung(); pmanager->AddProcess(LeBrprocess, -1, -1, 3); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4StepLimiter(), -1, -1, 3); } else if (particleName == "e+") { //positron pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering,-1, 1,1); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eIonisation, -1, 2,2); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eBremsstrahlung, -1,-1,3); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eplusAnnihilation, 0,-1,4); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4StepLimiter(), -1, -1, 3); } } #include "G4Decay.hh" void myPhysicsList::ConstructGeneral() { G4Decay* theDecayProcess = new G4Decay(); theParticleIterator->reset(); while( (*theParticleIterator)() ){ G4ParticleDefinition* particle = theParticleIterator->value(); G4ProcessManager* pmanager = particle->GetProcessManager(); if (theDecayProcess->IsApplicable(*particle)) { pmanager ->AddProcess(theDecayProcess); pmanager ->SetProcessOrdering(theDecayProcess, idxPostStep); pmanager ->SetProcessOrdering(theDecayProcess, idxAtRest); } } }

MultipleScattering by Po-Yu Chang <Po-Yu Chang>, 23 Mar, 2009 I would like to run the multiple scattering for electrons and protons in the media. However, I found there are three different but similar processes / models. They are: G4MultipleScattering / G4eMultipleScattering / G4hMultipleScattering and G4UrbanMscModel / G4UrbanMscModel2 / G4UrbanMscModel90 In the process descriptions, they are all available for charged particles. My question is, what's the different between these processes / models. Which one should I use? Thank you.

G4UrbanMscModel not printing parameters by G4cout by Yuriy Lapitskiy <Yuriy Lapitskiy>, 18 Mar, 2009 Hi! I was playing with N02 example of version 4.8.2 (compiled under Scientific Linux 4.4 CE) by beaming e- and looking closely at the msc processes. When I tried to cout the scattering angle and some other parameters (Theta0 in particular) it displayed nothing on the output. The code was the simplest: G4cout << "Theta0 = " << theta0 << G4endl; // in ComputeTheta0 (of the UrbanMscModel). I tried to place similar code into some other places like other scattering model - MscModel71 and even to the basic G4 scattering structure - G4MultipleScattering and to G4ProcessManager. I wonder what I've done wrong? At this time it looks like the angle is not computing at all. Thanks in advance, Yuriy

Strange results from G4.9.2 by Chibueze Zimuzo <Chibueze Zimuzo>, 11 Mar, 2009 Hi all, I have just installed the current version of GEANT (G4.9.2), but the result I 'm getting strange results from it. It records very small energy deposition for the Compton process against the result I get when I use G4.8.1 p2 to run the same simulation. Though nothing is changed in the code for the 2 runs, the former records very small energy for Compton process. Below are results from the 2 versions for 2 parallel detectors. G4.8.1p2 Compt Phot Total 0.0258343 0.114666 0.1405 0.002293 0.138207 0.1405 0.01029 0.13021 0.1405 0.000156718 0.140343 0.1405 0.0169942 0.123506 0.1405 0.00783461 0.132665 0.1405 0.0268587 0.113641 0.1405 0.0130026 0.127497 0.1405 0.00795517 0.132545 0.1405 G4.9.2 Compt Phot Total 0.00010867 0.140391 0.1405 0.000257808 0.140242 0.1405 0.00010798 0.140392 0.1405 0.00010867 0.140391 0.1405 0.00015155 0.140348 0.1405 0.00015155 0.140348 0.1405 0.00010798 0.140392 0.1405 0.00010867 0.140391 0.1405 1.363e-05 0.140486 0.1405 Thanks for anticipated help. Chibueze

Bragg peak by Melanie Raine <Melanie Raine>, 23 Feb, 2009 Hi all, I'm trying to get the Bragg peak for different ions : 15N+4, 139 MeV 20Ne+6, 186 MeV 30Si+8, 278 MeV 40Ar+12, 372 MeV 56Fe+15, 523 MeV 82Kr+22, 768 MeV The simulation I'm using is similar to TestEm7, with a physics list similar to emstandard_opt3, using SetStepFunction(0.02, 100*nm) for Generic Ion and SetStepFunction(0.1, 100*um) for electrons and positrons. Attached is the curves I get for the Bragg peak for those different ions. What I don't understand is the kind of bump I get before the Bragg peak. It is more and more obvious as the ion mass increases. Is it a normale behaviour of Geant4 ? The second file is just for Krypton. I've compared the Bragg peak I get (in pink), based on the values of step->GetTotalEnergyDeposit(), to the values I get using emCal.ComputeTotalDEDX(kinEnergy, particle, material) (in blue). Shouldn't those two curves be similar ? Attachment: http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/02/23/00.54-80689-let.jpg http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/02/23/00.54-25547-Krypton.JPG

Problems with energy deposition in gas by Claudio Giganti <Claudio Giganti>, 18 Feb, 2009 Hi, I am running the geant example TestEm5 to study the energy lost by a particle in 10 cm of argon gas. Below there is the macro that I am using. I am interested in the energy lost in one cm of gas so what I am doing in SteppingAction is StepLength+=aStep->GetPostStepPoint()->GetPosition().x()-aStep->GetPreStepPoint()->GetPosition().x(); TotEnergy += aStep->GetTotalEnergyDeposit(); if(StepLength>9.99) { histoManager->FillHisto(1,TotEnergy); } The problem is that the histogram that I get with the more recent version of geant4 v9r1p02 is not the one that I expected and it's different from the one that I get with the same example and the same macro but using an older version of geant4 (v8r2p01). You can see the two distributions in the attached files. Does someone knows what are the differences between the two versions? Looking at some documentation I think that the correct distribution is the one that I obtain with the older version of geant4. Thanks for the help, Regards, Claudio # $Id: dedx2.mac,v 1.5 2006/03/28 15:03:08 maire Exp $ # # macro file for TestEm5.cc # # to control dE/dx calculation # /control/verbose 2 /run/verbose 2 # /testem/det/setWorldMat ArgonGas /testem/det/setAbsMat ArgonGas /testem/det/setAbsThick 10 cm /testem/det/setAbsYZ 80 cm /testem/phys/addPhysics standard ###/testem/phys/addPhysics livermore ###/testem/phys/addPhysics penelope # /testem/phys/setCuts 1 mm # /run/initialize # /testem/gun/setDefault /gun/particle mu- /gun/energy 300 MeV /gun/direction 1 0 0 /gun/position -5 0 0 cm # /testem/stepMax 1 mm /run/beamOn 5000 Attachment: http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/02/18/02.13-92090-eLost_v9r1p02.eps http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2009/02/18/02.14-53351-eLost_v8r2p01.eps

Can't see Auger electrons by Hossein AFSHARPOUR <Hossein AFSHARPOUR>, 17 Feb, 2009 Hi I'm doing a simulation in which I need to keep Auger electrons and to have their imformation as soon as they are created. The ActivateAuger() is set true in my PhysicsList and I use the command : theStep->GetPostStepPoint()->GetProcessDefinedStep()->GetProcessName() != "Auger" in my SteppingAction in order to identify the auger electrons. The energy cut for secondary electrons is set to 0*eV (So every created electon is traked down to zero). I was suprised when no Auger electron was detected while there should be a lot created in my simulations! Is there anything wrong with my Stepping Action ? Thanks Hossein

G4hLowEnergyLoss::RTable is not set. by Maxim Gonchar <Maxim Gonchar>, 16 Feb, 2009 Hello, In the file processes/electromagnetic/lowenergy/src/G4hLowEnergyLoss.cc on the line 240 I see a comment: // calculate data members TotBin,LOGRTable,RTable first but then, variables RTable and LOGRTable are not set. This causes a crash on the line 798: Tim = Ti/RTable; This error is relevant for the Geant4 of versions: 4.8.2p02, 4.9.1p03, 4.9.2 regards, Maxim Gonchar

The Energy Deposition of Krypton 78 by Zukai Wang <Zukai Wang>, 15 Feb, 2009 This is my first simulation work with geant4. The code is modified based on novice example N02. A beam of Kr78 with the energy of 0.25*78GeV will hit a target (with the depth of 1.0cm) made of BC_408, and then be deflected in a magnetic field and hit the tracking chambers made of BC_408. And the World is filled with air. I used this method to get Kr78 in PrimarygeneratorAction: G4ParticleTable* particleTable = G4ParticleTable::GetParticleTable(); particleGun->SetParticleDefinition(particleTable->GetIon(36,78,0.0)); G4double a=0.,b=0.; while(((a*a)+(b*b)) < 0.0001) { a = G4UniformRand()*0.02-0.01; b = G4UniformRand()*0.02-0.01; } particleGun->SetParticleMomentumDirection(G4ThreeVector(a,b,sqrt(1.0-a*a-b*b))); particleGun->SetParticleEnergy(0.25*78.*GeV); I wrote in the TrackerSD.cc to get the energy of Kr before it hit the chamber: G4bool ExN02TrackerSD::ProcessHits(G4Step* aStep,G4TouchableHistory*) { G4double edep = aStep->GetTotalEnergyDeposit(); if(edep==0.) return false; ExN02TrackerHit* newHit = new ExN02TrackerHit(); newHit->SetTrackID (aStep->GetTrack()->GetTrackID()); newHit->SetChamberNb(aStep->GetPreStepPoint()->GetTouchableHandle() ->GetCopyNumber()); newHit->SetKineticEnergy(aStep->GetPreStepPoint()->GetKineticEnergy() ); newHit->SetEdep (edep); newHit->SetPos (aStep->GetPostStepPoint()->GetPosition()); trackerCollection->insert( newHit ); newHit->Print(); return true; } However, the energy loss of Kr is just about 20MeV, which is really absurd. The energy loss of Kr should be much larger than 20MeV after flying in the air for 3 meters, let alone the target put in front of the chambers. I checked the detector construction carefully and found no mistakes. I am quite sure that the matetrial definition is right. Here is my physics list: ^^^^^^^^^^ ExN02PhysicsList::ExN02PhysicsList(): G4VUserPhysicsList() { defaultCutValue = 1.0*cm; SetVerboseLevel(1); } ................. void ExN02PhysicsList::ConstructProcess() { AddTransportation(); ConstructEM(); ConstructGeneral(); } .......... void ExN02PhysicsList::ConstructEM() { theParticleIterator->reset(); while( (*theParticleIterator)() ){ G4ParticleDefinition* particle = theParticleIterator->value(); G4ProcessManager* pmanager = particle->GetProcessManager(); G4String particleName = particle->GetParticleName(); if (particleName == "gamma") { // gamma G4ParticleDefinition* GetIon (6,12,0.0); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4PhotoElectricEffect); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4ComptonScattering); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4GammaConversion); } else if (particleName == "e-") { //electron pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering,-1, 1,1); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eIonisation, -1, 2,2); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eBremsstrahlung, -1, 3,3); } else if (particleName == "e+") { //positron pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering,-1, 1,1); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eIonisation, -1, 2,2); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eBremsstrahlung, -1, 3,3); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eplusAnnihilation, 0,-1,4); } else if( particleName == "mu+" || particleName == "mu-" ) { //muon pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering,-1, 1,1); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MuIonisation, -1, 2,2); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MuBremsstrahlung, -1, 3,3); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MuPairProduction, -1, 4,4); } else if ((!particle->IsShortLived()) && (particle->GetPDGCharge() != 0.0) && (particle->GetParticleName() != "chargedgeantino")) { //all others charged particles except geantino pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering(),-1, 1,1); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4hIonisation(), -1, 2,2); //step limit pmanager->AddProcess(new G4StepLimiter, -1,-1,3); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4UserSpecialCuts, -1,-1,4); } } } I believe there is something wrong with the physics process. The ionisation process is perhaps the only physics process I have to concern about. I wonder if this process is applied in my project. I really appreciate your patience to read my question through and am looking forward to any solution or suggestion to it. I can't handle this by myself. Sincerely Oliver Ricken

Kinetic energy of an ion along its path - Problem for the last step (too big) by Melanie Raine <Melanie Raine>, 13 Feb, 2009 Hi all, I'm getting a very strange behaviour shooting Xe ions (100 MeV or more) in a silicon block, for the kinetic energy of the incident ion along its path. Everything seems normal until the last step where my Xe ion lost around 60 MeV in one step 4 um long. I get the same behaviour with other ions, the "energy threshold" being less important as the mass of the ion decreases. For alpha, I get a last deposited energy of about 1.5 MeV. Same behaviour also for another target material. To explain it as simply as possible, I've adapted the example TestEm1 to get what I want. Here are the modifications I did: 1. I added a few lines in SteppingAction.cc to print the incident ion's kinetic energy: (#include "G4UnitsTable.hh" at the beginning) G4Track* track = aStep->GetTrack(); if(track->GetParentID == 0) { std::ios::fmtflags mode = G4cout.flags(); G4cout.setf(mode,std::ios::floatfield); G4cout.precision(5); G4double kinEnergy = track->GetKineticEnergy(); G4cout << "Ekin : " << G4BestUnit(kinEnergy,"Energy") << "StepLength : " << G4BestUnit(step->GetStepLength(),"Length") << G4endl; } 2. My macro is: /control/verbose 2 /run/verbose 2 /testem/det/setMat Silicon /testem/det/setSize 1 mm /testem/phys/addPhysics standard /run/initialize /testem/phys/setGCut 1 nm /testem/phys/setECut 1 nm /testem/phys/setPCut 1 nm /testem/gun/setDefault /gun/particle ion /gun/ion 54 136 54 /gun/energy 100 MeV /run/beamOn 1 Here is what I get for the last few steps: Ekin : 62.122 MeV StepLength : 3.4727 nm Ekin : 61.578 MeV StepLength : 53.853 nm Ekin : 61.032 MeV StepLength : 56.095 nm Ekin : 0 eV StepLength : 4.4358 um (I get the same thing with /testem/phys/addPhysics Livermore) Could someone try this and see if you get the same result ? Do someone has some explanation ? It seems like there is a sort of energy threshold for ions, which souldn't be. This seems to be a big problem...I hope I made a mistake and someone has a simple explanation...

kinetic energy, deposited energy and range by Ozge Amutkan <Ozge Amutkan>, 12 Feb, 2009 Dear all, I will appriciate a quick reply from anyone. In my setup, I write down kinetic energy before it enters Silicon, deposited energy and range in the silicon in stepping action. ekin = aStep->GetTrack()->GetKineticEnergy(); edep = aStep-> GetTotalEnergyDeposit(); slen = aStep->GetTrack()->GetStepLength(); ofcourse i put them in a if close so that make sure they are coming from primary particle. and Sum slen and edep to get total range and edep. But the question is why i get nan for edep at some point. I put 0.001micron(even with 1mm, and 10cm) for cuts for all particles. I check if anything come out with Ekin but it is zero. But the total energy deposited and kinetic energy at the entrance are not same. The reason is i put if statement to get rid of those nans. But if i keep them, I will get nan when i add edep. So why do i get nan in edep i am cluless. I do this with low energy.. Anyhelp???? Thank you

Lowest Electron Energy Possible by Sean Kirkwood <Sean Kirkwood>, 10 Feb, 2009 Hi, With GEANT4.9.2, what is the lowest electron energy I can expect to model well? I want to model the electron mean free path in a vacuum (mTorr to few Torr) with energies just above ATI/tunneling (few eV) to those free electrons energised by inverse Bremsstrahlung to keV. Since I have had little success finding articles on this, I thought I might use GEANT, but want to be sure that I can expect the results to work before proceeding. Does the Low Energy Photon package cover this? Thanks, Sean

X-ray Bremsstrahlung from an ECR (electron cyclotron resonance ion source) plasma by <gerosro_geant>, 06 Feb, 2009 How to simulate the X-ray Bremsstrahlung emission from an ECR plasma using a 3" NaI detector. I have recently installed geant and a novice to it. Would appreciate some help in the form of an example.

Zero energy deposit for compton process by Chibueze Zimuzo <Chibueze Zimuzo>, 06 Feb, 2009

Hi all,
I am simulating a compton camera arrangement with a 140.5 KeV gamma source before 2 two planar detectors. My interest is in the events with compton and photoelectric processes in the first and second detectors respectively. I am able to record energy depositions in the two detectors when I use Penelope and Low energy physics. But my use of standard EM package give zero energy deposit in my first detector which I doubt very much. Below is a segment of my geant simulation result to illustrate what I mean. I borrowed TestEm12 modular physicslist.
Can anyone help me with some useful explanations?
Thanks in advance.
Chibueze.

********************************************************************************************************* * G4Track Information: Particle = gamma, Track ID = 1, Parent ID = 0 *********************************************************************************************************

Step# X(mm) Y(mm) Z(mm) KinE(MeV) dE(MeV) StepLeng TrackLeng NextVolume ProcName 0 0 0 100 0.141 0 0 0 World initStep 1 7.49 11.3 60 0.141 0 42.2 42.2 Calor_Physical Transportation 2 17.8 26.8 5 0.141 0 58.1 100 Scatterer Transportation 3 18.5 27.9 0.944 0.14 0 4.28 105 Scatterer compt :----- List of 2ndaries - #SpawnInStep= 1(Rest= 0,Along= 0,Post= 1), #SpawnTotal= 1 --------------- : 18.5 27.9 0.944 0.000875 e- :----------------------------------------------------------------- EndOf2ndaries Info --------------- 4 18.7 28.7 -5 0.14 0 5.99 111 Calor_Physical Transportation 5 20 33.4 -45 0.14 0 40.3 151 Absorber Transportation 6 20 33.4 -45 0 0.0318 0.019 151 Absorber phot :----- List of 2ndaries - #SpawnInStep= 1(Rest= 0,Along= 0,Post= 1), #SpawnTotal= 2 --------------- : 20 33.4 -45 0.108 e- :----------------------------------------------------------------- EndOf2ndaries Info ---------------

********************************************************************************************************* * G4Track Information: Particle = e-, Track ID = 3, Parent ID = 1 *********************************************************************************************************

Step# X(mm) Y(mm) Z(mm) KinE(MeV) dE(MeV) StepLeng TrackLeng NextVolume ProcName 0 20 33.4 -45 0.108 0 0 0 Absorber initStep 1 20 33.4 -45 0.103 0.00462 0.00378 0.00378 Absorber msc 2 20 33.4 -45 0.0987 0.00451 0.00378 0.00756 Absorber msc 3 20 33.4 -45 0.0949 0.00378 0.00378 0.0113 Absorber msc 4 20 33.4 -45 0.087 0.00795 0.00378 0.0151 Absorber msc 5 20 33.4 -45 0.0787 0.00829 0.00378 0.0189 Absorber msc 6 20 33.4 -45 0.0716 0.00704 0.00378 0.0227 Absorber msc 7 20 33.4 -45 0.0671 0.00457 0.00378 0.0265 Absorber msc 8 20 33.4 -45 0.0629 0.00412 0.00378 0.0302 Absorber msc 9 20 33.4 -45 0.0508 0.0121 0.00378 0.034 Absorber msc 10 20 33.4 -45 0.0422 0.00869 0.00378 0.0378 Absorber msc 11 20 33.4 -45 0.0333 0.00888 0.00378 0.0416 Absorber msc 12 20 33.4 -45 0.0209 0.0123 0.00378 0.0454 Absorber msc 13 20 33.4 -45 0 0.0209 0.00344 0.0488 Absorber eIoni

********************************************************************************************************* * G4Track Information: Particle = e-, Track ID = 2, Parent ID = 1 *********************************************************************************************************

Step# X(mm) Y(mm) Z(mm) KinE(MeV) dE(MeV) StepLeng TrackLeng NextVolume ProcName 0 18.5 27.9 0.944 0.000875 0 0 0 Scatterer initStep 1 18.5 27.9 0.944 0 0.000875 3.84e-05 3.84e-05 Scatterer eIoni Event: 44

Nuclear Resonance Fluorescence Process by <qjye@mail.ustc.edu.cn>, 28 Jan, 2009 Hi All, Do we have some code describe the Nuclear Resonance Fluorescence Process? And where can I find it? As I know some people finished the code, but I am not sure whether they are plugged in Geant4. Thank u! Q.J

Atomic Deexcitation for fluorescence detection by Julio Calvo <Julio Calvo>, 26 Jan, 2009 Hello, I am trying to get fluorescence. I do not know how to activate Atomic Deexcitation. Is it automatic from LowEnergyIonisation? Do I need to add something else? How can I know which particles are created by fluorescence?. Thank you so much.

Atomic Relaxation for G4LowEnergyPhotoElectric process by Melanie Raine <Melanie Raine>, 15 Jan, 2009 Hi, I'm trying to understand how the atomic relaxation works considering the simple case of the photoelectric effect, in the low energy package. I'm shooting 2keV gammas in silicon, silicon K-shell binding energy being 1828.5 eV according to EPDL97 data. I'm looking at the deposited energy. I get a spectra with discrete peaks corresponding to binding energies and deposited energies after X-fluorescence or Auger emission (I've checked the values with the EPDL97 data). But here is the thing I don't understand : I'm also getting a big peak (about 850 000 events for 1 000 000 incident gammas) corresponding to the K-shell binding energy (I understand the peaks corresponding to other shells energies since those energies are < 250 eV). If atomic relaxation is activated (and I get some X-fluorescence and Auger emission events, so it is), this energy (1828.5 eV) should be used during the relaxation. So it seems that not all excited atoms relax. So my question is : why do I get this peak corresponding to the K-shell binding energy ? Should not all excited atoms relax ? Thanks, Melanie

about recoils ions by <adnank@uludag.edu.tr>, 29 Dec, 2008 Hello everybody, I have read some comments about how to get recoil ions, but I don't have proper information. I have to get recoil ions and study energy deposition of these, but I don't know if it is possible. if it's so, could you tell me what can i do and which Geant4 version I need, please? Regards, Adnan.

How to print cross sections for Low Energy package by Francisco <Francisco>, 16 Dec, 2008 Dear all I have printed cross section and related data from code DirectAcces.cc for silicon. But I would like to do the same for the Low Energy package. It seems to me it is not possible from this code without rewriting almost a different code. I have tried with G4EmCalculator without success and G4VEmModel is not compatible with Low Energy classes. Does anyone know a way to do it? How did Emily Poon do it? (Accuracy of the photon and electron physics in Geant4 for radiotherapy applications) Thanks

One-step Compton scattering process by Chibueze Zimuzo <Chibueze Zimuzo>, 16 Dec, 2008 Hi all, Could anyone please tell me how to output results with only one compton scattering interaction in a detector medium. My simulation includes low gamma energy(140keV) interaction with a semiconductor detector material where all sort of interactions take place. But I am interested in interactions with only one Compton scattering within the detector medium. Thanks in advance. Chibueze.

Significant discrepancies between silicon Stopping powers with NIST by Francisco <Francisco>, 15 Dec, 2008 Dear all I have printed cross sections and stopping powers for silicon using example TesEm0. I used the small code DirectAccess.cc. While the cross sections have good agreement with XCOM, collision and radiation stopping powers with 1 keV cut-off have significant discrepancies with NIST data (ESTAR software). I made sure about what I was doing, but I got same results. Could anyone perform the same tests to get stopping power for silicon? If the results are similar shall we discuss reasons for deviations? I have attached graphs. Thanks. Attachment: http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2008/12/15/08.08-98461-_figures_Stopping-col.jpg http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2008/12/15/08.08-94912-_figures_Stopping-rad.jpg

normal distribution by <janitor0405@126.com>, 08 Dec, 2008 hi everyone,I simulate a chamber filled with Xenon,as expected,I get the gamma spectrum ,but now I want to consider the effect of Fano statistics which sample from a normal distribution characterized by mean value E1/w and standard deviation sqrt(f*E1/w),where E1 is energy deposited in an interaction,F and w are constant.Is there any way in G4 to achieve it?Can you give me some suggestion?thank you!

New web site for Geant4 Low Energy EM Physics working group by Sebastien INCERTI <Sebastien INCERTI>, 26 Nov, 2008 Dear users, We are happy to announce that the web site of the Low Energy Electromagnetic Physics working group has been migrated to the following official address, based on TWiki at CERN : https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/Geant4/LowEnergyElectromagneticPhysicsWorkingGroup This web site can also be accessed directly from the Geant4 web site : Home page -> Who we are -> Low Energy Electromagnetic Physics. We express our deep gratitutde to Dr Christina Zacharatou who took in charge this full migration and update. Thank you for your interest and best regards, S. Incerti for the LowE EM Physics WG

Particle charge evolution along track by Jean Claude Thiry <Jean Claude Thiry>, 18 Nov, 2008 Hi, I'm simulating ranges of heavy ions in different materials. To test my results, I'm shooting 74Ge ions in a layer composed entirely of 235U (density = 18.8 g*cm-3). When comparing the simulated range to other available data (such as SRIM for example), I find large differences in the results. For a 118 MeV 74Ge ion, SRIM gives a range of about 6.6 um, whereas Geant4 computes a range of something around 3.5 um. My question now is if I'm doing something wrong, or if Geant4 isn't able to compute reliable data at these energy an range levels. An observation I made was that my ions are apparently shot completely ionized (defined through: particleGun->SetParticleDefinition(particleTable->FindIon(32.,74.,0,0)); ). When tracking them, they seem to keep that charge all along their track. Is this true? Because the charge isn't supposed to stay the same all the way (according to V.S. Nikolayev), or is it for tracking purposes only, that the particle keeps the same name, but changes its identity? If true, what can I do to change the particle charge (or the particle) along the track? I started working with predefined PhysicsLists: LHEP_PRECO_HP.hh, the ones from the EM example: /examples/extended/electromagnetic/TestEm7. But I couldn't find any ways of how to include the charge variation. Regards, Jean Claude

Cross section for Coulomb scattering by Francisco <Francisco>, 03 Nov, 2008 Hi I am trying to compare CoulombScattering.hh and MultipleScattering.hh for my simulation with thin silicon, but although the msc model is well documented, the Coulomb is not. I would like to know where the cross sections for the Coulomb scattering come from and also the models used for the implementation, I read that it is based on the Wentzel model, but it also has some limitations, isn't it? How are this limitations overcome in the implementation, for a realistic simulation, I mean? Are the cross sections by RICARDO MAYOL and FRANCESC SALVAT used (ATOMIC DATA AND NUCLEAR DATA TABLES 65, 55�154 (1997) ARTICLE NO. DT970734)? Does this Coulomb scattering model allow to do detailed simulation event by event? thanks for any help.

Modeling Compton Continuum by <ticesty>, 24 Oct, 2008 Greetings: I am trying to model a pulse height spectrum from a liquid scintillator detector with 662 keV gammas incident. I would expect to see something like figure 10.1 from Knoll's "Radiation Detection and Measurement" (attached), but the spectrum remains flat at low energies (i.e. at low energies, the slope is close to zero; I expect it to be substantially negative). An experimental pulse height spectrum does show an increasing number of counts at lower energies, although, of course, the compton edge is smeared. Does anyone have an idea what is wrong with my geant model? I have used the "Hand-on 4" example from McGill University as a starting point (http://geant4.slac.stanford.edu/tutorial/mcgill06/HandsOn4/HandsOn4.htm). This model is supposed to record the energy deposited by particles (in my case, gammas) in some defined detector volume. Is it possible that the model is not accounting for energy that leaves the detector due to bremsstrahlung? Here is some key elements in my code: // HandsOn4: Accumulating hit data // Get energy deposited in this step G4double depositedEnergy = aStep->GetTotalEnergyDeposit(); if (0 == depositedEnergy) return true; // Sum energy deposited for one particle BeamTestEmCalorimeterHit* aHit = (*hitsCollection)[i]; totalEnergy += aHit->GetDepositedEnergy(); //Applicable Physics Processes if (particleName == "gamma") { // Gamma pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4GammaConversion()); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4ComptonScattering()); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4PhotoElectricEffect()); } else if (particleName == "e-") { // Electron pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering, -1, 1, 1); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eIonisation, -1, 2, 2); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eBremsstrahlung, -1, 3, 3); Thank you! David Attachment: http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2008/10/24/09.30-64809-comptcont.pdf

Doppler Broadening by Laura Harkness <Laura Harkness>, 14 Oct, 2008 Hi, I am implementing the low energy electromagnetic physics package to develop a Compton camera. I would like to investigate the effects of Doppler broadening in the materials due to the electron not being at rest in Compton scattering. I have searched the forum to find information as to if Doppler broadening is applied in the physics packages. The last post I found was in 2001, and it appeared there were plans to include Doppler broadening. Does anybody know if it has been included in the version of geant4 that I am using, 4.8.1, and if so how it can be implemented? Thanks in advance for your help, Laura

Multiple scattering parameters in macro files by Francisco <Francisco>, 30 Sep, 2008 Hi I am trying to set up these commands in my macro file in order for not doing changes in G4VMultipleSacttering, but I got an error saying COMMAND NOT FOUND. So can anyone help me use them properly? /process/msc/StepLimit UseDistanceToBoundary /process/msc/RangeFactor /process/msc/GeomFactor /process/msc/Skin Other commands like /process/eLoss/StepFunction do not send error messages. Thanks Francisco

Characteristic line production rates by Stephen McMahon <Stephen McMahon>, 30 Sep, 2008 Hello all, I am currently simulating a simple x-ray generator (high-energy electrons onto a metal target) we have built in our department. To validate the simulation I have compared the results at low energies (25kVp electrons incident on copper) to the spectrum observed from our system. The simulated spectrum agrees very well in many ways with the observed spectrum - the bremsstrahlung background agrees well, the copper k-alpha and k-beta lines are both present with the correct energy and their ratios to one another are also correct. However, the ratio between the characteristic lines and the bremsstrahlung is very different - in the simulated spectrum the characteristic lines have an intensity roughly 6 times higher than that of the neighbouring bins, whereas in the observed spectrum they are roughly 35 times higher. I'm presently using the Penelope low-energy physics list, (proccesses which are activated are listed at the end of the post) and have set range cuts to 500nm to ensure that production thresholds are always significantly less than the energy needed to create k-shell holes in copper. At present I do not have access to a spectrometer to measure significantly higher energy spectra, but simulations of more traditional beam setups (e.g. 150kV electrons on Tungsten) produce results quite similar to those which can be found in published sources. Does anyone know of anything which may cause this effect, and if a solution exists? Many thanks, Stephen McMahon Active processes: ------------------------------------------------------- /* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Gamma Processes * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * */ pManager = G4Gamma::Gamma()->GetProcessManager(); pManager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4PenelopePhotoElectric); pManager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4PenelopeCompton); pManager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4PenelopeGammaConversion); pManager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4PenelopeRayleigh); /* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Elctron Processes * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * */ pManager = G4Electron::Electron()->GetProcessManager(); PeIoProcess = new G4PenelopeIonisation(); PeIoProcess->ActivateAuger(true); PeIoProcess->ActivateFluorescence(true); PeIoProcess->SetCutForLowEnSecPhotons(0.1*keV); PeIoProcess->SetCutForLowEnSecElectrons(0.1*keV); pManager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering, -1, 1, 1); pManager->AddProcess(PeIoProcess, -1, 2, 2); pManager->AddProcess(new G4PenelopeBremsstrahlung, -1,-1, 3); /* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Positron Processes * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * */ pManager = G4Positron::Positron()->GetProcessManager(); pManager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering, -1, 1, 1); pManager->AddProcess(PeIoProcess, -1, 2, 2); pManager->AddProcess(new G4PenelopeBremsstrahlung, -1,-1, 3); pManager->AddProcess(new G4PenelopeAnnihilation, 0,-1, 4);

Problems with simple Rutherford Scattering by Jens Hasper <Jens Hasper>, 16 Sep, 2008 Hello, I'm trying to make a simulation of a simple Rutherford Scattering Experiment shooting a 4 MeV alpha beam on a thin 1 um thick gold foil. I'm analysing the angular disribution of scattered alphas as well as energy distribution and angular distribution of produced delta electrons. I have set the CutValues to 0.001 um. I am using the PhysicsLists from example TestEm5 and trying the different options (standard, livermore, standardSS, etc.). What actually strikes me now is that the results are very sensitive to the model used even for the simple Rutherford Scattering angular distribution. So, I'm pretty unsure now whether I'm doing any mistake and what model is best to use for my application. I would very much appreciate any help or comments. Jens

TestEm7_G4ScreenedNuclearRecoil by wangym <wangym>, 30 Aug, 2008 Hi In your paper you describe as follow The contributions to nonionizing energy density from primary knock-on atoms (PKAs) and daughters of nuclear reaction fragments, although conceptually identical for many purposes, were recorded separately. These quantities were computed by tracking the kinetic energy of PKAs and nuclear reaction fragments, and all secondary particles created by these primaries. Each particle was followed from its creation until its kinetic energy fell below 1 keV. As it traveled, its discrete interactions with the lattice atoms down to an energy transfer of 1 eV were recorded. Any interaction that transferred less than 1 keV of energy (the large majority of interactions) resulted in the tabulated energy at that point in space being increased, and the ion energy decreased correspondingly. If a collision resulted in the transfer of more than 1 keV, a daughter particle was created and tracked. When a moving ion finally fell below the 1 keV threshold, it was stopped in place, and its kinetic energy added to the accumulated nonionizing energy at that point. A three dimensional map of deposited energy density at F(z,p;x) , as a function of initial location z and momentum p of the primary ion was produced in this way. The nonionizing energy deposition rate (NIEDR), a quantity that approximates NIEL,was computed from as described in Appendix A. my question is in strim programe , nonionizing energy have two parts . The first is phonon, The second is displacement atom , which have displacement threshold energe. In your progame ,how do I distinguish these ? thanks. wangym

Low Energy EM Physics lists by Sebastien INCERTI <Sebastien INCERTI>, 17 Aug, 2008 Dear users, In order to guide you and for your convenience, we have setup a web page regularly updated where you may find Physics lists based on low energy EM processes. This page is accessible from the official Low Energy EM working group page at the following address : http://geant4loweworkinggroup.wikispaces.com/ in the Physics lists section, or directly from the Geant4 working group pages : http://geant4.web.cern.ch/geant4/collaboration/working_groups/LEelectromagnetic/ Please, do not hesitate to contact us if you have any question. Best regards, the Low Energy EM working group

Optical boundary process and absorption at boundary by Kay Ulbrich <Kay Ulbrich>, 13 Aug, 2008 Hello! For the transport of optical photons in a material I use the optical boundary process, which is based on the difference of refraction indices at volume boundaries, i.e., Fresnel type refraction. More specific, the transport is achieved by exploiting the angular limit for total reflection. No G4OpticalSurface is needed for this. Now I would like to add one feature: additional to this process, I want the photon to be absorbed with a certain probability at the boundary surface, where the Fresnel process takes place (this is due to phenomenologically introduced surface imperfections). Is this possible with some special G4OpticalSurface? If I got it right, as soon, as I introduce such a surface, the "normal" Fresnel type boundary process is not working anymore and all optical properties have to be implemented via the G4OpticalSurface. So my question is: are there some standard optical properties or techniques implemented, or would the only solution be to go to the stepping level? In that case, would every single step have to be tested or is there a special class offering a virtual function, which is called when a boundary is crossed? Thanks in advance for advice!

Low energy vs standard? by Aram Teymurazyan <Aram Teymurazyan>, 05 Aug, 2008 Hi All, in my simulation I am shooting 6.1 MeV gammas into a big chunk (10"x10"x10")of NaI crystal and I look at the total energy deposition per event. The Standard EM processes (mostly borrowed from hadrontheraphy example) give me unrealistic spectrum: Attachment: http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2008/08/05/09.45-24024-standard.gif Using the low energy EM processes I get energy depositions larger than my incident photon energies? why? http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/geant4/get/AUX/2008/08/05/09.48-74366-lowE.gif thank you in advance, Aram

a question about G4EmProcessOptions by Aram Teymurazyan <Aram Teymurazyan>, 03 Aug, 2008 Hi All, in the ConstructProcess() method of my PhysicsList I have the following two lines ==================== G4EmProcessOptions* electronEmProcessOptions = new G4EmProcessOptions(); electronEmProcessOptions -> SetDEDXBinning(480); ==================== but seems like they have no effect because during a run I get: ============================== eBrem: tables are built for e- dE/dx and range tables from 100 eV to 100 TeV in 120 bins. Lambda tables from threshold to 100 TeV in 120 bins. Total cross sections and sampling from StandBrem model (based on the EEDL data library) Good description from 1 KeV to 100 GeV, log scale extrapolation above 100 GeV. LPM flag 1 ============================== I can change the number of dEdX bins with /process/eLoss/binsDEDX 480.. my question is do I need anything else besides those 2 lines to make G4EmProcessOptions work? thanks, Aram

Problem with showers width by <sbalev>, 25 Jul, 2008 Dear All, I am new G4 user and I have the following question. What I am trying to simulate is a liquid Krypton calorimeter. For me the important part is the transverse size of the shower. I have made a very simple simulation: 100 GeV electron is hitting a liquid Krypton volume. I am calculating the energy deposit in the total volume and in some cylinders around the impact point (the electron is hitting the volume perpendicularly). My problem is that it seems the width of the shower G4 is giving is much wider than expected. For example - in a cylinder with 1 Moliere radius (~59 mm) I find only 82-83% of the energy deposited, instead of 90% as it is by definition. In two Moliere radiuses I have 92% instead of 95%. First I was thinking that I have a problem with the definition of the material (I defined the LKr myself), but I have the same result if I use the default G4_lKr material. The same behaviour is present for other materials (I have tried with Fe and obtain the same percentage - 83% and 92% for 1 and 2 Moliere radiuses respectively). I also compared the distribution of the deposited energy as a function of the distance from the impact point with an early estimation done with GEANT 3. Both plots are with similar shape, but with G4 the shower is much wider, than with G3 (and the G3 plot is much closer to what should be expected). I will give you the way I am defining the physics in my code - it is pretty standard, but perhaps I am missing something important? if (particleName == "gamma") { // gamma pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4PhotoElectricEffect); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4ComptonScattering); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4GammaConversion); } else if (particleName == "e-") { // electron pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering,-1, 1,1); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eIonisation, -1, 2,2); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eBremsstrahlung, -1, 3,3); } else if (particleName == "e+") { // positron pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering,-1, 1,1); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eIonisation, -1, 2,2); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eBremsstrahlung, -1, 3,3); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eplusAnnihilation, 0,-1,4); } Many thanks in advance, Spasimir

Problem of energy deposit by <yfdeng@student.dlut.edu.cn>, 06 Jul, 2008 Hello everyone, I'm a beginner of Geant4 and study particle-matter interactions. For recent few weeks, I encountered a problem in my study work. The questions are following: 1. I want to obtain energy deposited in unit of MeV/cm, when particles moves through matter. I try to use the command like "aStep->GetTotalEnergyDeposit()", however, the results are in unit of MeV. It's mean that this method obtains an energy, not what I need. In order to obtain dE/dx, I also try to use the method of G4EmCalculator like GetDEDX, but all efforts in vain. 2. Another question about dE/dx. I don't know how does the Geant4 conculate the total energy deposit in unit of energy like MeV, how does it converts dE/dx to dE? Which class do this work? I note that in class G4MollerBhabhaModel de/dx is calculated by formula of Berger-Seltzer. From formula, de/dx is the stopping power in unit such as MeV/cm, why in G4MollerBhabhaModel class dedx in unit of energy,like MeV? Best regards! Yongfeng Deng

NonIonizingEnergyDeposit by wangym <wangym>, 02 Jul, 2008 Hi,I will calculate NonIonizingEnergyDeposit. In class G4Step.icc, inline G4double G4Step::GetNonIonizingEnergyDeposit() const { return fNonIonizingEnergyDeposit; } How do I explain it. in my source file, I can not find G4LindhardPartition.cc. Could you tell me where it is . thanks.

Problem with G4hLowEnergyIonisation by Christian Stahl <Christian Stahl>, 01 Jul, 2008 Hi, if have a problem with my PhysicsList, especially with the physics classes for generic ions. Everything works fine with the G4ionIonisation class, but when changing to G4hLowEnergyIonisation instead, I get a segmentation fault message with the first shoot. (I shoot with 136Xe, but get the same error when trying with alphas). The same error occurs for the G4hIonisation class, too. Do I have to do more specifications when using these classes? thanks for your effort! christian

Gamma Range Cuts for Positron Annihilation by Brittany Cochran <Brittany Cochran>, 30 Jun, 2008 I am attempting to run the e+ annihilation process, but keep recieveing the following error: G4VRangeToEnergyConverter::ConvertCutToKineticEnergy for gamma The cut in range [0.7 (mm)] is too big for material idx=2 The cut in energy is set1.79769e+305GeV annihil: Sampling according eplus2gg model tables are built for e+ Lambda tables from 100 eV to 100 TeV in 120 bins. ========= Table of registered couples ============================== Index : 0 used in the geometry : Yes recalculation needed : No Material : Vacuum Range cuts : gamma 10 um e- 10 um e+ 10 um Energy thresholds : gamma 990 eV e- 990 eV e+ 990 eV Region(s) which use this couple : DefaultRegionForTheWorld Index : 1 used in the geometry : Yes recalculation needed : No Material : Copper Range cuts : gamma 10 um e- 10 um e+ 10 um Energy thresholds : gamma 990 eV e- 19.3423 keV e+ 18.9042 keV Region(s) which use this couple : DefaultRegionForTheWorld Index : 2 used in the geometry : Yes recalculation needed : No Material : Aluminum Range cuts : gamma 10 um e- 10 um e+ 10 um Energy thresholds : gamma 990 eV e- 33.8876 keV e+ 33.4729 keV Region(s) which use this couple : DefaultRegionForTheWorld Index : 3 used in the geometry : Yes recalculation needed : No Material : Sodium Iodide Range cuts : gamma 10 um e- 10 um e+ 10 um Energy thresholds : gamma 78.965 keV e- 5.47125 MeV e+ 5.14464 MeV Region(s) which use this couple : DefaultRegionForTheWorld ==================================================================== I have tried removing the material in question, and initiating default cut values. However any default value that is defined as being less than 0.7mm does not appear to have an effect. Is there a different way to edit the cut values for gamma particles produced using positron annihilation?

About electron-ion pair by zhangxh <zhangxh>, 27 Jun, 2008 Hi, I am a youngling about Geant4. I want to simulate a ionization chamber and meet some toubles. I developed the simulated program accroding to /examples/extend/electromagnetic/TestEM18. The physics is the 'standard' electromagnetic processes. The primary is alpha and the energy is set 5.8MeV. The geometry is a box and filled Ar gas. My question: 1). when a alpha though the detector, it will lose its energy through electromagnetic reaction and produce lots of electron-ion pairs along its path. But after my simulation, I only get lots of e- and not ion, why? 2). For the energy cut of e+,e- and gamma, it seems have a lowest limit about 990eV, is it right? Would you get me some helps? Thanks a lot Best regard zhangxh

Estimation of initial kinetic energy of the first electrons by Francisco <Francisco>, 18 Jun, 2008 Hi I would like to have information of the initial kinetic energy (KE) of primary electrons set in motion only by photons and not including the KE of electrons created by ionization between them. My primary particles are photons and I need the initial KE of the first electrons without considering the delta ones. In SteppingAction I have: if (particle->GetPDGCharge() != 0.){ // Measurement of Kerma (it should be divided by mass in RunAction) G4double InitialKE = aTrack->GetVertexKineticEnergy(); if (InitialKE > 0.) { runAction->AddKerma(InitialKE); } } This works, but I think it's taking into account all the electrons. 1. How can I restrict the code for just the first electrons? 2. What ID can I set for just including the primary electrons? 3. Also I would like to know how to inactivate bremsstrahlung production inside my macro file. 4. How can I kill the scattered photons without affecting KleinNishinaCompton.cc? Thanks in advance.

Recoil energy< 1keV ? by Cristina Consolandi <Cristina Consolandi>, 18 Jun, 2008 Hello, I'm using G4CoulombScattering. I managed to get the Si recolis but I need to have the low energy part of the recoil spectrum. How can I get Silicon recoils with kinetic energy lower then 1 keV? Is there a way to set the lowest recoil energy? Thank you. Cri

Relativistic Coulomb Scattering? by Cristina Consolandi <Cristina Consolandi>, 10 Jun, 2008 Hello, Is there in Geant4 a code which considers Relativistic Coulomb Scattering for protons and for ions also? Thank you for your help! Cri.

How to get recoil nucelus? by Cristina Consolandi <Cristina Consolandi>, 06 Jun, 2008 Hi, I have to simulate Rutherford scattering of different incoming ions (from He4 to Ni59 , Energy from 50 MeV/n up to few GeV/n ) with a Silicon targhet and I have to get the Si28 recoil Energy srectrum. I used G4CoulombScattering but I was not able to have any secondary Si28. Is there something that I have to add to have secondary Nucleous? Or is there another process able to genetare them? Thank you very much! Cri.

Switching on G4CoulombScattering in just some volumes Keywords: Coulomb scattering multiple G4CoulombScattering G4MultipleScattering by Kamil Sedlak <Kamil Sedlak>, 05 Jun, 2008 Dear All, I would like to switch on G4CoulombScattering in a few critical volumes of my detector, while keeping G4MultipleScattering in the other volumes (my simulations are order of magnitude slower if using G4CoulombScattering everywhere). In some other posting in these hypernews (which I can not find now) it was adviced that one can switch between the two processes using the following trick: ... G4ProcessVector* v = processManager->GetProcessList(); size_t np = v->size(); for(size_t i=0; i<np; i++) { if( (*v)[i]->GetProcessName() == "msc" ) { mscIndex = i; } if( (*v)[i]->GetProcessName() == "eCoulombScat" ) { eCoulombIndex = i; } } .... and then in the SteppingAction to switch between the processes in the volume of interest using something like: .... processManager->SetProcessActivation(mscIndex, false); processManager->SetProcessActivation(eCoulombIndex, true); .... (and vice versa when the particle leaves the volume of interest). The problem with this approach seems to be, that for some reason _SOMETIMES_ the G4MultipleScattering seems to keep very short interaction length (that of the G4CoulombScattering?). This can be seen in a piece of the output at the end of this code. In the detector phys_C1 I have the coulomb scattering, in the phys_World I have switched to multiple scattering, but the step lengths are enormously short (please see the output at the end of this message). Is there anything I can do about it? It would be great if this feature (the possibility to switch between the Coulomb and multuple scattering just in some volumes and just for same particle type) could be implemented in the official Geant4 code. I believe this option would be interesting for many people. With Best Regards, Kamil Sedlak 243 4.99 mm -2.54 mm -1.48 mm 407 keV 350 eV 1.51 um 432 um phys_C1 eCoulombScat 244 4.99 mm -2.54 mm -1.48 mm 406 keV 587 eV 1.89 um 433 um phys_C1 eCoulombScat 245 5 mm -2.54 mm -1.48 mm 406 keV 239 eV 2.17 um 436 um phys_C1 eCoulombScat 246 5 mm -2.54 mm -1.48 mm 406 keV 30.6 eV 131 nm 436 um phys_C1 eCoulombScat 247 5 mm -2.54 mm -1.48 mm 406 keV 38.8 eV 805 nm 437 um phys_C1 eCoulombScat 248 5 mm -2.54 mm -1.48 mm 405 keV 601 eV 2.3 um 439 um phys_C1 eCoulombScat 249 5 mm -2.54 mm -1.48 mm 405 keV 8.94 eV 717 nm 440 um phys_C1 eCoulombScat 250 5 mm -2.54 mm -1.48 mm 405 keV 58.8 eV 569 nm 440 um phys_C1 Transportation 251 5.42 mm -2.52 mm -1.35 mm 405 keV 15.8 eV 455 um 895 um phys_World eCoulombScat DEBUG 3log_World boolCoulombProcessIsOn=1 !!!INFO!!! musrSteppingAction.cc: Deactivating coulomb for e- in volume log_World. (First time occurence) 252 5.5 mm -2.47 mm -1.32 mm 405 keV 3.48 eV 103 um 998 um phys_World msc 253 5.58 mm -2.41 mm -1.29 mm 405 keV 9.38 eV 103 um 1.1 mm phys_World msc 254 5.63 mm -2.33 mm -1.26 mm 405 keV 19.7 eV 103 um 1.2 mm phys_World msc 255 5.67 mm -2.24 mm -1.22 mm 405 keV 1.33 eV 103 um 1.31 mm phys_World msc 256 5.69 mm -2.14 mm -1.19 mm 405 keV 29.9 eV 103 um 1.41 mm phys_World msc 257 5.69 mm -2.01 mm -1.15 mm 405 keV 18.7 eV 142 um 1.55 mm phys_World msc 258 5.66 mm -1.88 mm -1.11 mm 405 keV 37.4 eV 142 um 1.69 mm phys_World msc 259 5.59 mm -1.76 mm -1.07 mm 405 keV 2.63 eV 142 um 1.83 mm phys_World msc

Heavy Ion incidence on insulator Keywords: ion-matter interaction, charging of irradiated matter by Christian Stahl <Christian Stahl>, 02 Jun, 2008 Hello, I'm simulating the interaction of heavy ions (A~140, E~5Mev/u) with a thin foil. I'm mainly interested in the production of secondary electrons. My question is whether a charging of my solid is simulated within G4ionIonisation. I read about the effective charge calculation, so the charge equilibrium between ion and matter, but is this calculation also stored and beeing used for the media? Can Geant4 differ between a conductor and an insulator for these consideartions? How can a time-dependency be implemented? Thank you for your support! Christian

A problem about Low energy EM model! Keywords: Low energy EM model by <yfdeng@student.dlut.edu.cn>, 26 May, 2008 Hello, I have a problem about low energy EM model. After building the code, I run the exe file and everything is ok. But when I set the /run/beamOn 10, the following messages are given and then a system problem appears: msc: Model variant of multiple scattering for e- Lambda tables from 100 eV to 100 TeV in 120 bins. LateralDisplacementFlag= 1 Skin= 0 Boundary/stepping algorithm is active with RangeFactor= 0.02 Step limit type 1 G4AugerData for Element no. 6 are loaded G4AugerData for Element no. 7 are loaded G4AugerData for Element no. 8 are loaded G4AugerData for Element no. 13 are loaded G4AugerData for Element no. 14 are loaded G4AugerData for Element no. 15 are loaded G4AugerData for Element no. 16 are loaded G4AugerData for Element no. 24 are loaded G4AugerData for Element no. 25 are loaded G4AugerData for Element no. 26 are loaded G4AugerData for Element no. 28 are loaded AugerTransitionTable complete At here, my windows system has stopped the Geant4 and given some errors. Please note that my G4SYSTEM is WIN32-VC and Cygwin. Some codes of PhysicsList are listed below. ------------------------------------ #include "G4LowEnergyCompton.hh" #include "G4LowEnergyGammaConversion.hh" #include "G4LowEnergyPhotoElectric.hh" #include "G4LowEnergyRayleigh.hh" // e+ #include "G4MultipleScattering.hh" #include "G4eIonisation.hh" #include "G4eBremsstrahlung.hh" #include "G4eplusAnnihilation.hh" #include "G4LowEnergyIonisation.hh" #include "G4LowEnergyBremsstrahlung.hh" #include "G4hLowEnergyIonisation.hh" void EbeamPhysicsList::ConstructEM() { theParticleIterator->reset(); while( (*theParticleIterator)() ){ G4ParticleDefinition* particle = theParticleIterator->value(); G4ProcessManager* pmanager = particle->GetProcessManager(); G4String particleName = particle->GetParticleName(); if (particleName == "gamma") { // gamma pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyCompton); LePeprocess = new G4LowEnergyPhotoElectric(); LePeprocess->ActivateAuger(false); LePeprocess->SetCutForLowEnSecPhotons(0.250 * keV); LePeprocess->SetCutForLowEnSecElectrons(0.250 * keV); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(LePeprocess); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyGammaConversion); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyRayleigh("Rayleigh")); } else if (particleName == "e-") { //electron pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering,-1, 1,1); LeIoprocess = new G4LowEnergyIonisation("IONI"); LeIoprocess->ActivateAuger(false); //eIoProcess = new G4eIonisation("stdIONI"); LeIoprocess->SetCutForLowEnSecPhotons(0.1*keV); LeIoprocess->SetCutForLowEnSecElectrons(0.1*keV); pmanager->AddProcess(LeIoprocess, -1, 2, 2); LeBrprocess = new G4LowEnergyBremsstrahlung(); pmanager->AddProcess(LeBrprocess, -1, -1, 3); } else if (particleName == "e+") { //positron pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering,-1, 1,1); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eIonisation, -1, 2,2); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eBremsstrahlung, -1,-1,3); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eplusAnnihilation, 0,-1,4); } else if (particleName == "proton") { //proton G4hLowEnergyIonisation* hIoni = new G4hLowEnergyIonisation; pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering,-1,1,1); pmanager->AddProcess(hIoni,-1, 2,2); } } } ------------------------------------------- Who can help me? Thank you very much!

How to force photons Keywords: forcing, photons, interaction by Adiss <adissv@yahoo.com>, 23 May, 2008 Hello Is it possible to force a primary photon to interact in such a way that the particle always interact in the detector? I mean, the particle should interact anywhere in the detector and only there before leaving it. I do not want to do it by increasing the interaction length of a particular process by multiplying by a factor. I just want, for example: 1. 100 incident photons. 2. Only 50 interact (given by probability) the rest just pass through the detector. 3. I previously know that 5 will interact by coherent scattering, 15 by photoelectric, and 30 by incoherent. 4. I force them to interact anywhere within the detector (the 50s only) preserving all the physics unchanged. Is that possible in Geant4? If I can do it, I will just need to simulate for example the amount of photons which will interact and not all of them and I can save some time for the simulation. Thanks in advance.

How to change the fluorescence proportion? Keywords: fluorescence by Sergei Yakimenko <Sergei Yakimenko>, 22 May, 2008 Hi, I simulate photons in a krypton counter. Geant gives me that fluorescence proportion is about 30%, but according to a reference book it must be 66% How t adopt this proportion?

K-Alpha lines in exRDM Keywords: K-alpha exRDM Co-57 Lead Tungsten by Lenny Evans <ltevans@unc.edu>, 16 May, 2008 I'm using a Cobalt-57 source in the exRDM example with a lead and tungsten target, and am not able to see the K-alpha lines that should result from this. Is there some error in my method, or can these not be seen in this example?

Gamma production in bremsstrahlung process by Miguel Cortes-Giraldo <Miguel Cortes-Giraldo>, 12 May, 2008 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ----d8013d33ac9e5d3a242d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear Geant4 experts, I am making a simulation of a Siemens Primus Medical Linac, and as first stage I compared the results on gamma fluence through a fixed plane, obtained using different physics list. Briefly, the linac has a tungsten target which is hitted by electrons at 5.75 MeV. I see that gamma production is higher when using Low Energy EM processes than when using Standard EM ones, almost a factor 2 (please see 500: gamma: Energy at Zstop.gif). Gammas are mainly produced by bremsstrahlung, so something might be wrong in this process. I compared them with results obtained using Penelope, and the total gamma production is quite similar to Standard package. In all these cases, the production cut was fixed to 0.05*mm. To see what is happening we have run a test which consisted on electrons at 6 MeV, hitting a copper target, and we counted the number of secondaries produced by bremsstrahlung. The cut was 1*mm. In this case, we obtain more particles with the Standard process than with the LowEnergy package. The difference is about 30% (please see plots "N secondaries.gif" and "E secondaries.gif" to study the spectra). In this case, it seems that bremsstrahlung produces more secondaries when using standard process, but the energy delivered to the material is lower, so the total energy lost in the process (namely, delivered energy + secondaries' kinetic energy) is the same in the end. Thank you very much for your answers, kind regards Miguel Ant. Cortes-Giraldo. ----d8013d33ac9e5d3a242d Content-Type: image/gif Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="hisPhaseSpace: 500: gamma: Energy at Zstop.gif" R0lGODdhtAK8AfMAAAAAADw8PD8/P3l5eX9/f/8AAAAA/7W1tb+/v/Ly8v///wAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAACH5BAAAAAAALAAAAAC0ArwBAAT/UMlJq7046827/2AojiFgnmiqrmzrvnAsz3Rt 33iu7ybp/8CgcEgsGo/IpHKZASSe0Kh0Sq1ar9isdsvter/gsHhMBjDP6LR6zW673yMneU6v 2+/4vH5vhvv/gIGCg4RCcnuIiYqLjI14fYWRkpOUlZYkh46am5ydnnOQl6KjpKWmZ5mfqqus rYyhp7Gys7S0qa64ubq7WLC1v8DBwm+3vMbHyJ6+w8zNzs8ixcnT1NV2y9DZ2tvM0tbf4OFX 2Nzl5ueX3uLr7Nbk6PDx8m7q7fb3uu/z+/z9Q/X4AgrspM+fwYMImwxcyPBTwYQQI/YD2LCi RVASM2o8SPGix49b/x5uHEmyG8iTKL+ILMmyZayOKWOCXOmypk1KMGXqrEjzps+ff3LuHCqw J9CjSNEIJcq0ndGkUKMSWdq0KrinUrNqLWG1a0OsW8OKvUDVq1ljYMeqFVv2rFtcadfKldr2 rV1VcefqPVr3rt9NefcKttn3r+FFgQcrLln4sGM9iRdLztj4seU6kSdrRlj5smcxmTeL5tf5 s+kuoUerhlf6tOteq2MTfk1bUWrZuKG1rs37ye3cwIft7l37d/DjtYYTf20cufNTypefbv68 uqjo0j9Tt859Evbsl7d3Hz/oO/jH4smr92P+/OH06+Ozae/+L3z5snjo38+/f4v6APbi3/+A BBZIwzwISECAAASoYeCDEEYo4YQUVmjhhRhmqOGG9xEigBkfmtCgUviVaKKD8SDQgwkhptHh iTCO92IgBACAgIpm1OhijDz2GMSMgOhYowAK6Eiij0gm6QGQf6gYIgE47iiEAVRWaYCSWB7H ZFAnKPAhkUd2YGWVFFxZZpZo4rblHwIIkOCCKHpg5gRzKlCnnWnmqdqa8bwz5p1/VnCnnoQO xiccNQIA5YhhXjDoB48WKulah7oRoqI1MsqEnz5EOumnW1XKBo4qQtlDoxZ4yoGqoLaalKhr 1JigokXaiKqgnbqqa6jxZKoArR8WUSpZGrBa7Ji7JgsUrGuwCED/m6dmgICmCkJpgYjEZmCs nMp2S5g8iaKQoAYmjKsAjixSsCCt1xY7xJ/beiuvPMyugUCbDG6ArrlfJjquir9SKwGnSMQ7 78Hm1BtJuLYO3MeQDodo7gQEH2Ewwhhno7AS996I78dgWvAhqRJEee6pC345scMtGJACERdn LHM35wyJ7ssXjFuugqeaTLHAv7pbcKAzF63xOR3fC3KbG+xcax8+Ny30GTEbbfUoG5+xcgdO J1pytFJrm0bVV5eNU6/PltCwyV5zPTUTRJstdylZL+ErCE7/auuXS7IgAdlBAD734G3UvcSH UN54Y9MNe+ls42FjIPgPkxNuOSop+k0u/+SXAo1BKPC6EfrlpAeV+QokbB05npFUXvrrPhju DOiSuA777Xin6Ka66aXgMtiA2I778Kubc/fJvZ+ZQQHMN1/A2MgSL/0/6Lwg5d8aPE+B9hI4 33wSwk9PvOxG3JyC50fQvnwF3nPfPfjixx975uhvqvwE7YPgfhGjy+9/E4JRH/58sD8lhO9/ cyNfElL2MReh4Hd9KOAHJFgwBFqwAgpMH+oadScKdsCDRojbBeOXwSIkamnXY90ASQBCA47Q fyUkgqyIcb/3sdB7Y3uh/GI4BBWpjoPsG0ILYaZDEsoDcYpbHBC3J0ToRa+Ir+OhEMzXpSWu MAhDhB8Uo3g6Ff848AQQtCEW84eGA25RV1JMTg0VkMURtDFwZyxdGonwwyUIUIxGaN8bQyDC OF5tjkF4kpGsiMcl7DFXfjQbIH+AAgJAjJBsTMMhSWDGROZpkalLG62Ap4Q7RhINkxxBJS2J JkyOYIa0miHm6BREUOJwaE8k5cFMKQKIbTJ5rGRiG0IpSllijJbRUEHI7EcnMrKBlyIYpS9h BMwQUNFBD6ziG/QIvlgu01XNFMG0rBUn7EUCmSBQ5jXVk83rrFEQ4ITUOHdVznScMxDGDGEf 15mmdlrCk5JIpzrpSSh7VgKf34wn//jZzwC+0xL6lBxB9eRPDCTxoUpcpTdLkVBHWXP/oTxq qAUYtkGJqpAUFd2AODE6Go1WgKNehKQoQvo2ksbIpBu4VB2N4DtpXoKl2pqnS8k5j3AN06Mj TYJAXbhT/MDUAjebKRIAStEcFlU+R6VA5+hxUJA69anriSryRATRFAb1DNSEJZmwyh2tohRn QGUGThVKVuuY1XoqrcVaHdVWtxo0l8IY6rt0WteS3nWizpgrXfuqpr9+tBmCTRVhC7sXpgYj sbhabGy0KgjHAiOsFuOrZPVC2UBYFrFX3axiOguImnIysKEVrWHl8lm1OnGsqmWtYb9KCMjm 9KKxhQppTYdXbui1jLnlVWOrug3bii24Wdkte4irDczCDbnJ/53tQYwLWOgiRblwaK05qGsn 3Fq3JdilYW/5wd3Ifvcm4aXqePfxW4ud1yfpLRxz58Fd2r53dtKNSH3v+63hrtcg9dUsfzmS X4g4dwn2HfAs4juf+QL4tVRScEIYvAYBI6S9IZQwZwxb3mEE2Lsa5gaFu/lJl3TYwSHGr38L WZIT/zfF2xjxF1PaYgwPFMbV4zBSPgxbHOtGx0dxcXdB7OP8ABkoB05tkdW44hJHRcgJXrJH ZXvFJ4tOysGQcaOEXNwrY/kXWvYol5v7Sqp9GcxHDguPI3xmU4SZmCzOCpQt3ObSpnkrY0Zx ncXLWV2KJcnA3bN37rwWGxNR0JJ4s/8d/ayY/dKJzohOgqI7yejBrBlQkVZvn6ts6UBEOdMD I/Re8vxoIoPaEKLWC6nZempJp3ouqx5sq5f6arkAug2frvOkXc1pzRhai7NOX619/YZct3nX tO61arhs7DMjW9jKHg2zTR3sDzybppVeTayb7eNrFyEUsc7IreEG6Wq3K7l5owC4q7Ntc0cj K/dyXLbinJt2uzt3JZnWRrlJgWGdm9642Ta13e3tvN3sp4ibt5OP82sz35tcJNnXBPqV7pMp PNw2GTeCHw7xjTDMXChLW61G/u+FqwfKHAfgRkbmNJP57ARAqwG7vZzykktEZw1rW9Q6DnDu NByONbe5Rrr/1rPTXpxHly63rllCdKgZveQYl4rGiWrugq8t5CJpAZJQTnCmN25nfHNbtGE0 54FL2er8epxSKZZtpJeZDdwmK9qlCnNrtz1JzG61t6VVgrtvvdh6HzbSAX/qvf9Dc1jKe+EF HyPFg9rwqB67j6YOM7OnGPI/8juaKD8lpd8X80BYd7K4fnbG54n0SwY9IxEPKtQXWfXzk3yh fg6EuK8T9pjQfKsu3W3TS6rsVpIw7uOg+9Z7Wvi+nz373r5xBQ//3bJvfTwdPeDnq62jM6M+ f62PN+YXTfufX63ZwP9e7tudcLw/r/mXZDnXI3f9Yh8c5wPn+Z3CnwP3ny7NVZt//56XjvaU E1z91wSsh35KJlkD+DnTQ34IKH6ww4CLlYAKhzvzl0wC6IDSI1i2t0MYSDwaeIFNFj8fWCaW d00SKHQLWE2xtIGkc4IYhEDu51IuqG4w6H3A9lQzyHYvVIF81FY5yDI0BoMqGHwk9YNBE0cQ OE5GaIQtdoC314EXlIQmCIUWpEc2SEkySIV+FFIsqEhaiISHhlFLyE9cmIUhuExlWIRfeEYA KCglWERjSFJp+IRnSE88aF5KuIbjhExdODNLWIDrxIf8FIdYJYj0RIhPZYh0uGmF2Cn19z+I WFRzaEmRuFOTmEiV6FJ3qGcWlIlkpYiUqIcLBYqYKIoERf+KfuSJjYiFsqSKiXiFkvOG0+OK dYWKOkSLbWWLL4SLn4hIZ8SLq9hLcQSMrwiLijWMppiL+/SLydiL3IKMjQWIhPVGfchOzRiM q5KK15iIy7hFxNhX1KiNdZhb4QiNjGhdGFaNaLSNtdhScMiOynhbRDhC37hZe6SOhVKPknWP twiPn5iO/TiOAwZC+FhQAslfBBmQ5xhiCbmL/rhYDUmPDzmN7giJEwmOFQlDF9mOxyWRB3lf EXlB+kiOGcmBH/leIdmJGxmPrCaSK+mMLamSJ3leKYlAIxlbNWmRM/ldAlWQDKUVdYeCMLY/ PnlJLKFvJ8VvIzdINIhl7fOIhDP/d19zAj9Fci8oaO5TlEnybBInARQHOf52lXuWlTY5Eh9H MQ8jcifjOUyIH2SpkxrBclfndE7nJqojcxL2lhq5ETg3Ljp3KpeyDG0pH3ppkiTRdFPJfljJ iZcjlX+ZdYhWmEbEGHPJM5C5mC82Pl4HcnujloyDfTgmmeIjlY7zLBWncmPJmJZDmqXJLvFX Z6I5i0exdmIJm6oZlS+Jk7c5ODeJkLuZQAEkjQz5m3LTmyBJnF64kykWm9JjnCiJnGXjnDQJ nX+Um6rFnJoZjaA5lNRpNdLJk91pNN+JjuFZNOMJXdg5POeJXOmJO+sZXO15O+9JkpmpnsG5 nctZnn5o/52i5T1aiSTzaV3/6SMBCl0D2iMFilwHmlH8GVwL+lINmlsPykwRGlsTeiJ/iJ9F dqEmkqAOWpbKuaEgupCIxqEl4qESOqJzMZhQxSEu+qIwmgPUE6IhRh8BwgmJgaIIeKNfMaMk 6mw8yhA5WqERGKQLMaQ0qmE2aqSv4KMrKpw1yqRFYVPEl6TCJ6UBgQKhR6SEtaRYighaykhc 2lde+qWQQaXQ96NfVqZm+gho2ndW6nzJcAAH0KZWEKaxp6ZYxqZaMAAqUKdSAKh64KeCSgcA EABH+qb4pqdnxwsBYAIBMAAD8KgAMABQcACHigiEegeZOhB4mntxWn100Dx1gP+pqWCql9qp gwoAhQoKiOqpinp+jJp6c+A9dOCnlioFjwqomPqqq9qqZeCrWRqrijmrr0cG7XOrqhoFgOqn J5CrpnoCwlqp0cqquvqsm/oE1bqsleqsueqsh9qrifp0xbqikdYXyWqo4VoFB0CpA1Cnpiqp zuqr0jqpJiCokCqpJ8CrJiCvkAoFKWCp3gquwooPn1qlxtptyGqrdFCtkdqq4uobqWACAFup UOCnr4qxqWqtCUCxUeCxHWuxFfuxy2qwxPqarAWlSlqrpHoH4LqvqeqrdCoFIAuyvvGqNpsA u6qtrVqzmYCrzFqy93CwaWquiManXdCuMJsAEcusB2D/r4eQs52as9l6qU9LqSMLBTv7sQU7 tCeLf2NaV0j7BY/6qk2rsyiAtTdLszh7qhyLttJas8L6qFMgtPZAtHCasDg2tlWQs1nbtJA6 syELsAU7tamQrYELqHIbBVtLuOMaFzpapPnwtiSrrZ16toO7tlwrsdcKryW7uBcrspbbtXf7 tcVDKee6C87aqo8KrZ2qsaEbtYWbsaIbsp4rrM7quBvLuHbrFKbrf1QmaHxbBZR6qFB7CKYa AHXar3RavLr7vIELropLrUoLurHbvP8Kq+SKsqh7tMbwsv16rZm6rU8rsp87t/XKseQLtB3b tS+LuV67vWAbqts3p8BqBYIr/wb3y7NfkL9C+ruoabTCa6fsgLeLKsB7NrwEHAYGLKsIrGsL LA4NXK7Bm8ARHA4TzL1qwaLxocAXjBoArID0+3kf/A0ZPL96C2MeXMJacMKnu8Gpy8LU4MLA 270DLMPTQMMBnLIaGqU4nAw6LMIpfHk/DMQhPIE2bMFFfAxBjMQw7L1LjBZHLJRsEcNRvAtN TMVhwcFZpbq1K8NZXJsVDMG6wL4/HMZNOcQ+nAtmjMNorINqvLJhAC9VQgZtDMZTLMZJTMZg YABV4MdjcMeBmrbNWrs2W7VS8LK46wTFW7DVu66WW73fKq3iesd0mwtvHGojXH5iAMhT4Mlh IMgbG/+plHq715u1UzCwagu33Zq9TJuvq2u5KFCn7kqwnFu5mJzHafzAx9bJf2zHX0yygoqq mQu3udq+VEDMT8C+q1zM97q7r/y2Z5u9jSvKeKHLcMzLQDrHvxzIwTy6nZsAiKu2iKy1lJu5 rcu7pqzO0czOoWu2qnrJuSy/LzwWXExOvkwFoAwG1lzOQIuplgrQlyzPNGu88pq7aFuoO4ux B22vAc2tbkuvsovF2KzJcXyl3KzPwHzM4Ry0bSvOTrCpvesCT9C4CQ3SLPDQ03oL8Wyt5dwK mXyEFy2nGf3JG10F/iyydEu3AI2p++u37lzSLv3N4IzKRf3KiArUrBDTkdv/pfls097M0VFg yepbqYZL0B19sYBq0juLuU971Cf9zsLcu6vA1GHrg51Mx/v8BdZczO1csRxLqaQry0ErB1zN sc/8t8uqzCG7yCYNFxUt09q8pl68ArRLrd7Ku4eQ2FbgruUb15S7tfH62K5bsHLdyAW9wpkN uWctd4W9Ahu7tLGLy1cAvoJ618McsDGbys+KuenMC2a9yerXDvtLBv7bv7V9BQB9rUwc2E1N plKKyH9N1kvt252NVZqdEqYKrwgtzrEsxfRcw098w0wKvpngrsgQ2zMtql/6tO8aqN+d3cYt 29+V3FcssdG9wy2BlOqilFpMq+c9uektxDVhcChQ/5XZzMfx7Qravd4nkHYMcpoWrcT7zd/j 3RJn6TA8g9+Crd8FXtYHzhJy+S9Fhw33TB4xmuEavuFaJ6Yu0ZeWmZhOfLQcXuImniFbil45 V+GfcyCvd+IwHuMQkuKEseJ0Sd+PJ+M6vuP7QeP1XZlPg+OzZqIyAl9f15kMfuEwQuTdoXp5 EyISI+StxuRlZeQTM1Ut3sNfRuV2JRVKpeQnwuXV8dsf2pzHLVpi/hxkTsGelWiRoDAzoir1 AudvXufk/W12Xghz7ua4Jt28ped5Xh73GYTyBeiBXll8Dnd+vlyH3uaGvt2U9uiEsOeNHmhS /ueTXumYPsaOnumazuiSrv8Gcv7poC7oob7HnW7qp25npE51I17qqh7riH6Q71Dri97gerzL Wmzr6p3r+e3rA77rt87rlx7swI7rx07sr35YyT7szt7rv67rwg7txi7t1h7t2F7t2Y7s2y5c xc7t2h7u4D7uyj7t307uz/7t5d7s1I7u7e7u6l6S8L7s637t4l7v9j7v5k7v6c7v7w6UmoPv 997v+17wx67v7B7v7S7wCJ/v+sDwDD/qC0/wCe/vE3/xCp/xFr/xnO7wFO/xGM/xBw/xH7/t JB/yBl/xKV+fJ6/xKz/wJQ/zLq/yNA/yjNryIm/zOW/y9SzzO+/zL9/wPB/zQl9dNT/0M6/z 743/80HP9EcP9JTC41I/9VR/4mp99Vif9Vq/9Vzf9V7/9WAf9mI/9l0fdGZ/9mif9mofR45E m6NSP2zgSHDfBm2/MHPPD9tklu79B3XfJALT91tMlXoOOW9gPm7PBOZDCG0TCF0FCIF5+BzT +E2CVn5wcFxiLpa/FU+CLYz/36X1LPcy3530LIly919UHpT/Bv7SIpW/ApAvaaAfduyBKZzf Bl3pOAFO+LplK4vvBwkOBy4n+knANLXC4IUT2HTEIvjy+X5p+hzzMchvCDfu+1jnBr8fcsb/ E8F/KBNOCDv3+c5vN4oi/AvkmZ9fJOHvQK8P+w2ScNQPJt+PBt2PPCLu/+UsDgggjvrZH/fp gv8rAgFATVrtxVlbAcRHNnEkJwRA07BkW4sACHduU4/GtVNSYD7HrVArnwkFRCaVS8zO+GMC h1FkB0qlEawrbA0QOnZnNpRMXNoJEMWzK9xm+VRwEkogp2+mvbAz/wcc8fML1Psq1JhDFCFc 5FPb4XKc6Ahhm4yc2JucgDHjpOh7w0yx4txjawRdjRocXd08fV3likW0IvtkVbBF3OtdBF4k FB6eDdzzu9xlTpqCEWguBtxidr1C1PqwumvmjQEt0zwEVeW8Xu2gvJncnOqI9pbH4Z72JScl ww62s5PeR0QMnyMf3FhB++fBX7h+A+9xqedw3v9EErh0sbJHR46NXTbiMTvGTyE7UHI+gupw MV0pVjsywollkeJMF5Jo3gyIEyVLa80qzbOp85xQokWNHkU6I2hSpk2dPoUaVepUqlWtXsWa VetWrl29fgUbVuxYsmXNnkWbVu1atm3dvoU7k8BcupLmavxAYKkjBH39VpgbNLBVuoVVCjVM N+5ixlL1iQLIRN9JWRzHpajgkapLMje7WeBsWUfkxqVNt/Mw16C5KFb0+jh8b1s81+IUwIM9 dUdimvAwGMY8mvRp4sVhglsnwckam2v0vhhcwXlm5LfZ9VXAHHR0wM+l35W+9ATlb5bChEGY HXuTu+tNcF8PfjoF7OD/e1x0rsu99JDxVXJXrwcuBsNuv/268w4BePZKjgvnBozlwfCy8844 Cy9kwTY+lGuIJH2eSOETMlZwLagOf/iwk86S0/CYgtR4IkZ0rCNvQxvMIIO2kcqwDJobbSBx xHVUYo1GIEF8ozPOTPFtnOZysS6431pU8sbLFgqNJAy35JI6SArKzo41nvGgrymm8GPBS3Ks ZYjcfDATnN3S2DDOUPbBxR90ZvTkgjldozHOEEoMcbcN9SpUzyHotI7Ix3SMgdEyFGQnRBlU wIONZcZ57Yg0YgNTxWgygQ0MN8VxaczqumT1wsd4EOjJQ+y46Bd8NiIHlVnEaVK7PVISAVg4 /wXaMMYNmvwGv3fYaVJY9J4lD9kMsmSWnSLW5MGdH9hYNjZjpeVPyxLDNbZYQsBtNV3TSsmL viSR0+JIXGWg9r/g3hgkz0tXvZKnEiaFLExYQ6IAWE47yXNQ5Ax2Nh5Nr8uzRnIxMPjax8Zx d9swfAsJ13UklvJOnpTB19M3NlU35cU0nDjZKBG9FcjdCjN14mSOKBVYg72kuQVgA55RA2R5 BfgQhhcGJz2lb5gzPeEyMNgJ2ArDuNxUeKyR1jS1FHmpeBXl4ZLlTiZYZbPVYjnjO/cV4hAt 1i6vExxJMsXlYg0W52oJbIvuQCf/JjOeZT/yGjK2/z7ajIZFZbxZkv/ECylqk2EFbxTbpDwS tIBpvKCaF2A0F7IgOSQH3bNPTyvtcsUJEVBLyYyhblwvtwNQ1wD9ZiQZYPP8mIjCbmh0z01/ bN875kh8yEcYX37qhXbOWB+FzfAjxIVGmV3jkGgNziDqHqM0hty+6Yabalz64CXU1/dKdYHh Rt9xRaLcZN61QxQ5BsgWshGfyP2lny5k8rEmbAFV7LpB8hq1PAam50c8gB6SjiS5H+DiI68o yDL49wLryWl+udOHDCJWsIVsZAW7+SD7VKguBungAmXbQAtbsBcaosE9m5ChUWRYIafFzYVN CESRVjhEIooAhklJg6rIgilU4eEmQixiFKVI+I2r5IlfXwmNw1I4EShO0YtflMpfzuIXSfgN jGdEYxrVuEY2ttGNb4RjHOU4RzrW0Y53xGMe9bhHPvbRj38EZCAFOUhCFiICADs= ----d8013d33ac9e5d3a242d Content-Type: image/gif Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="hisGmPrimaryHistosUA: E secondaries.gif" R0lGODdhtAK8AfMAAAAAADw8PD8/P3l5eX9/f/8AAAAA/7W1tb6+vr+/v/Ly8v///wAAAAAA AAAAAAAAACH5BAAAAAAALAAAAAC0ArwBAAT/cMlJq7046827/2AojiFgnmiqrmzrvnAsz3Rt 33iu7ybp/8CgcEgsGo/IpHKZASie0Kh0Sq1ar9isdsvter/gsHhMBjDP6LR6zW673yMneU6v 2+/4vH5vhvv/gIGCg4RCcnuIiYqLjI14fYWRkpOUlZYkh46am5ydnnOQl6KjpKWmZ5mfqqus rYyhp7Gys7S0qa64ubq7WLC1v8DBwm+3vMbHyJ6+w8zNzs8ixcnT1NV2y9DZ2tvM0tbf4OFX 2Nzl5ueX3uLr7Nbk6PDx8m7q7fb3uu/z+/z9Q/X4AgrspM+fwYMImwxcyPBTwYQQI/YD2LCi RVASM2o8SPGix49b/x5uHEmyG8iTKL+ILMmyZayOKWOCXOmypk1KMGXqrEjzps+ff3LuHCqw J9CjSNEIJcq0ndGkUKMSWdq0KrinUrNqLWG1a0OsW8OKvUDVq1ljYMeqFVv2rFtcadfKldr2 rV1VcefqPVr3rt9NefcKttn3r+FFgQcrLln4sGM9iRdLztj4seU6kSdrRlj5smcxmTeL5tf5 s+kuoUerhlf6tOteq2MTfk1bUWrZuKG1rs37ye3cwIft7l37d/DjtYYTf20cufNTypefbv68 uqjo0j9Tt859Evbsl7d3Hz/oO/jH4smr92P+/OH06+Ozae/+L3z5snjo38+/f4v6APbi3/+A BBZIwzwJSECAAASoYeCDEEYo4YQUVmjhhRhmqOGG9xEigBkfmtCgUviVaKKD8STQgwkhptHh iTCO92IgBACQgIpm1OhijDz2GMSMgOhYowAL6Eiij0gm6QGQf6gYIgE47qjklFRWwGRQJyzw IZFHVumlklf+IYAACS6I4pdo+hjmMyiQleabMa4JR40AQDniP1AmaIGccPaZFJ9thFhnjXdi kEChCkJJgZNkuunno+oBugaOKkLZgwYm6LkAjixOkACDHzoK6ajWSapGjQnWWaSNhp6g6ZZ0 aiqBirJKYCqpuGp0KxqELqBqqBfQmekElw6pYI7L7JrrspzJwyL/AGNeasGHlM56aZS2ikjW gcx2K5eyZwjrqqHZ6kmntSKB6+26rCE4JoMdDLtqH9hyoC67+HJzLyHynruptBu0kO/AY+1b xKc3vqswl02w+m8f/tpL8MRzGUzEkJymELDDvrK65ZIUh1zwOQh/uvCYG7/6LMcBF+CyyyLH /Kc8tcbLsqCIYsqCzDwTFo+xQtQcMAUF9Gx0TRYb0Ss9RB/tNGPyfJjnjUIjEUrRT2dNWYo7 o2HA12BnqfXYBiV9cNeoUGAA2WyXLVgoa7ct9zxmE4EwBUamPUHcc/d9Tt1DLP2wlBLw7ffh 2gAOxAsuomCA2IhH3g06GaeQcxJwS655/zOKB1EpMWpvLnowndsS+uioz1J6EAsuTPgChqcu +yir/4A2E5nPrvt1P7PoulKOQ7778Pz2XrXehROvfCS1k0Ar6HsvL70gzZMgNdU3vh779NzP x/UK2ncvfhvVi1C58EvkPv76yFccPMDsxz8VP8crob78+M8ftYh5t799/gDEhLNOQACg+S+A CLQd14ikKvjZ73QJjCAIyhcCVPmqQRY8oAQ3GK/eMbBBDsQcBDlIQlGhYwUMw53aXvayErqQ giE435mS1zQXkhCG5itg/Y6QgsddCms23CAOeRe9GgZRgkNMxwgXAMQjJjCJlrgfE52IxLct sYlUBCAUKwE3sP+BLYtPpBz2xrhD/WHgf2Bk3xaDxbguXQCNaRzfGi0gLvC50QJwjGP35sgB QZXxHxrIox6nx8cMCCuF7cPjIPFXSAtk7I9FeIcgF6m8RlIAZ0zLwCQpOTxLPkxEZGycHTfJ Sd15so4qeJ0iSynHc6BSY3esAClZmTpPUi+QtBSfLQMhyVzu0YqaZCEWfSm7XQKilxMYJjFR Z8yg4DKZy9xdM9nzTAkoM5qbmyYckGlNbM5Om9A7oxG9OTpwZlKc0CQnM4GJzm6qs5zsfKMX Z/nOsZmTfB+gZz2zdk/veUCf+3RaP4/wuT3lM6CaGygHDkVHRVlJVQb9J0Ilp9CUeQr/BSlc EEStdNCJIq6irZKXlqAVK2td0IQbMIAwr+nRo4GUjijQVLGgla0Q1WwlsWNpS3v20gpQS17Y wlbroHXTGeR0p2Tr6aLKdSx6wW+jFMBpBXSK1JgpdU8O81e9hibRcVbVpSzp17VCuC07ynKq X+VnWB0mVLJGtANHTatA1ypTj9G0g/+cJ0Dl2q2rPlRl0BIpV0ewV74uy69RvRkBPyAwDhTW sLhC7EJL4AOVshCyIZOsEcBiOKpi9rDxDEFnPzsxzUbydpr0KmnXZVozimC0q81XawFJAtjG ll2zNURlVXtb0O6Fs/PsLW7fhlq4Cpe1od3tcfua3NqudLmj/8rtj4YQV+j6SbqLoy5arXtd 4pq1o+nkLpywq0AhVFe8aSKvDxJzXvR+Sb0CNK9eheneKsE3DkmwbX2TdN9o5Je3+41Tc80L 4ACfqL8lKO5rC2zgEiF4gv8Nb4N59GDGRtidE6bwgIMwX/pmGD8VBtkZ2vth8oQYr0wgcYm7 c2KJjXi7K47Uhoug4hhXp8WDXUKNbewcHOvsuwQm2nN53OMZE0GvOybyanzcBDckWcmjYTIG ZvRkKG9GyihNQ5WtPBksv3UNOfUwl6Ns5AtfwLNj1ouXOdoGJDM4zb8ts9eELGY4x/nOf8gj mu2clTVHNRB65rOc6QLo4L6ZzpcVNP/SvJtKOGy5cHpV9KLxPIhHw+6skm6Jn4kVCUvH7rGZ jsembdXpqdZ5lUUMNUlG7atOR1rCqC7cqVXdLEpPQr+xvjSsac2RQfsB15je2zyHzGvS+NrR iG5hqt8I42LT7dhvCPSyc71nZ+sG2k42tITzaGlrO4PVdTsvtzusbG+XA9ymCPPL6Alsc1/b 1pfgNgja7e5vYzvP1YSrtuudDXSXws3Tnje/t+HvWbyasANPnFbG9eV9WDbRCSddVj410izL o9sRjyJLGFoBHToSqpz2B8Az/gvTijRjiJSaxUVOcmBIllMqY5Bg/7XyfjwcZi2HzkjEVddj cUlIyZIIvXP/zsWR/JStY4XEYrE6g3McnOi0G4mexOrUdJHk5jiHunfo2lR0iXgjGNf6Gkye 1aQvScEOb7bYi8cYpEPMrWwGu9rXfsu21zVBH0OxRsJO90TqimMhsunZgWxzcme979vk+gQw +fWWDB3xqrQJJEPukqdDHp/wrgmoL5/dzFee2JxX4W/RLvS5h95q907IyE//QM//ZPOsd7Ga s4L1asde798i/dUtf/vyzn4ssO89qV0PleALv+BhMX7vkb8V5d+e+VrhvfAbn3vC/6SJzr88 9LMizNpPH/drGTXfT799saz++1NOffFnjf7yz+Xxy1d/UqT/fXDr3vzob3j4VZN9/5K7fzD9 l3H/JxgBGHEDuBfeV3/yR3umx3oHqBfjR3QP+H70R34LCHz7Fnr2Z32aUYC0NoGb4YGqBoId CHp0R4KTEYHehoKSoYLWxoKL4YLOBoOKcX5rR4MhmGyHl3A4WIIQh2EGeIExqAG2N4JCWINI 5kUt14PAIYIxtoGNph5OuGJMmBtTWGJViBtYN3BZKBudZYJGSHxSmIFFaGVdGBw2GGpnWB1X yF1r+BwVaE3s12Bv2B2C1ERluFx1yB13eGjutYfW0Ye7NmGAyIYmiIc2VohwaHmI+IRHaCLn lYfHpYjjsXqSKFyU2B1YBH/11WJLF3ejsokZmGGmxXF44/9Qx7IqNfcmWIR9pvaDbqh4n3RX eBN0uLJSrjhOl5hWL8dwIyVzLFNQoIgvlgiGsYVYPEcsb8cwwjiMFCNtk2h0NgJUZvcvZCI0 NbAs0IiJUsdU8+J1I4U+wxczhpOGq0V25lKNsicy5Rhs3Gh3XTc4NsOB2rhEW3iMitdWVicz 7ThCu/hO6KiMeEeLORYy/ShsSpgBuDhRASkBgTdzTcaPo7hEavePcdSQDvmJ9nJ/7EiEDehN 9zV54zg3lviR2JSJ3XKPg0hOKMks21hPUAhLcvOSAPmIz+iRCNWS9aiQDGmTE0OT6qSTucKI PTl69Mg25giSPuk0bRhBQkkwTRn/RmIoOlGJQE85MFUZQDHZJqjzhbhYbpR0lfnyeBZplUt5 NCp5ZqwklsT4AWWplWdpNOX4dG+pRXHZMwdJQ0C4SGzJLpbHiU60leI4PIB5RH3Jj35omHfZ NnGYRYeJlmu5mH6TgGn0mHJpki8kmX0jg/FjmXiJmSXkmTzzaY0plWrGkbtzflkZOaL5NKKY kBzUmk6jU6spN7J5NK3IQs7HIbzZm76pA7T1exzUihRpOwHCE8FZMSW0kAFnnMfJEIlxmyQZ Sc8Jncn5LXqUlPFSnQsRnZo5PJvonNwZEN45lSQUnus1nkUxmBBmnsPpjtGgnuTJnhbmnhuE npggn/jA/5Xr9Z27g59xoJ/3wJ/xdZpHiUAAGp8C6hT0SX37F0cJyhXIcAAHsKBWQKD4ZZ8S FKETZAwDoAIVKgUhqgcfOqJ0AAAB0J0NCn5qwWqT8Zpf1KG7EAAmEAADMAA0CgADAAUHgKKI UKJ34KMDgaH+paERRJzNiSl08DJ10KOp4KQ8KqQkCgAmCgopOqQruo7YCaHNpk+FIUx08KE7 KgU0GqI9eqVTWqVlgKbzCXcsOjJcOk5eSgYrFaZSGgUh+qEnMKZOegJsqqN9SqVkuqdA+gSB eqc6qqdjqqcoeqYq6qZa+qBphKR6uSR0CqYn2qhVcAA5OgAV6qQ3qqdo6qc4av8CI1qjN3oC ZmoCoVqjUJACO6qojMqm+5mlBSmpYMScsjaHxHKpLNSkKGCjVeqovpEKJvCqOgoFH3qlyxql gqoAxxoF0QqtyYqs0nqntQqpt9qiy/RkX8qkd8CoqhqlaEqhUjCt0+obV5quClCmhlql6JoJ Yoqn2Dqgtoop/jk+3joNnDquCkCseHoApXoI7Cqk7FqoPCqwOWqtUOCu0kqr9qqt+GqkTrSv 1UCjVwqw7Rqs6EqrBvukz7qxftqxUUCjU1Cv9kCklEWxR2SxucCuDAuwNWqu1PqqHruuqVCo MxuiJNuwIauujxoX0jk6LgsXPxuzQqqxNQu0D1usg/r/qdjas08wr+QatJ0nnLlUtK6gp1VK o3wqpM2qrFLLtFRbrFDLpnpqs/SaCRhrtb5XE6Y4AR4Xkb5Emkn4NfThBTmKogN7CE4aABXK qhS6t2rbtMUKuIzKs4Dar2OrAFzLuBCbsvdKt0jDMShHubT0aV71OB6qAmPqsz56qAJbrVHL pntro88qulRbr+KqtBErtJLni7ACkSOZue64iXkbBjSrBburu1bQu1sAvFgqsZhLEsmYLT6X fsSkubDGuRa6Dirbni1xdHoSVGTlolZ4u7KUu88bpJOrvC0xdWVXdeCbtdqrNtzbvZjxvau4 EVQHjkwnA1TEvHvpvOr7DdFb/5+EMb7w64ylRL9ThL73exXsq3/5OFPYgL1aeL57k74DPAb5 66CyOCx5F78ymZ10ub0P7A4F7L/wmJGBxTJ/hlC4u8HVEMFvumqKpS3lW08lbMLTgMKRehQ7 pMDc8cIwjAwyvK0Fg5qDhMM5jBYdPMJY68IaHMTHsMMTW8TvBMRInA9DTHnKScJH/MS7oMTF 26I+rEcrZb+4ULYwjMUtjKst5cVbW605LMbtu3BfZcatAMYmrMYGDKdI5cZccLcGQAZwvMFy 7MFs0cZtkcdUIMhisMdrO7NTi8ZLm8hqmsh+GgUfKrLYyriaaqhU2qmO3Kg+Cscm+7JRXLvh t8X/G//IVUDIYWDIlsy3OXq2YhuyMOvIN7qwT7C3qSqlf1vLq4oCFdqps+q01wrFxDvG3FpV BUDKg6zHinyuIQuli4zJTCui6Uq1suzL1DqizOyk1oyoQuqwjpvMrNDHRDzFSFXMYmDKUWDO X4DKSuuuOivLCFuyRxutXgvPrEzP/5qu3NzNGSulnezJwbzGffZV5BwG6PwEBd0FqPzO3byj PcrQOtrJ/azMNhqqabuxJsrOfEvR86yx7CqzBBu5qwDOUryl42zMU3DQXIDK+XzPONvN3Ry4 IO0Cs/yzGM0CDv2nt8DPgqrQrSDSoKzFB+pLAw0GB43SW5DQRyvNTmCyDd3/o428yFSQzxj9 uVPA0SBbrj76yt/8ya3GskJt0lJg1FqA1FRt0ZYctjXqDSvtqTN90YKqtAJryab7s2Frtii7 1f88x39MzIF8t8hc1r/srNf6rDkK0vecCcws1c9qqoGtscx8uJCMokfrCj7d1Uw8UUP9xSzA rIKrqPB8CJ5tBZ06uoRN06nb2awq14OKoqerzA6sBZU9tOOT2WfMAs7qr60c2FcgriGr2NmM Ap/ruozqqdg6z7wQ2/m6nK/dpHogvF3g3FnQ0IOaxFwt2+JD28f5zit91z1d3Yx2weqE3QGC zf9a0Y7LtdSd134cFja8HuIdILzNtqmd3rDr1bn0/97HKbBsjaf7Td9XK847hd9WjBfebd+0 JOADrgwFftkkvNwJXgXIbeCshOAPDhgLDuAtReEV7ggRzuABVcy/GeIiPuKiDNB0UeKU1H0d Q+Is3uIY8t8kLVdr4+I0XuMRAuNk3MYrbuM83uM8gOPDzFcAXJtTYt3xM+RtY+Tsg+Rso+Tr w+RJldwt645EDiZSHkRQbk9XbkNZrjXSeSu7AuaSIB5dLubMc+aF8OVonuZrznYpRuXrHU5u Xh5tXn1ReE50Xue8NOZe83SxY+ZsHuhzHuN1N+iFnueCjmzhfOiI3uiMnuPHpOd7nuiO7mRx jueVHumUDunOtOmTbuifrv/oIx3qmd7poE7Hq/gOqr7Eqc7qem3Z7bvqWTzqi77esi7MtJ7r P63ru97rsP7qUnTrrT7rvi7sr/7rtu7qyU7syF7rzs7r/2fsy47rxa7sz17t1g7t2Y7t1N7s 2s7s0j7tw16+f77t3s7t457u6i7uwG7u4f7t3b4V747u7Q7u7n7v+N7t837u/L7v/m7u/Z7v JlTu9l7w+i7w637tAW/wCQ/vJh4V/87w9X7wEh/nEU/xGN/w9M7uE6/xsE7wGd/xIs/xJO/w I6/wF+/x8o7wJb/xKM/yCr/wId/yMu/xKW/zAg/yOF/xL8/sNX/yJk/zN3/pfebjRn/0SN/j eLz/9Ezf9E7/9FAf9VI/9VRf9VZP9fmX9Vq/9VwvMnNLCHH7BwV0OX7w9YNQQBtxKGSPEGYf JKgIB2FfJG+/cCeASMckwm5QOSKpBJVDCBEDCKEECIKC921ARnufBH0P+BiFJZpyuVvxJCys +LQ7H0TVIncPjGtPPuqNOeDtBrFi+XC/AofPQ5VPkMQwKJHPBjC3eCQ1+XzBKn8/JzHVJOro ByizKnZ/+ptPUL5z++yRVZmPBiYTLbt/Wv3r+QiM/L44U7lPw7UPB9QL9sVvNSD3BoQy/Rdj +lgi98xD+JrfICpX9ne1VWoQ/fJI/klhvXIivqNvP9ov++9f+CvCJ1sy/ybtfzYpcP9HIDh3 3ym0DwFgLQLkxFlv3nmaLJCypqT0UnVlW/eFvfOaY9sVbz0V0P3XEHqAEXCX8xmPFiZBqZsJ EpXLc2n9UZlF7Msi0Ha9xAnVlBSn1c/aor0ec+Gq7Tz2tnMq0pk8v+kBMfv7yFkwJNQDcEr0 QMFrPPtCSzQchIzMhGvD1Dwk8wyhDC1CjBxismAMzTCNNHTNjM18m6Ud/TNsG2TtxcrZ8xX1 axwivqXB/RMSaP5a9VUNlf48JuxElmTtmegR8ETM8RYmNxoyJrf9m0mtAp8E+BZWvvZRz6M6 7w2eh5d/j3dvDqJzAssdVIEKWi+DcLSkisbkX//EiAHj7ZPoq8fCbRlZsQOlyZRChCWhmETp y1pKQqgmfiQXCOFKlpFo1sSZU+dOnjZu9gQaVOhQokWNHkWaVOlSpk2dPoUaVepUqlWtXsWa VetWrl29fgUbVuxYsmWbMgNjg8BativXXnuLYcqIuGrmZriLt+6KKWz9otzbIrBZwoUNu2lH r0Pii4XczeG1YFw1FUJ0TBa1kIkLVO1QNpSr+PBo0libTNk8BoyWY2mXJZlsOQU/G5g/QdPC scMQv4PThWSRwHVp4sWvDsGbIwHdVXvDXVzuhgCI6G6oTzeBPUNbudcXIECQATwJd5Orl1lb BB2G9Bu4d2ucuRVEvMT/bM8enFevdrntu0tf6C5E+ioiuilM4MK//vgzrkEHd6KGA29SeQiD 576ZMJ424InHJUk8yhABH8yIbDLl2nHiIeraGQGkReCbKMIaTBnlPkUotDCVUnAUxaNPOsOg sxNTkSfD6R7xrMfUHmSyyZnU4Y2dI1+8bTl0zuEDhS1YG8Qb1C7A8jb5HiJyGMpqEE6aKNIk Y0gY51tlHNtqZIwjYFDwsksRqACBt3x6XE5NVdjsU0M9O0TsgkHHOaFIKp2ENFJN+igDR+Qk w7MxxhytYkNQqHGlDcwGQYFMj5CIZyF+MBvnGQ3mfNTNFYSMMMfhRMkRBEtG0EXLT1/ELFRx /3xA0x4JqGBQUmWXzcMSSxvjh58vmpEiyPg85fVXupLcaD4S5ClRUzLIZETaR4Mh980cy1Vl rVp3i8+DdF0clBI8ULXWiW7NJK8OzGowtc0ymSW44C6+0ECa2KAV175rfc024k9ezBSajSwI j7wMTATlyzsdbS4+FTVeV8kkeYhXBhVn6C3QxxL19pN8MV1l2EUo3RdmZP8yAUiDfwb6BmTZ U5hhcBuW8GFFtTXTWPigEXHJcOUB5h9pojU2RatfpDTRFRfxSxeHX9JjaycsYQRUikEhtYpu L0FV4pyLreIt4dh9OWi9906asUKPBpzfV5XmFxaBwfD30R7/mbrpdsjv1HBiVHp099fE4HsM YZkBYezlZw4VolQOK+3Q8Jklr+OZxFfxdBGEd9acb9lnJ3pgTAP/VvCNCaesd8hL11dx8jIm WV1DOtsRFA+trYP52N9tu+/LNXBRPR1rR2RkXJ/+MPSvgac5NLd9fIhs2s/f+6dJBRNNBfWP sea8RtS/5gb40cc/f6Aq101///8HoFboE0ACFtCAUAEP8Q64QAY20IEPhGAEJThBClbQghfE YAY1uEEOdtCDHwRhCEU4QhKW0IQn9EoEAAA7 ----d8013d33ac9e5d3a242d Content-Type: image/gif Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="hisGmPrimaryHistosUA: N secondaries.gif" R0lGODdhtAK8AfMAAAAAADw8PD8/P3l5eX9/f/8AAAAA/7W1tb6+vr+/v/Ly8v///wAAAAAA AAAAAAAAACH5BAAAAAAALAAAAAC0ArwBAAT/cMlJq7046827/2AojiFgnmiqrmzrvnAsz3Rt 33iu7ybp/8CgcEgsGo/IpHKZASie0Kh0Sq1ar9isdsvter/gsHhMBjDP6LR6zW673yMneU6v 2+/4vH5vhvv/gIGCg4RCcnuIiYqLjI14fYWRkpOUlZYkh46am5ydnnOQl6KjpKWmZ5mfqqus rYyhp7Gys7S0qa64ubq7WLC1v8DBwm+3vMbHyJ6+w8zNzs8ixcnT1NV2y9DZ2tvM0tbf4OFX 2Nzl5ueX3uLr7Nbk6PDx8m7q7fb3uu/z+/z9Q/X4AgrspM+fwYMImwxcyPBTwYQQI/YD2LCi RVASM2o8SPGix49b/x5uHEmyG8iTKL+ILMmyZayOKWOCXOmypk1KMGXqrEjzps+ff3LuHCqw J9CjSNEIJcq0ndGkUKMSWdq0KrinUrNqLWG1a0OsW8OKvUDVq1ljYMeqFVv2rFtcadfKldr2 rV1VcefqPVr3rt9NefcKttn3r+FFgQcrLln4sGM9iRdLztj4seU6kSdrRlj5smcxmTeL5tf5 s+kuoUerhlf6tOteq2MTfk1bUWrZuKG1rs37ye3cwIft7l37d/DjtYYTf20cufNTypefbv68 uqjo0j9Tt859Evbsl7d3Hz/oO/jH4smr92P+/OH06+Ozae/+L3z5snjo38+/f4v6APbi3/+A BBZIwzwJSECAAASoYeCDEEYo4YQUVmjhhRhmqOGG9xEigBkfmtCgUviVaKKD8STQgwkhptHh iTCO92IgBACQgIpm1OhijDz2GMSMgOhYowAL6KgUCz4mqSRZKQIQIgE47rjklFRWACQgKCzw IZEkVunllFcCIoAACS6I4pdo+himPGum6eZWbcJRIwBQjtjlm3jKF6cbIdJZo51M7JnnoD4J ugaOKkLZw5ErEOpocIaqUWOCdBZp452PZnpcpGn8uUClH0qp6ai5ceqik062iCmprI5mKhpz opDgqq3WKtmraCQwJoNrhGLAr8AaYOuwauGqGwXCIkvssnCeo+v/jbtGyyUqylbL7LVJGXvE kDiqIOoCyU4QLrbkFuosmbpKO+a344Jb7rs3aavErPSgYMAJEhhQwL77wuvvRvIiMSQxyPK7 b7C//qtwRAFvWyk91l7Q7sIU79PwER9CeeON7GowccUgo3NxEd2m0HEGH4es8jYjE1Fylpim nO/KNJvTMjC+elzzztrcLMSzFBhJrbg682x0Mz4H4akEUcZc9NFQ4yyyCydjIHPUWI+StA8v owDoEjmjnPXYLzX59Zkzi0322loLFrbVbMdtydZKq3vqCfcuWsHVcvcNB90/IOk0ygb36/fh BMMzp92Dw01BAYhHPl88kyaetuMTQC75/+ZDo6MivZMTrXbmnJeuBOA+ZLwxx2ggfHW7mpsu +1RNNopp7BJXgPvsvPuA+ghd6x3o409LsHvvyIPwuymhHB/xAs4nL70Gy3PdRvPFQz/99h1U L8KTQneu/ejGc29+E2yeQMDAt2cf/fnce/+BikRWKjzYxKPsOvz8TyC/B5WrVOXE977c9Y9/ /+vAwOyXHux9gG8H5F0Cu6eCaQ2PdA+MIPwmyIGuoW18HoCgBk3HwQ4kYH2gG0KimITBEI7Q fCU0wgktgEILiIiF5cvgC7cXwyKYgF4ls+CCHmalwoFAhDuUXA9/dgJ6bWlOs1LRp872KR8g MYmIWyIQYnUpCf8sin0s+qENrYhF6WnxBx9CFNMW1bQFbSmFnzrQ88oouzMybXV4hCPTvNjF Oa0RFkSkAFiuSEe52ZGLtmtCH9l4P/SRgJCFZNshX7ABMVqqD03jwCAjKUF+9EmPguxiGxuJ gRZ0AJKcHJsdKxArCyqSXmLckgc2mUoS1s6SmuyilsKoy0qSsZalW+Uub/gBXA4zkL58pBGB eTg7lkxjqyMBKBWZyOIVkJlYmyTVaKXDHGLTkOdApLe46cIWflOSbvulN8+5NmFiSXAbGNc1 2ckzdwZFnSCkpyrT+cj86XOfe6HlOv8ZNXuyB5/zJKjKDPo3eFpToVljqOVEIE+IZpP/nyOo qEWhJlGI9dOcG91ZR6+H0JAebaShy6g/TVozlPbKoeRLKEv95dIPhmB/M20pRoGAypwyq6bf +kFPfUosoJKTokRdmVHFJ9SkLnSnTXUqyJYaKJieUqpThSo+sfovquJPCEPl6qi8erohhFWs mSJrEhJzVrQ6Sq1IYKtbu6rVj871XXA9glzvite6qpSv5cqrEUx5U8AG1q9INSy2BOtDsyp2 sYgt7GN/GtkjTpayATVr4WR6WTQxlnZg1V1nSfXZfzh2paN9a2W7OdDUDqq0hjgtSF2bJ9j+ SLatpe2bbAuEvc5Wt27ibeBwm0/g7tZtVuUA7Iz72tWW87fM//WScH1HXM5Gl0fTxUR1r3vc zIYWtdytUnbjsN3weta5VwWveZc03miUd73iRa9yRQvf+Ho3CMutL5XaW4L36ldJ/FWef/+r JvnGk74ETlKAizngBMdowbNssINPBOHuSXjCJaqwJi+MYT1ppYk45CmCO0zhrOhqlyEWKk5J XOKSzJCVULLACseIhLayWDaMxWUQK5CxFBPBxjdeTV675UQnQbECUqTxEYAcZFeNhIuw7AP7 hLSM3zC5yZuBaxot2bRMqo8scnwultcD11lZ0o8LyGQylzxmDzNmkZgkpY+J2+bu5BjOf5xl ciVbZ/LcOYpflLOSjXDlPg/mz/67lP8sLVxjQ/uZJbgMUYimaaUkFNrRekH0BPpExVLu2bKY 5s54KT3n74a6OhpeM6FPbZ1UU8/SrEa1gUEda+S4mprjjGqtNzVr1u66VL0O4TJ/LeRgpze3 xJ7MrUsJa+gmezHLBnM17VrcZyvb2PN1trWxba5Ga3vbmeb2Q8GtmWgPuggaJfetkDvtvyJb 3XMxd6W9/W54r0Xegmx2ve09Fnz7T9/V5rdc/O1FgFtX4FAheBXpHXCE91vcMXX4feNtcImH O6CfZu3BLf4ThVtZvRz/MMQx1/CQ02XkBty3yZHi8YqvnC0ot0C6Xy7yiaMb5DRnecz3hvOc A6XlDN+4z0n/4vGMi1noQwfYziOG9KRTZumiU7nTWwJ0Nn976lSH+uVKjnWXVH3VV+860bUO LoSJnS9k5/nZO572Oa496zYH+Nu93vaoz53ucWf43SFd963vnTHszjWd/670vFud8IA3PNgR P3bF35zxjb84Ey4N+Wd8XQmUrzzS+u4uzWvk8nL3fEJAr3fRc4bzmTe91Bz/Y9UzDPWuhwjp Dx97g8x+8bX3x+3Rvdncz2P3re+577MBfA4Pn/iwF/7xnaHhL59b7k1ffn5Y8uKgxXgCVC41 7rku/c2/GYgocKWltP/4sHc/GEMGsQSeaMwZz3vyIz4/8jcC5UQryEkTcP/7l5Bf//n3bCRb JkqMFGfoIm0ysFXR539tsxFmhmdptih9UmWtE38K6H1E54Bq9mpn0H8VyHyQhoGCZiVGl1jm 14Fl8315dkkRtoEUaILo94FRliCLtmEsqHwueIIXWGSo0ksaCH82eIPMA4MUwGnFNIJ8JnVA WAqj1l81WIJJeB3J54RPODdRiIRTmA6BZzLlZ4VXWAnFZ2pc2IXeUYXcJ4ZYyHrGZ4ZnKHn8 14JquICZZoS0FoZvWB5kmIB1OFEDN4E/mIeE8IX45YZ+iBN3OIhKWIiGCIfxJoe+hoeJGFT3 xodS+Ih6GIlNSIeUSFJoCIZlmIn3tImB2Iee6FFsiHmCOP+KWIKIqBgJRdduIiaKq2hTljh5 KxaLdgiK22eLqYiLW6iLu1iKaZB6vkhevBh8w/iLFNcGwniMAlaMg8eMKZWMbLCM0MhowCiJ 1UiKi+iKvZiNvcJ5MueNlVgsbkCN4shszsiJ53hUYTEj5riO+7eHygiP35iOoUiP7Ngs84iP +Vhz08iP/ZgV7giQTDWLa/CO/AiIuUiQgwWOaseQa5WFMGOKEBmR9viKFalXDlkww5aRw3WR uoaJHhmPBqkGHDiSxHiNl9iJKOlIKumDk9iS/waSCCiT2kWT1MaSSsQhPNmTPpkDpoWT7iaS hhQgPBGUL9mGsNhMRvkVSCmNB3n/iiTUlAyRGArZi46oSlS5EFa5kXank5FDH1vZCF0plCRI lHEjlmOJGPjykUlJkTHZN2q5lokwkTdpE9WHfdeHjv+4lH4zl3TJB21JXfGiSzvGl1Hpl3IZ mPdglynZEkS2aUZmTPm2j3FZlIzpFIN5lyxRf3x0f+JXcJaJlpKUDAdwAJlpBY7pXi4RgIAW Z9gwkIqJmbswACqAmlKAm3pgm7pJBwAQAFy5mY/pYnw0K2iWgTPZl5eZlrwQACYQAAMwAM4J AAMABQfwm4jAm3eAnQOxmkxIGCAYm2F2j6TZTnTAL3VwnamgntbJnbsJAL0JCsDZncLJmuBp nAOImCYp/5XBNAeFQwe2WZ1S4Jy4eZ3z+Z7xWQYHGhDe2Yz3mYJo9nzYCJZZRAabBaDuGQW4 aZsnIKDqeQILSp0fCp8D2qHa+QQjmqHUyaECyqG/aaDBGYLWWBO4FEv4R35wWZ5k0xcX6psv WgUHMJ0DgJrqGZ0ceqAgKp0moJvPGZ0nUKAmYKTPCQUpUJ0s6qILig8NymCFqYOT5mncaIw6 qpVj0KNzMKLQGZ8w6hupYAJUSp1QYJvzKaftSaIK4KZRgKd3CqdvmqcZqqX1+Z002ktEqJ/B yJ+cUxgGgwcu+qTteaCnKQV6qqe+MZ+UqgAEiqLxOamZEKAa+qeNGagOChWkJv+by1mapjmd drqmGnoASnoIl8qdl3qi1umq09mnUJCpeZqloSqjNPiW0Bc/1uCc88mqmIoCt1qpkmqp62mn xwqik7qgzjkFoGoPW7qCcRimadif+SANeMqqzxmpe0qlWSqrqXCi4Yqb0RoFukquMRoXVymm FMqU3Zqg46oAa2qs93qn5cqsJUqkf7quccqnKFqtmumrqiaPyjmmEVWbS1qiHsqddDqwsNqv T+CpbwqwC8qh7lqn7Gqw7HCtM6qwiXmq5rkLqgqdqlqnAYCaUXqaK6usu/qmLeui6iqiQXoC HUuxMDul9ImwPbiNgqd3WdmwvNCoUVqi2JmirsqnASv/rUm6qinQtAIKqo2qr70Kr17pd0Wb TaZpr0AKtlwgtuLaBWVblaLKpcBKtMKamusgsr8Klfs5m8zptuIAtwlbkodKt6hqt1eRttgq tFqIebWYPIDpt6AAuCOrt+XYtojrDoobtyQLBwgZMof7uKARuXlLjoBQuVOFuZALtC4pt2/g uRVzuaCrEpobtJNbuo6busiAt6x7b4z4jLODurDLBbI7uq3buDyUu8mwu4bKuX9guhSDu8Cb BcKLo/7oB8a7MMibvOOwurzLuKNpuNKLFtQ7vA/Xua/rChibu8srod1bvN/bCuELu+NLksVS u+rYO9E7BembuutbmWu7ksjT/xauEyxkML+gW7/JSbq+Oz36WwUG0L8ESwVouqEJTKm0KgWN urFOkLK5mbK6eZ05y6dYCqPzO625AMCieb8waUZicMBUYMJi4L8s+6oay7O4Kr9R+qq5aqI+ i69NyqFQigKoKaRYyqaSGr9+KrrcC3Pe+7thgMJSgMRgoMJsesF4qqdCurOf2ql8mqw+3MQe a8POaqw+265M7BDby7wCGQjPqzAFfMIILKBToK+Ziq7J+sAzvKly4JxqfKwt/LEAmwntqgAT y6oe/MFhTL5EbL5GDAZKDAWH7AVMDMeeep3V6cge/Mc/DJ1GyrF2jMd8/JuVrKSPrKLNiqQV uwsgvP9wIqyUBFzCBpzGVbDHNuyvtpnJLsurbMoCT7DHbdwCnRyit+Cetyy2YCzEYnxyRXzK R5zKY7DIznqxVTzBTuDIGFwFl/qvmPzFXPzJj7qvgAzMgtyO7kue2FvMaHzMCRwFHSy1E/uc 3sDKQ1rLyZyp+uqqBQu1vTmxTQyyeBHI7Fu+znu+XLC/wKLK0JwJ7PmmdjqdslywAo2ntmyn D4urxjrQbCrBrOwKoxyvoQe/DrsCc/qyLPqxh9DRViCkTVvQ7Sy1IgrSbPycFBzE2qvN+TzI +1zIuIC0KFCnjkrOlBrNMKzDcYzJCN2h1wzBHZrSdZzNWmuWGEnC7ODLYnD/tl/g1FvgyCV6 DBW9tSmn1Fv5wKxsz6tQ1Ugdkt+8lepJpJbMxzhM1fhsvwJ8vflLlzTt0UXdrS6t1r3L1hgd mK66zhqq12g91wFc1wsb1tlr1L1l1eEo04NN0Wn919Yb2G2d2ITtlmvt2HcN2Yrt1yE82SWL 1ZbNCl6drUO7gWYHvz9Z2qZ92t380u0YCWVsxqj92rCdIYX91bZ7u7F927gNIbNdynvLQ7n9 28C9H7ut2a5rk4tLvIPQ2qho0fhr3MEcFZyi3KPI3CPs3EO82oUg3Z5I3aZs3detj4Sg3dv8 N6woCZxy3uZd3oXA3TkqCKaC3ur9h/Et3+s934BN/7n27d75HQjwTd/1/d/+TdwDfIsATuAB rt8FbuAIfuBRkZeMPcwKvuARzt/7/YkJTuEXnnA8SMrJXeEWPuHIKOEiPuIhjuFSEZmq/Q4q Prtu9+AuntnbvOIs/uIcHuMzDuMpfuM1nuM6LuPX7ePkB+Q2Xr10rdo7XuRITuNCzuM/3uNZ 4ZlJjuNRfuQ0fjVLPuVXTuNULuVK7uRE3uVfzuVivuVjnuVl7uVNHuZkbuZkvuZoHuRvPuRp HhWuKedwruZWHudMjqNs3ud6juV/DuZq7ueDHuhnXuiInuh3PueL3uh2nhQNCEeEzuiHTel7 /uiYDuiKnumC7uhGPumerv/pli7qoa7loM7phz7qnT7eHbfhp37pD1nqqS7rs47qbr7psE7q 4/3qup7rq+7rtf7phn7rqh7svT7lP+fqp+3PzN7szv7s0B7t0j7t1F7t1n7t2J7t2r7t3N7t 3v7t4B7u4i7u3Exq3o0nlHnuj5Lu6k4oxlRDf+DgRbKXa7A+ZwPvbYDvemnuSrA+MMbvR5BH 1gfwMuTv/84GeQQ6+l7v9K4gDd8pD7/wTCDvEi/xfHECoflS4Ifxh5ICr8kiCD+4h8kGETry DqKFJo8GEfjxN5orK5AgKX8GL5N/4dfxHP9HIH8qG5/zD3jzSfEkxNQGKL5LDMLua+UkugKB k7n/4WCz9CPCfkxfVZAA9QTPRKmyLkR/ZJ3yQ6pC9WmQLmPSll5/8mSyaGN/JOtDTGc/L+qX 9ZbEIlrPcpcSofUuK/ZnKRkf8PkZR6C5BlgPRlLW8ncDCYGW9wIj+J+J9ydvnCNS+PXSgH1/ 8ino+LASaH1A+f1u94k/ME0zg0DRZZidOjbCZXsf8mYA+kByQ6hf98dZ+ip/9a+Zgkcy7zQP m/n+MKt/8g3SY7l/BuwTJb2fBHXe83mGZnT/E8GvBpF+f7Z/PfjX+i+yOMwv+zK/IoHf/IN/ Q9D/9SpQJq5/Ktj3/ahw89vv8tevgsS/BMuP/lFi/KF/EMk/H+HZBqpS//71/qX2P/6Ucv7p nwZpBAGLACDpWuli3v0HQ0wDhGSq0HETW1ecCE7N2Pd+UQpIrKr+4YQhikDnWwWHSwylhwRC aUxq1XqtkpJYrBND03KHuyfYJhZqzUp0aGIi9dZtpnNOF8WbvDu+5f3aCPMj+lETPCPkICm5 6FPkAJyjmYK0vFwKG8QEAQyrxNzp+Ey8fFpwImWDFNhxJVDlLITdALUETK0thdyMlR3M/bHl 1PIN5dlCoiyRbXb+8Hp79gBERW4VaG5F7vDCbtbc8GbmJBA43zay7vn+ZfEaz5alkFm3b5eV 7r4mJ0b8iaftR7uAnKoV3NCq3jSGmNJVY1jtIf83TIxcYZh4ymCRIhg5UnTGImPIj/JG5ivp sRFIhwAWqtym8dhKkx9l3rIJEyLOUycnNgTakl5Qexy2uWym46JKpM9cyWP6kmSHo1I5HYW6 oOozHVm3Omt18yvYHV53WLVkUePYY2vPUiVDVK6im3MX2R0VtG4GvHeB7t1LLETgv3oH9x1h FzBixo0dP4YcWfJkypUtX8acWfNmzp09fwYdWvRo0qVNn0adWvVq1q1dv4YdW/Zs2rVt38ad W/du0+bOoc1BQLhwwsKdnXh5ogzwNspHwfKAPA30RdQdGx/inPd27t2zuBK1BHxHEJswVSLI 8oM5K/isSQ1/I6bRpo7/d7rQ513/fv6R6J2ID4cihIsLBHWSsqEd9lrIjwn3hprhLfniUwiy +1pI4MD+NuQwt21G8SKB5WZ46SBmRMwAOhQz6EE77Ui0DsUTFkAAgQ5qhMIjeVb8gjj6QPLR g+F66ue9fQJk0UAJK/wAOaterO7JIEdo0boRoKtmyEWqpLKDKa+0skMxx/QMQiWPcmmpoqzJ BpsiwvioBKySKEtHChBgQQX0yAkRPBmUahG8Jyxq6sH6tICoFDQ9skopbgg90kzwdowzCDT7 fGqPbQiktM491CQzVFEp0yOETRmhpan/MhxHThHFsYMMGrABcKAisoFwKEc9hQeZYjYFwoT5 /zDVcZ+FvjFUSRTarM8/OfgsgVWAoqVB1qEYqfVZl7Bls9ZPz7FAnv8qlKbUUc9FF7FSlZLh Q60SgnZSlRaB9YlcWQoDn2qFGY+8XjUMpCaovhnQA0MXIvYFheJgch+AgalgEBXzvKDUoRre Cc5+pNHnkG3TBTlkuyR55V159NHn1nOIhEpje7kheamGrQk3ECXS01bClOvj2M9i/asHheHM FKHChxoV1AdBzcuxmHeQkpQbR/dYSJpLYfVUZK233igrIxUkZ+e68HF5j5d7eAvelxS602a4 xH0U0JrfrXpjV7Q19tPxFFZVwugWJWE44piewukghooa7RJSpTpCZv9dEnyGObmmvHI6hI4Q KbBPhnbsfsouqlf/GL1RzT3hlgMqXcN++k/VkSpVj8AF98TzoP2W3FmJ68GFh1I/hLhdcvR4 uvGAoXAuwzJ2sbx55yfslx3WOUf9THqnPdtsNnWQHj7ycjRZ+7NQ0NYEa1aaFvLe936XDX9X odu/ZjU1B9407T8KpvmCD/YoxY2Ii5l2BkBmCG1Zz0NgAm/gqIFN73hretv1tBc6ZHTFaPND gY3cRp/qtc9E3JgcU0CCptdJZV/Kut6TkiZCuBRIaY9qHZ3Ip7RzQI1nw8uUzb6nQB72MDqQ IYyXmIeDIPqlSXkoYloOU56KZGGJPoRiFDtCQ6D5SdGKV8Qid0CVRS520YuwqZEGvzhGMpbR jGdEYxrVuEY2ttGNb4RjHOU4RzrW0Y53xGMe9bhHPvbRj39cYwQAADs= ----d8013d33ac9e5d3a242d--

New recommended Geant4 electron transport parameters Keywords: electron transport algorithm, multiple scattering by Francisco <Francisco>, 12 May, 2008 Hi I am working with Geant4's low energy electromagnetic package. We are mainly interested in energy deposition and we need a good accuracy (as high as in radiotherapy). I have recently changed my detector simulation for another one more reliable based on example TestEm3. My silicon detector consists of some layers: pasivation, dioxide, epitaxial (Si layer of 14 microns), bulk (Si) and the PCB material. I am getting the energy deposited only in the epitaxial layer as for the real detector. I started to simulate with the default electron transport parameters for multiple scattering, step limitation and energy loss fluctuation. 1 MeV electron beam incident perpendicularly to the surface and interacting randomly (100000 electrons). I got some histograms for the total energy deposited in the epitaxial layer. The histograms looked similar each other (for CSDA, 1, 0.5, 0.1, 0.05, 0.01, 0.005, 0.001, 0.0005 mm cut-offs), but the only thing that changed was the height. The taller histogram was for the CSDA and the shorter for a cut-offs of 0.001 mm (but not for 0.0005 mm). I then decided to use the new parameters given by Elles, Ivachenko, Maire and Urban (2008). For the CSDA I got nearly a Gaussian and when I started to increased the cut-offs the shape was gradually changing and for 0.0005 mm both histograms (new and old parameters) were very similar (at least for the tail). I also plot the total energy as a function of the cut-offs for both (new and all parameters). And they agreed within 1%. So the new parameters only seem to change the energy distribution, well, I conclude that from the histograms. Also the tail at higher energies can be attributed to delta rays production. My questions are: 1. Why when using the default parameters all the histograms keep the same shape, a peak with a long tail for higher energies, but when I switched to the new parameters the distribution starts with a Gaussian and finishes with a long tail. 2. The cut-offs seem to be a big issue: a difference of about 8.6% for the total energy deposition between the CSDA and 0.0005 mm respectively, and 5% with the new parameters. How to decide a cut-offs in terms of energy deposition? I need accuracy, CPU time is secondary. 3. The step size seems to be another big issue for this simulation but I am still working on it. So how can the step size affect my energy distribution? Is there something regarding the size of my sensitive layer? 4. What do I need mainly to understand about this kind of simulation, I mean with respect to physics and Geant4 itself? Is the multiple scattering something to take into account very carefully. I would be very grateful in receiving some clues, maybe this is something very straightforward or I am missing something. I would like to discuss these points. dRoverRange = 0.2 finalRange = 0.01 mm linLossLimit= 10-6 RangeFactor = 0.02 GeomFactor = 3 Skin = 1 Many thanks

setting eloss parameters for low energy physics? Keywords: eloss lowenergy by Miguel Couceiro <Miguel Couceiro>, 09 May, 2008 Hi, For Standard processes we can use the /process/eloss/ commands to set some simulation parameters. Is there any predefined way to set the same parameters for low energy processes without having to change the code and recompile? Or the solution is to develop our own messenger for low energy processes? Thanks in advance, Miguel

ProcessManager=0 ? by Cristina Consolandi <Cristina Consolandi>, 06 May, 2008 Hello I'm running example TestEm7 The run consists of 20000 protons of 114 GeV through 300 um of Silicon. I'm using binary physiscs list. I get this error message: G4SteppingManager::GetProcessNumber: ProcessManager=0 for particle=rho0, PDG_code=113 What does it mean? How can I solve it? Thank you! Cri.

Calculating & Plotting of Compton Differential Cross-Section Keywords: Calculation of differential cross section by Chibueze Zimuzo <Chibueze Zimuzo>, 05 May, 2008 Hi All, Please is it possible to calculate and plot Compton differential cross section (i.e. d(sigma)/d(omega) & d(sigma)/d(energy transfer to recoil electron)). TestEm0, 13 &14 treated calculation of total cross section which is not what I need. I am using Penelope physics for my simulation. Thanks in advance. Chibueze.

only hIonisation works in N02 physics list by Mario <Mario>, 01 May, 2008 Dear Geant4 Gods, I don't know what I did, but the physics lists don't work properly any more. I am using the geant4.8.2.p01 release. I was playing around with some cut values and new processes in my own physics package (derived from the N02 example), when I decided that I wanted to compare by results using the new package, to the old package... I am simulating proton radiographs, and therefore am interested in the scattering of protons through matter. I was trying some new processes, and cut values, but when I changed back to the old physics list... my results had not gone back to what they were before the changes. I have since reloaded an old version of the simulation with the unmodified physics list, and I am still having a problem. I then implemented directly the ExN02PhysicsList with out changing anything, and the problem persists. Basically, all I can say to explain it is that if I go into the physics list: ..... .... } else if ((!particle->IsShortLived()) && (particle->GetPDGCharge() != 0.0) && (particle->GetParticleName() != "chargedgeantino")) { //all others charged particles except geantino pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering,-1, 1,1); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4hIonisation, -1, 2,2); //step limit pmanager->AddProcess(new G4StepLimiter, -1,-1,3); ///pmanager->AddProcess(new G4UserSpecialCuts, -1,-1,4); } ..... the portion in ConstructEM() which sets the EM physics for the ions, and comment out only the G4hIonisation portion, no particles are tracked in my sensitive detectors... if I only comment out the G4MultipleScattering, then the results are equivalent to both G4MultScatt and G4hIonis being on... It is as if the G4MultipleScattering is having no effect on the simulation... I don't know what to do, or how to fix this problem. Previously when I was playing with new physics lists, I used the LHEP_BERT list in which I had to set some environment variables: set G4LEVELGAMMADATA=c:\geant4\geant4_8_2_p01\data\PhotonEvaporation2.0 set G4RADIOACTIVEDATA=c:\geant4\geant4_8_2_p01\data\RadioactiveDecay3.1 set G4LEDATA=c:\geant4\geant4_8_2_p01\data\G4EMLOW4.2 set NeutronHPCrossSections=c:\geant4\geant4_8_2_p01\data\G4NDL3.10 before opening a command window to run the exe in windows. I have run the sim with ExN02 physics from a cmd window with and without setting these variables, and the results are the same. Any help is much appreciated!!!!!!! Cheers, Mario

Is Geant4 able to simulate the avalanche effect of electrons Keywords: avalanche effect by Ran Cheng <Ran Cheng>, 14 Apr, 2008 Hi, I am trying to simulate the avalanche effect of electrons in avalanche photodiode (APD). General physics process: The electrons accelerated by electric field hit the APD, and then generate electron-hole pairs, the newly produced electrons then take part in the cycle of e- -> pair. Finally, the electrons increase exponentially lead to avalanche effect. In my simulation, there are two problems: 1 Is Geant4 able to simulate the avalanche effect in semiconductor such as APD? 2 Is Geant4 able to collect the information of electron which energy is less then 990ev? Because I can't see much increment of electrons in my result. And the lowest energy threshold for electron is 990ev, but the ionizing energy of electron in APD is much less in practice. Thanks in advance!

Cut off in compton continuum in low energy package Keywords: compon continuum low energy physics cut off by David Oxley <David Oxley>, 23 Mar, 2008 Dear All, I observe a low energy cut off in the compton continuum which I can't make any sense of. It appears that the Compton edge appears at around 800keV despite an increase in energy. I attach a picture of a spectrum. The black line shows the delta energy from the gammas at 1408keV. The red shows the delta energy from the gammas at 1085keV. You see the compton continua stop in the same place despite the energy difference. The black spectrum also does not peak upwards at the end, supporting that it is being cut off half way through. I used a very large detector to try and eliminate geometrical constraints on the scattering angles. Any thoughts or advice on what I could be doing wrong or what is causing this will be appreciated. Thanks, Dave

Is Geant4 able to compute field from charged material(s) or a system of charges? by Dmitry <matison.d@gmail.com>, 21 Mar, 2008 The problem is to find a field from a system of charges, or from charged materials, to compute it's influence to electron beam. Can Geant4 manage this kind of problems? Thank you!

Problem with Total Internal Reflection of Cerenkov Light Keywords: cerenkov reflection TIR by Kurtis Nishimura <kurtisn@phys.hawaii.edu>, 16 Mar, 2008 Hello, I have a problem with a relatively simple simulation geometry and Cerenkov light. Any help would be much appreciated. I have a fused silica bar that I use as a radiator for Cerenkov light. This bar sits in the world volume. Both the bar and the world volume have indices of refraction defined for a range of photon energies. I've tested the setup with both an optical photon gun as well as a charged particle gun in order to see if the expected behaviors are respected. With optical photons as the primary particle, the critical angle for TIR seems to be respected. However, as soon as I fire a charged particle through the bar, ALL of the optical photons from Cerenkov emission are internally reflected, all the time. This even happens for some photons which were emitted at an angle near normal to the surface. I found a previous forum question that had a similar problem, but the discussion was taken offline before they were able to debug it. Does anyone have any idea what could be causing this apparent inconsistency? Thanks much, -Kurtis

momentum transfer by Mariusz <Mariusz>, 11 Mar, 2008 Hi, I have a thin (30 micrometer) target and LHC proton beam. Is there any way to estimate momentum transfer from the beam to the target (in the beam direction only)? I guess kick-off electrons and nuclear interactions will contribute minimally to the total value (they both take the momentum away from the target), but how to estimate the remaining contribution? Regards, Mariusz Sapinski

Absolute efficiency values depend on em packages? Keywords: Low energy em physics standard absolute efficiency germanium by Laura Harkness <Laura Harkness>, 07 Mar, 2008 Hi, I have simulated a 6*6*2 cm germanium crystal and have obtained experimental values for the absolute efficiencies at various energies (100keV -> 1408keV) I have simulated using 2 different sets of physics processes. The first set I used the standard em physics processes and these gave me the closest results to the experimental values (optimal around 100keV) The second set I used the low energy em physics processes and these results were all about 40% too high in comparison to experimental data. I was surprised at this as I thought at the energy range I am simulating that the standard and low energy packages should both produce the same absolute efficiency values? Does anybody know why this could be? For the low energy I am using G4EMLOW4.3 and I am geant4.7.1 for both methods. Thanks, Laura

HOW TO KNOW AN ESTIMATION OF ELECTRON HOLE PAIRS Keywords: e-hole pairs, charged tracks by Francisco <Francisco>, 04 Mar, 2008 Hi I would like to know a way to get information of the number of e-h pairs generated for example after an irradiation with photon in a silicon thin detector (microns). I have found that both examples /g4work/examples/extended/medical/fanoCavity/src/RunAction.cc and /g4work/examples/extended/electromagnetic/TestEm1/src/RunAction.cc use the number of charged tracks, can I use this information as the number of electrons, taking into account that at the energy I am using I only generate electrons? Are the number of charged tracks equal to the generated electrons? Assuming that they are, what happen when a track is created in a particular volume and then pass through a boundary entering my sensitive region? Does Geant4 count it as a track created in my sensitive region? Delta rays are also considered in the number of charged tracks? Can I sum the total energy absorbed in my sensitive region and then divide it by 3.58 eV to get the number of electrons after apply some statistics? Thanks in advance Francisco

Fluorescence data Keywords: fluorescence database by valentina <valentina>, 25 Feb, 2008 HI! I'm simulating the interaction of X-rays with Lead and I want to analyse the resulting fluorescence emission. The fluorescence lines are stored in G4FluoData and, after a loooong search, I have found that they are taken from the Evaluated Atomic Data Library (EADL). The first problem is that this database is not accessible. The second problem is that these data don't match the X-ray fluorescence emission lines of NIST database. For example the Kalpha for Lead is: - 75.25 keV (EADL) - 74.970 keV (NIST) I summarize my question: I have the resulting spectrum and I find a line at 75.25 keV. Now I want to identify this line but it is different from the Kalpha listed in NIST database. The second step is to understand if the database used by GEANT4 is right or not. Someone can help me? Thanks in advance! Valentina

Too much energy deposition with LowEnergy package Keywords: LowEnergy
by Robert Freudenberg <Robert Freudenberg>, 22 Feb, 2008

Dear all,

I've the problem, that I get too much energy! My aim is to simulate the energy deposition in 100 um thick spherical shells around a point source of 500 keV electrons. When I use the standard Geant4 librarys for electromagnetic processes everything works fine, as you can see below:

Extraction of MyPhysicsList.cc

if(particleName == "gamma") { //gamma pMan->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4PhotoElectricEffect); pMan->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4ComptonScattering); pMan->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4GammaConversion); } else if(particleName == "e-") { //electron pMan->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering, -1, 1, 1); pMan->AddProcess(new G4eIonisation, -1, 2, 2); } else if(particleName == "e+") { //positron pMan->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering, -1, 1, 1); pMan->AddProcess(new G4eIonisation, -1, 2, 2); pMan->AddProcess(new G4eBremsstrahlung, -1, 3, 3); pMan->AddProcess(new G4eplusAnnihilation, 0, -1, 4); }

The results look as expected:

******Run 0 finished! Simulated events: 1 Shell[0] E_abs: 20.0067911778766 keV Shell[1] E_abs: 18.46432871484156 keV Shell[2] E_abs: 17.16755680496905 keV Shell[3] E_abs: 15.4193391766694 keV Shell[4] E_abs: 23.61578150214196 keV Shell[5] E_abs: 20.47036611695079 keV Shell[6] E_abs: 98.07545602952851 keV Shell[7] E_abs: 134.2114403391701 keV Shell[8] E_abs: 152.5689401378521 keV Shell[9] E_abs: 0 eV Shell[10] E_abs: 0 eV total absorbed energy: 500 keV

When I change to the LowEnergy package in MyPhysicsList.cc via:

if(particleName == "gamma") { //gamma pMan->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyRayleigh); pMan->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyPhotoElectric); pMan->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyCompton); pMan->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyGammaConversion); } else if(particleName == "e-") { //electron pMan->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering, -1, 1, 1); pMan->AddProcess(new G4LowEnergyIonisation, -1, 2, 2); pMan->AddProcess(new G4LowEnergyBremsstrahlung, -1, 3, 3); } else if(particleName == "e+") { //positron pMan->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering, -1, 1, 1); pMan->AddProcess(new G4eplusAnnihilation, 0, -1, 4); pMan->AddProcess(new G4LowEnergyIonisation, -1, 2, 2); pMan->AddProcess(new G4LowEnergyBremsstrahlung, -1, 3, 3); }

then I got via the G4PSEnergyDeposit-scorer a total absorbed energy of 561.4 keV.

******Run 0 finished! Simulated events: 1 Shell[0] E_abs: 32.46440622087332 keV Shell[1] E_abs: 28.14419079032732 keV Shell[2] E_abs: 35.09535948072306 keV Shell[3] E_abs: 66.8380046101959 keV Shell[4] E_abs: 45.85848368358489 keV Shell[5] E_abs: 48.56747246418793 keV Shell[6] E_abs: 51.08569021249662 keV Shell[7] E_abs: 166.0850614863725 keV Shell[8] E_abs: 87.2664894852086 keV Shell[9] E_abs: 0 eV Shell[10] E_abs: 0 eV total absorbed energy: 561.4051584339702 keV

I already found, that the problem results from an energy loss dE which is twice the kinetic energy KinE of my particle as you can see by a detailed output of tracking:

********************************************************************************************************* * G4Track Information: Particle = e-, Track ID = 16, Parent ID = 1 *********************************************************************************************************

Step# X(mm) Y(mm) Z(mm) KinE(MeV) dE(MeV) StepLeng TrackLeng NextVolume ProcName 0 -0.419 0.624 -0.239 0.00145 0 0 0 shell_physical[] initStep 1 -0.419 0.624 -0.239 0 0.0029 0.0215 0.0215 shell_physical[] msc

********************************************************************************************************* * G4Track Information: Particle = e-, Track ID = 15, Parent ID = 1 *********************************************************************************************************

Step# X(mm) Y(mm) Z(mm) KinE(MeV) dE(MeV) StepLeng TrackLeng NextVolume ProcName 0 -0.387 0.659 -0.298 0.00317 0 0 0 shell_physical[] initStep 1 -0.387 0.659 -0.298 0 0.00634 0.0155 0.0155 shell_physical[] LowEnergyIoni

Does anyone knows this problem and perhaps how to solve it?

Thanks for your help

best regards, Robert

system: geant4.9.1, G4EMLOW5.1

How to calculate ionisation dose of alphas? by Alexey Lubashevskiy <Alexey Lubashevskiy>, 21 Feb, 2008 Hello everybody! I'm simulating transport of alphas in germanium detector. I'd like to know how much energy alphas lose by ionisation and how much energy alphas lose by other process (nuclearstopping). How I could obtain this information? I use G4hLowEnergyIonisation model. Thank you in advance Alexey

problem with cerenkov process Keywords: optical processes by Hans Wenzel <Hans Wenzel>, 18 Feb, 2008 Our goal was to implement a DualRead out calorimeter, where we readout both the Ionization energy as well as the energy deposited by Cerenkov photons. The energy deposited by the Cerenkov photons serves as an indicator for the electromagnetic fraction of the shower and can be used to correct for the energy lost to nuclear breakups etc. which otherwise remains undetected. Unfortunately the longitudinal distribution of the energy deposition looks very weird when cerenkov radiation is enabled. It looks like a big part of the energy is deposited at the first layer where the particle enters. The plots and link to the code can be found on the following webpage: http://home.fnal.gov/~wenzel/dual/index.html

Gap in Spectrum Keywords: spectrum germanium gap problem by Laura Harkness <Laura Harkness>, 14 Feb, 2008 Hi Everybody, I have a gamma ray spectrum for 141keV isotropic source 25cm from a germanium detector. I am confused however, as I have a large gap in my spectrum...between 50kev (the compton edge) and 90keV. It just looks like a piece is missing. In a spectrum I would expect: a compton contiunuum with a compton edge (at this energy it will be at 50keV) and then a low region of multiple compton scattering from the compton edge to the photopeak. If I use higher energies (e.g. 662keV) I see the exact sort of spectrum I would expect. I really do not understand this as I make no alterations to the code, only to the macro file to change the input energy. Does anyone have an explanation for this behaviour? I have used low energy electromagnetic physics but have also tested it with standard em physics and both have the "gap" Thanks, Laura

Grazing angle proton scattering by valentina <valentina>, 13 Feb, 2008 Hi, I have a question about the simulation of grazing angle proton scattering. In the article: "Low Angle Scattering of Protons on the XMM-Newton Optics and Effects on the On-Board CCD detectors" Nartallo et al. 2001 Nartallo uses the multiple scattering to simulate the interaction of protons with a mirror reflecting surface layer (in this case XMM-Newton optics). As a conseguence of: "Grazing Angle Proton Scattering: effects on Chandra and XMM-Newton X-ray telescopes" Dichter and Woolf, 2003 , where the authors show that the multiple scattering under predicts the expected proton flux at the focal plane, Nartallo in the article: "Update on the use of Geant4 for the simulation of low energy protons scattering off X-ray mirrors at grazing incidence angles" implements a new physics process, G4FirsovScattering, in the G4 Monte Carlo code, to treat the scattering of low energy protons at grazing incidence angles. Now the question is: someone knows where is G4FirsovScattering? I can't find it in G4 library! Thanks! Valentina

CHANGES IN KLEIN NISHINA CROSS SECTION CHANGE SECONDARIES? Keywords: Compton cross section, Klein Nishina by Francisco <Francisco>, 01 Feb, 2008 Hi I forced photons to interact in my detector by instantiating G4KleinNishinaCompton.hh, but I do not whether my scattered photons will be affected as well. I put before changing the cross section the fallowing line: if (aTrack->GetParentID()==0){ factor = 1000. } then the cross section is multiplied by the factor. I have done some tests, but it seems that the scattered photons are being affected as well. If so, how can avoid this.

Ionisation is not the same as calculated by Behte-Bloch! ? Keywords: Behte-Bloch ionisation ionization thin low density air gas by Maik Wissing <MaikWissing@gmx.de>, 29 Jan, 2008 Hello! I'm comparing the proton energy deposition as calculated by geant with one calculated only with Bethe-Bloch. So I try to disable everything that could produce a difference, meaning: -> a huge defaultCutRange to avoid delta-ray production -> no MultipleScattering to prevent changes in the particle direction which do not occour in Bethe-Bloch On the other hand I use the same Behte-Bloch equation which is mentioned in the geant manual, including the terms for density and shell correction. In addition to this I use the same detector structure and parameters (size, composition, density, pressure, MeanExcitationEnergy...) Of couse I know it's not very realistic to turn off the MultipleScattering but my aim is simply to compare it with Bethe-Bloch. My detector is some kind of air, begining with very low density and ending with standard ground conditions. (So it should be an atmosphere.) My problem is that the Bethe-Bloch calculation shows up to 30% more energy deposition in these very thin layers! (Energy range of the particle gun is 1MeV to 500MeV, but it is approx. the same discrepancy for all particles.) Is there any obvious reason why these two calculations do not show good agreement in the very thin layers? (As they do in the dense ones!) Yours sincerly Maik Wissing

please very emergency:how can i create a spectrum??? Keywords: how can i create a spectrum by elif <elif>, 22 Jan, 2008 ciao dear friends; i did a detector setup. I have two Ge detectors and i can do interaction with them.. But i have a probleam.. After interaction how can i create a spectrum? please help me:(( ciao, chylec..

electron-hole pair spatial distribution Keywords: electron spatial distribution heavy ion ionisation by sauvestre <sauvestre>, 18 Jan, 2008 hi, i need the advise of a geant4 expert. I would like to know if geant4, in its present status, has all the ingredients to compute the electron-hole pair spatial distribution (spatial distribution when electrons or holes are at rest ie have lost all their kinetic energy) resulting from the passage of an heavy ion through a given material. If so, isn t there any limitation due to energy threshold? thanks in advance regards

How to decrease the time used per event of optical process of plastical scintillation? Keywords: secrease tme optical plastical scintillation by Xiaoxiao Li <Xiaoxiao Li>, 09 Jan, 2008 Hi,All : I am a beginners of Geant4, and now I am simulating a optical process of plastical scintillation . The volume I used is ( from outer to inner ) PAPER , air _empty , , Scintillation, groove, WLS. Some properties I set are : (1) The REF of paper is 0.985 , ; (2) Scintillation: myMPT1->AddConstProperty("SCINTILLATIONYIELD",8000./MeV); myMPT1->AddConstProperty("RESOLUTIONSCALE",1.0); myMPT1->AddConstProperty("FASTTIMECONSTANT", 2.*ns); myMPT1->AddConstProperty("YIELDRATIO",1.0); The number of Photon.Eletrons which was collected by PMT is about 60, buut the time I used is about 1 minute per event. The reason maybe come from the reflection of phontons in the scintillation. So how can I improve my programe to decrease the time used per event? Can anyone give me advice for the this problem? Thanks in advance . Best Wish Xiaoxiao Li

Strange gamma ray spectrum by Laura Harkness <Laura Harkness>, 07 Jan, 2008 Hi, I have simulated 2 germanium detectors surrounded by aluminium casing. I have made the germanium sensitive and have a 384keV isotropic point source a few cm from the first detector. They are arranged in compton camera mode, but aren't related to each other, ie they aren't operating in coincidence. When I plot a spectrum of the energy deposited in the 2 detectors, it is not what I expect to get. There is a peak at 11keV and then what looks similar to an exponential decay of photons. There is no compton continuum or full energy photo-peak. I am using the low energy em package, but the standard package produced the same results, I have also tried varing the input energy. Any help would be greatly appreciated! thanks, Laura

1 Re: Strange gamma ray spectrum (Vladimir IVANTCHENKO - 07 Jan, 2008)

1 Re: Strange gamma ray spectrum (Laura Harkness - 07 Jan, 2008)

Re: Strange gamma ray spectrum (Laura Harkness - 08 Jan, 2008)

Re: Strange gamma ray spectrum (Vladimir IVANTCHENKO - 08 Jan, 2008)

1 Re: Strange gamma ray spectrum (Laura Harkness - 09 Jan, 2008): ... 7 Message(s)
3 Re: Strange gamma ray spectrum (Laura Harkness - 10 Jan, 2008): ... 3 Message(s)

2 Re: Strange gamma ray spectrum (michel maire - 08 Jan, 2008)

1 Re: Strange gamma ray spectrum. Eratum (michel maire - 08 Jan, 2008)

Re: Strange gamma ray spectrum. (Laura Harkness - 08 Jan, 2008)

4 Re: Strange gamma ray spectrum (Alain Ferragut - 08 Jan, 2008)

Optical Photon Transportation Hangs at G4LogicalBorderSurface by Johnny <goettj@rpi.edu>, 21 Dec, 2007 Hi guys, I've been having difficulty getting optical photons to cross a border surface defined between a volume of air and water. If the photons are incident normal to the optical surface the simulation hangs for days on the first event. If they are incident at an angle the simulation hangs after some number of events. This behavior appears to be indifferent to the incident angle and which "side" of the surface it is incident from. the surface is defined as follows: G4OpticalSurface* OpSurface1 = new G4OpticalSurface("AirWater"); G4LogicalBorderSurface* Surface1 = new G4LogicalBorderSurface("AirWater",experimentalHall_phys, column_phys,OpSurface1); G4double sigma_alpha = 0.01; OpSurface1 -> SetType(dielectric_dielectric); OpSurface1 -> SetModel(unified); OpSurface1 -> SetFinish(polished); //OpSurface1 -> SetSigmaAlpha(sigma_alpha); branch=topBranch.GetChild("Air_Water"); branch.GetChild("Air_Water_MomentumBins_Rindex").GetData(fPP_Water_HDPE_RIN); branch.GetChild("Air_Water_Rindex").GetData(fWater_HDPERINDEX); branch.GetChild("Air_Water_MomentumBins_Alength").GetData(fPP_Water_HDPE_AL); //branch.GetChild("Water_AbsLength").GetData(fWater_HDPEABSORPTION); branch.GetChild("Air_Water_SPECLOBE").GetData(fWater_HDPE_SPECLOBE); branch.GetChild("Air_Water_SPECSPIKE").GetData(fWater_HDPE_SPECSPIKE); branch.GetChild("Air_Water_BACKSCAT").GetData(fWater_HDPE_BACKSCAT); branch.GetChild("Air_Water_EFF").GetData(fWater_HDPE_EFF); G4MaterialPropertiesTable *AirWater_MPT = new G4MaterialPropertiesTable(); AirWater_MPT -> AddProperty("RINDEX",&fPP_Water_HDPE_RIN[0], &fWater_HDPERINDEX[0],fPP_Water_HDPE_RIN.size()); //AirWater_MPT -> AddProperty("ABSLENGTH",&fPP_Water_HDPE_AL[0], &fWater_HDPEABSORPTION[0],fPP_Water_HDPE_AL.size()); AirWater_MPT -> AddProperty("SPECULARLOBECONSTANT",&fPP_Water_HDPE_AL[0], &fWater_HDPE_SPECLOBE[0],fPP_Water_HDPE_RIN.size()); AirWater_MPT -> AddProperty("SPECULARSPIKECONSTANT",&fPP_Water_HDPE_AL[0], &fWater_HDPE_SPECSPIKE[0],fPP_Water_HDPE_AL.size()); AirWater_MPT -> AddProperty("BACKSCATTERCONSTANT",&fPP_Water_HDPE_AL[0], &fWater_HDPE_BACKSCAT[0],fPP_Water_HDPE_AL.size()); //AirWater_MPT -> AddProperty("EFFICIENCY",&fPP_Water_HDPE_AL[0], &fWater_HDPE_EFF[0],fPP_Water_HDPE_AL.size()); OpSurface1 -> SetMaterialPropertiesTable(AirWater_MPT); Everything works fine if I set the finish to ground and re-introduce sigma[alpha]. Is there anything here I am doing obviously wrong? happy holidays, Johnny

Plotting Cross-section for Low-energy Gamma processes Keywords: Cross section by John <smithersjohnd1982@gmail.com>, 19 Dec, 2007 Hello, Is it in principle possible to access the cross-sections for low-energy gamma-ray processes via the G4EmCalculator class? I tried but the return value was always zero, without dumping any error, etc. message. Thanks!

1 Re: Plotting Cross-section for Low-energy Gamma processes (Vladimir IVANTCHENKO - 19 Dec, 2007)

1 Re: Plotting Cross-section for Low-energy Gamma processes (michel maire - 27 Dec, 2007)

2 Re: Plotting Cross-section for Low-energy Gamma processes (Maria Grazia Pia - 19 Dec, 2007)

4 Re: Plotting Cross-section for Low-energy Gamma processes (Bernd - 19 Dec, 2007)

1 Re: Plotting Cross-section for Low-energy Gamma processes (Maria Grazia Pia - 19 Dec, 2007)

Re: Plotting Cross-section for Low-energy Gamma processes (Bernd - 20 Dec, 2007)

Re: Plotting Cross-section for Low-energy Gamma processes (Maria Grazia Pia - 20 Dec, 2007)

Low Energy EM Implementation Keywords: low energy em physics problem
by <lauraharkness85@hotmail.com>, 18 Dec, 2007

Hi,

I am learning to use Geant4 and have so far been able to implement standard physics into my simulation of germanium detectors with gammas at low incident energy (<1MeV). Unfortunately, when I attempt to implement low energy electromagnetic physics I encounter problems. The code compliles but then when I run the simulation, I have

"G4EMDataSet::LoadData - data file "/ray1/re-ff-1.dat" not found ***G4Exception: Aborting execution *** Abort

However, I can see that this file exists in data/G4EMLOW4.3/ray1 which I don' understand.

Any help with this problem would be greatly appreciated!

Thank you,

Laura

Geant4 simulation of gaseous detector by YangZhang <YangZhang>, 14 Dec, 2007 Hi all, I want to use geant4 to simulate micromegas detector(which is a relatively new type of gaseous detector), but I've heard that the method geant4 use to calculate energy loss can not fit here. I think it mainly concerns the EM processes that happen when charged particle transport under the electric fields through the gas chamber, so I put this message here. Can someone tell me why?

Discrepancy in ICRU49 stopping power values? Keywords: Electronic stopping power, ICRU49, G4hLowEnergyIonisation by Steffen Greilich <Steffen Greilich>, 12 Dec, 2007 Hi, I have chosen G4hLowEnergyIonisation with ICRU49 parameterisation for a proton beam impinging on an Al2O3 detector. However, if I compare the stopping powers provided by G4EmCalculator::GetDEDX with those from the ICRU49 report they do not match although I chose high production cuts (1 m), f.x.: 0.5 MeV - ICRU49: 276.8 MeV*cm2/g, GetDEDX: 1310.86 MeV*cm2/g 10 MeV - ICRU49: 35.43 MeV*cm2/g, GetDEDX: 58.47 MeV*cm2/g 100 MeV - ICRU49: 5.893 MeV*cm2/g, GetDEDX: 6.31 MeV*cm2/g The same for other materials and particles (alpha). Does anyone know a reason for that. I am pretty sure that the physics are ok as I used the hadrontherapy example. Does the size of the region given for the cuts in GetDEDX matter? Thanks for any help, Steffen

problems with secondary electron spectrum by Henrik <SI@wcreplays.com>, 11 Dec, 2007 I was wondering if I am approaching this problem correctly. I want to generate the spectrum of secondary electrons being knocked out of a thin foil of steel by incident gammas. I have an event generator which shoots the primaries onto random points, then have a custom physics process which activates itself in vacuum and stores + kills the electrons. For the physics list I started off with the radioactive decay low energy list and made some modifications. Also I tried setting the minimum energy cuts to 5 ev and 1 nm. However I still seem to be missing most of the low energy electrons. Am I forgetting to turn something on, or is some cut value interfering and removing the electrons before I can count them? Basic code for the electron process: GetMeanFreePath(...) { G4Material* aMaterial = track.GetMaterial(); if (aMaterial && aMaterial->GetDensity() < 1.29e-02*g/cm3) { *condition = Forced; return 0.000000001 * m; } } and in PostStepDoIt I store the energy, momentum etc and kill the electron. For the physics I have if (particleName == "gamma") { pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyCompton); G4LowEnergyPhotoElectric* LePeprocess = new G4LowEnergyPhotoElectric(); LePeprocess->ActivateAuger(true); LePeprocess->SetCutForLowEnSecPhotons(0.005 * keV); LePeprocess->SetCutForLowEnSecElectrons(0.005 * keV); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(LePeprocess); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyRayleigh("Rayleigh")); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4LowEnergyGammaConversion); } else if (particleName == "e-") { pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering, -1, 1,1); G4LowEnergyIonisation* LeIoprocess = new G4LowEnergyIonisation("IONI"); LeIoprocess->ActivateAuger(true); //eIoProcess = new G4eIonisation("stdIONI"); LeIoprocess->SetCutForLowEnSecPhotons(0.005*keV); LeIoprocess->SetCutForLowEnSecElectrons(0.005*keV); pmanager->AddProcess(LeIoprocess, -1, 2, 2); G4LowEnergyBremsstrahlung* LeBrprocess = new G4LowEnergyBremsstrahlung(); pmanager->AddProcess(LeBrprocess, -1, -1, 3); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new DirectERemoval); Also in the main physics list I have G4double lowlimit=1*eV; G4ProductionCutsTable::GetProductionCutsTable()->SetEnergyRange(lowlimit,100*GeV);

all scatter, no transportation Keywords: all scatter by Reema <Reema>, 04 Dec, 2007 Hi all, I am simulating a cone beam Computed Tomography system in geant4. I need to use 15 billion photons per projection angle. So in order to reconstruct an image image I will need to do 100 such projection angles. I was wondering if anyone can suggest any variance reduction technique to reduce the runtime. Also, I was wondering if it is possible to force the particles to scatter (with Compton or Rayleigh interaction), such that none of the photons do transportation, and all scatter. I did read in the geant4 manual that transportation is a mandatory process but if anyone has any ideas. Thanks in advance! Best regards, Reema

The problem of Gamma interaction with nuclus ??? Keywords: physics process
by yuchun zhang <zhangyc@ihep.ac.cn>, 01 Dec, 2007

Hello !I am a novice at geant 4,I simulate Gamma(2GEV) interaction with a target(C) in order to get pion using G4.9.0,I use EM physics list as follows:

#include "A01PhysicsList.hh" #include "globals.hh" #include "G4ParticleDefinition.hh" #include "G4ProcessManager.hh" #include "G4ProcessVector.hh" #include "G4ParticleTypes.hh" #include "G4ParticleTable.hh" #include "G4Material.hh" #include "G4MaterialTable.hh" #include "G4ios.hh" #include <iomanip>

#include "G4FastSimulationManagerProcess.hh"

A01PhysicsList::A01PhysicsList(): G4VUserPhysicsList() { SetVerboseLevel(1); }

A01PhysicsList::~A01PhysicsList() { }

void A01PhysicsList::ConstructParticle() { // In this method, static member functions should be called // for all particles which you want to use. // This ensures that objects of these particle types will be // created in the program.

ConstructBosons(); ConstructLeptons(); ConstructMesons(); ConstructBaryons(); ConstructIons(); }

void A01PhysicsList::ConstructBosons() { // pseudo-particles G4Geantino::GeantinoDefinition(); G4ChargedGeantino::ChargedGeantinoDefinition();

// gamma G4Gamma::GammaDefinition();

// optical photon G4OpticalPhoton::OpticalPhotonDefinition(); }

#include "G4LeptonConstructor.hh" void A01PhysicsList::ConstructLeptons() { // Construct all leptons G4LeptonConstructor pConstructor; pConstructor.ConstructParticle(); }

#include "G4MesonConstructor.hh" void A01PhysicsList::ConstructMesons() { // Construct all mesons G4MesonConstructor pConstructor; pConstructor.ConstructParticle(); }

#include "G4BaryonConstructor.hh" void A01PhysicsList::ConstructBaryons() { // Construct all barions G4BaryonConstructor pConstructor; pConstructor.ConstructParticle(); }

#include "G4IonConstructor.hh" void A01PhysicsList::ConstructIons() { // Construct light ions G4IonConstructor pConstructor; pConstructor.ConstructParticle(); }

void A01PhysicsList::ConstructProcess() { AddTransportation(); AddParameterisation();

ConstructEM(); ConstructGeneral(); }

void A01PhysicsList::AddTransportation() { G4VUserPhysicsList::AddTransportation(); }

#include "G4ComptonScattering.hh" #include "G4GammaConversion.hh" #include "G4PhotoElectricEffect.hh"

#include "G4MultipleScattering.hh"

#include "G4eIonisation.hh" #include "G4eBremsstrahlung.hh" #include "G4eplusAnnihilation.hh"

#include "G4MuIonisation.hh" #include "G4MuBremsstrahlung.hh" #include "G4MuPairProduction.hh"

#include "G4GammaNuclearReaction.hh" #include "G4PhotoNuclearProcess.hh"

#include "G4hIonisation.hh" void A01PhysicsList::ConstructEM() { theParticleIterator->reset(); while( (*theParticleIterator)() ){ G4ParticleDefinition* particle = theParticleIterator->value(); G4ProcessManager* pmanager = particle->GetProcessManager(); G4String particleName = particle->GetParticleName();

if (particleName == "gamma") { // gamma // Construct processes for gamma pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4GammaConversion()); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4ComptonScattering()); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(new G4PhotoElectricEffect());

thePhotoNuclearProcess.RegisterMe(theGammaReaction); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(&thePhotoNuclearProcess); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(&thePairProduction);

} else if (particleName == "e-") { //electron // Construct processes for electron G4VProcess* theeminusMultipleScattering = new G4MultipleScattering(); G4VProcess* theeminusIonisation = new G4eIonisation(); G4VProcess* theeminusBremsstrahlung = new G4eBremsstrahlung(); // add processes pmanager->AddProcess(theeminusMultipleScattering); pmanager->AddProcess(theeminusIonisation); pmanager->AddProcess(theeminusBremsstrahlung); // set ordering for AlongStepDoIt pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(theeminusMultipleScattering, idxAlongStep, 1); pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(theeminusIonisation, idxAlongStep, 2); // set ordering for PostStepDoIt pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(theeminusMultipleScattering, idxPostStep, 1); pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(theeminusIonisation, idxPostStep, 2); pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(theeminusBremsstrahlung, idxPostStep, 3);

} else if (particleName == "e+") { //positron // Construct processes for positron G4VProcess* theeplusMultipleScattering = new G4MultipleScattering(); G4VProcess* theeplusIonisation = new G4eIonisation(); G4VProcess* theeplusBremsstrahlung = new G4eBremsstrahlung(); G4VProcess* theeplusAnnihilation = new G4eplusAnnihilation(); // add processes pmanager->AddProcess(theeplusMultipleScattering); pmanager->AddProcess(theeplusIonisation); pmanager->AddProcess(theeplusBremsstrahlung); pmanager->AddProcess(theeplusAnnihilation); // set ordering for AtRestDoIt pmanager->SetProcessOrderingToFirst(theeplusAnnihilation, idxAtRest); // set ordering for AlongStepDoIt pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(theeplusMultipleScattering, idxAlongStep, 1); pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(theeplusIonisation, idxAlongStep, 2); // set ordering for PostStepDoIt pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(theeplusMultipleScattering, idxPostStep, 1); pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(theeplusIonisation, idxPostStep, 2); pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(theeplusBremsstrahlung, idxPostStep, 3); pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(theeplusAnnihilation, idxPostStep, 4);

} else if( particleName == "mu+" || particleName == "mu-" ) { //muon // Construct processes for muon+ G4VProcess* aMultipleScattering = new G4MultipleScattering(); G4VProcess* aBremsstrahlung = new G4MuBremsstrahlung(); G4VProcess* aPairProduction = new G4MuPairProduction(); G4VProcess* anIonisation = new G4MuIonisation(); // add processes pmanager->AddProcess(anIonisation); pmanager->AddProcess(aMultipleScattering); pmanager->AddProcess(aBremsstrahlung); pmanager->AddProcess(aPairProduction); // set ordering for AlongStepDoIt pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(aMultipleScattering, idxAlongStep, 1); pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(anIonisation, idxAlongStep, 2); // set ordering for PostStepDoIt pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(aMultipleScattering, idxPostStep, 1); pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(anIonisation, idxPostStep, 2); pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(aBremsstrahlung, idxPostStep, 3); pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(aPairProduction, idxPostStep, 4);

} else if ((!particle->IsShortLived()) && (particle->GetPDGCharge() != 0.0) && (particle->GetParticleName() != "chargedgeantino")) { // all others charged particles except geantino G4VProcess* aMultipleScattering = new G4MultipleScattering(); G4VProcess* anIonisation = new G4hIonisation(); // add processes pmanager->AddProcess(anIonisation); pmanager->AddProcess(aMultipleScattering); // set ordering for AlongStepDoIt pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(aMultipleScattering, idxAlongStep, 1); pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(anIonisation, idxAlongStep, 2); // set ordering for PostStepDoIt pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(aMultipleScattering, idxPostStep, 1); pmanager->SetProcessOrdering(anIonisation, idxPostStep, 2); } } }

#include "G4Decay.hh" void A01PhysicsList::ConstructGeneral() { // Add Decay Process G4Decay* theDecayProcess = new G4Decay(); theParticleIterator->reset(); while( (*theParticleIterator)() ){ G4ParticleDefinition* particle = theParticleIterator->value(); G4ProcessManager* pmanager = particle->GetProcessManager(); if (theDecayProcess->IsApplicable(*particle)) { pmanager ->AddProcess(theDecayProcess); // set ordering for PostStepDoIt and AtRestDoIt pmanager ->SetProcessOrdering(theDecayProcess, idxPostStep); pmanager ->SetProcessOrdering(theDecayProcess, idxAtRest); } } } void A01PhysicsList::SetCuts() { if (verboseLevel >1){ G4cout << "A01PhysicsList::SetCuts:"; } // " G4VUserPhysicsList::SetCutsWithDefault" method sets // the default cut value for all particle types SetCutsWithDefault(); }

I ran the programe,however the programe exited in the midway! I only got the information:
>****************************************************************************** >*************************** >* G4Track Information: Particle = gamma, Track ID = 196, Parent ID = 1 >****************************************************************************** >*************************** > >Step# X(mm) Y(mm) Z(mm) KinE(MeV) dE(MeV) StepLeng TrackLeng >NextVolume ProcName > 0 -3.48e+03 -28.5 5.45e+03 29.6 0 0 0 >Target initStep > 1 -3.5e+03 -28.8 5.48e+03 29.6 0 35.8 35.8 >secondArmPhys Transportation > 2 -3.78e+03 -32.8 5.9e+03 29.6 0 501 537 >chamber2Physical Transportation > 3 -4.06e+03 -36.8 6.32e+03 29.6 0 501 1.04e+03 >wirePlane2Physical Transportation > 4 -4.06e+03 -36.8 6.32e+03 29.6 0 0.2 1.04e+03 >chamber2Physical Transportation > 5 -4.33e+03 -40.8 6.73e+03 29.6 0 501 1.54e+03 >secondArmPhys Transportation > 6 -4.47e+03 -42.8 6.94e+03 29.6 0 251 1.79e+03 >hodoscope2Physical Transportation > 7 -4.53e+03 -43.6 7.03e+03 29.6 0 100 1.89e+03 >secondArmPhys Transportation > 8 -4.98e+03 -50 7.7e+03 29.6 0 808 2.7e+03 >HadCalLayerPhysical Transportation > >*** Geant4 Hadronic Reaction Information *** > Process: , Model: > Nucleus A, Z = 0 0 > Projectile was abort !!!! > >
and I could't find the place of the problem,has someone give me instructions??

when I remove the parts in void A01PhysicsList::ConstructEM():

thePhotoNuclearProcess.RegisterMe(theGammaReaction); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(&thePhotoNuclearProcess); pmanager->AddDiscreteProcess(&thePairProduction);

the problem was resolved,but I could't get any information about Pion!!

in order to get pion ,What's the correct way to do it?

I would appreciate any help....

Best regards!!

Scintillator Efficiency Keywords: Efficiency by Ibrahim <Ibrahim>, 28 Nov, 2007 Hi, I'd like to calculate the efficiency of a scintillator NaI 3"x3" as fonction of energy, i have changed the enegry of gammas that i have sent(0.5 Mev, 1 MeV, 1.5 MeV until 5 Mev) and i have seen that the efficieny increases with energy. It must not increase. I don't know where is the problem! do you have an idea about the variation of efficiency with energy? Tahnks

energy boundaries of G4VEmProcess physics table, G4PhysicsLinearVector Keywords: G4VEmProcess by Niklas <Niklas>, 23 Nov, 2007 Hello, I am interested in Photon simulations in the energy range 1 keV to 1 MeV and would like to speed up the code a little bit by replacing the G4PhysicsLogVector by a G4PhysicsLinearVector and at the same time reduce the energy borders and increase the number of bins in order to stay still correct. The G4VEmProcess/model-hierarchy is however quite complex and I do not understand when the borders are initialized and when the physics table is build. Is the code below correct to achieve this? Thank you very much in advance! Niklas #include "TestComptonScattering.hh" #include "G4PhysicsLinearVector.hh" #include "G4PhysicsVector.hh" TestComptonScattering::TestComptonScattering( const G4String &processName, G4ProcessType type) :G4ComptonScattering ( processName, type ) { SetMinKinEnergy(1*keV); SetMaxKinEnergy(1*MeV); SetLambdaBinning(500); } TestComptonScattering::~TestComptonScattering() { } G4PhysicsVector* TestComptonScattering::LambdaPhysicsVector(const G4MaterialCutsCouple*) { G4PhysicsVector* v = new G4PhysicsLinearVector(MinKinEnergy(), MaxKinEnergy(), LambdaBinning()); return v; }

Problems with LowEnergy ... Keywords: low energy by roccaz <jerome.roccaz@cea.fr>, 20 Nov, 2007 Hi everyone, I've tried to compare some results between standard EM and low energy EM. I simulate a coaxial germanium detector and shoot 1.33MeV photons isotropically. The parameters I use in the Physicslist for electrons are : - low energy : G4MultipleScattering -1,1,1 G4LowEnergyIonisation -1,2,2 G4eIonisation -1,2 2 G4LowEnergyBremsstrahlung -1,3,3 - standard EM : G4MultipleScattering -1,1,1 G4eIonisation -1,2 2 G4eBremsstrahlung -1,3,3 With standard EM, the spectra I obtain are good With low energy : -When I consider in the HitsCollection only the e+ and e- interactions, I have such message after about 40000 shots "WARNING : G4VCrossSectionHandler::FindValue did not find Z=-2147483648 Segmentation fault" -When I consider all particles, I have a segmentation fault after about 240000 shots. -When I consider only gammas, the run ends but when I look at the spectrum I have a bump around 11keV and nothing at 1.33MeV. Where could the problem come from? thanks

Optical Photons Keywords: Optical Photons by Marcel <Marcel>, 17 Nov, 2007 Hello everybody, I am detecting neutrons in a Scintillator composed of carbon and hydrogen. It was expected to have most of the Scintillator processes coming from the proton recoil. In fact, my processes with protons show Scintillation process, but there isn�t any produce of optical photons in the whole run.. Only in a step with gamma emission and Compton Scattering, I have optical photons, which is like 0,3 % of all events... Here it is part of my output: run=4 proton ID 6 ParentId 1 0 3.5887 cm 1.8318 mm -1.79284 mm 388.835 keV 0 eV 0 fm 0 fm 1 3.58827 cm 1.83565 mm -1.79583 mm 0 eV 388.835 keV 6.50958 um 6.50958 um hIoni 2 3.58827 cm 1.83565 mm -1.79583 mm 0 eV 0 eV 0 fm 6.50958 um Scintillation here no optical photons run=337 neutron ID 1 ParentId 0 0 0 fm 0 fm 1 m 20 MeV 0 eV 0 fm 0 fm 1 0 fm 0 fm 4.25 cm 20 MeV 0 eV 95.75 cm 95.75 cm Transportation 2 0 fm 0 fm 4.1 cm 20 MeV 0 eV 1.5 mm 95.9 cm Transportation 3 0 fm 0 fm 3.97655 cm 0 eV 0 eV 1.23449 mm 96.0234 cm NeutronInelastic run=337 gamma ID 3 ParentId 1 0 0 fm 0 fm 3.97655 cm 13.6238 MeV 0 eV 0 fm 0 fm 1 6.75627 cm 3.41147 cm 3.48257 mm 9.68919 MeV 0 eV 8.39344 cm 8.39344 cm compt 2 9.09395 cm 4.1 cm -1.03512 cm 9.68919 MeV 0 eV 2.80223 cm 11.1957 cm Transportation 3 9.60322 cm 4.25 cm -1.33649 cm 9.68919 MeV 0 eV 6.10483 mm 11.8062 cm Transportation 4 1.5 m 45.6019 cm -84.4196 cm 9.68919 MeV 0 eV 1.68297 m 1.80104 m Transportation run=337 e- ID 4 ParentId 3 0 6.75627 cm 3.41147 cm 3.48257 mm 3.93458 MeV 0 eV 0 fm 0 fm 1 7.27035 cm 3.77206 cm 2.45197 mm 2.82307 MeV 1.11151 MeV 6.48206 mm 6.48206 mm eIoni 2 7.43459 cm 3.8646 cm 1.89561 mm 2.53207 MeV 259.189 keV 1.98478 mm 8.46684 mm eBrem 3 7.82189 cm 4.03312 cm 2.94136 mm 1.59534 MeV 936.738 keV 4.57819 mm 1.3045 cm eIoni 4 7.91952 cm 3.85156 cm 5.33578 mm 1.14891 MeV 446.428 keV 3.2916 mm 1.63366 cm eIoni 5 7.97069 cm 3.62235 cm 6.24037 mm 714.975 keV 433.934 keV 2.66464 mm 1.90013 cm eIoni 6 7.9992 cm 3.51736 cm 6.42021 mm 375.508 keV 295.801 keV 1.15968 mm 2.0161 cm eBrem 7 8.03164 cm 3.50099 cm 6.60687 mm 311.03 keV 64.4774 keV 429.425 um 2.05904 cm eIoni 8 8.08905 cm 3.48205 cm 7.02201 mm 13.9688 keV 297.062 keV 1.01153 mm 2.16019 cm eIoni 9 8.08896 cm 3.48178 cm 7.02252 mm 0 eV 13.9688 keV 5.15173 um 2.16071 cm eIoni 10 8.08896 cm 3.48178 cm 7.02252 mm 0 eV 0 eV 0 fm 2.16071 cm Scintillation run=337 opticalphoton 382 4 I use a neutron beam of 10-30 MeV in my simulations... Is it normal?? or I should put something in my physics list or Optical file...? I would appreciate any help.... Best regards,

currentMaterialIndex in G4VEnergyLossProcess Keywords: currentMaterialIndex in G4VEnergyLossProcess by Dongwook Jang <Dongwook Jang>, 14 Nov, 2007 Dear experts, Recently, I was very puzzled by behavior of the private member, "currentMaterialIndex" defined in G4VEnergyLossProcess. When I call G4VEnergyLossProcess::AlongStepDoIt, I've noticed that currentMaterialIndex was changed at some step. However, I couldn't find where this variable was changed. The only place I can think of by looking at G4VEnergyLossProcess.hh,cc is G4VEnergyLossProcess::DefineMaterial. But in my case DefineMaterial was never called. I simply put a print statement in that function, but that statement was never printed. So it is very strange where this variable is actually changed. I have spent a week to understand this problem. Please help. Best regards, Dongwook Jang

Physics list with Bremsstrahlung by Andreas <zog@mpe.mpg.de>, 07 Nov, 2007 Hello, Looking at the various examples, Bremsstrahlung is added to the physics list in different ways: 1. pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eBremsstrahlung, -1, 3,3); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4LowEnergyBremsstrahlung, -1, 3,3); 2. pmanager->AddProcess(new G4eBremsstrahlung,-1,-1,3); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4LowEnergyBremsstrahlung, -1, -1,3); I.e. the second number ("AlongStep") is either 3 (= 3rd process) or -1 (no action). What's the correct way to do it? Or what are the implications doing it one way or the other? Thanks a lot, Andreas

Comparison of G4 transition radiation simulation and PAI model to testbeam data by Henning Gast <Henning Gast>, 07 Nov, 2007 Dear colleagues, we have conducted a comparison study of G4's simulation of transition radiation (TR) and ionization losses in thin absorbers (PAI model) using testbeam data taken with a prototype for the AMS02-TRD at CERN in 2000. The results indicate excellent agreement in the case of TR of electrons and very good agreement for the simulation of ionization losses by protons in a gas-filled detector. The study has been accepted for publication in Nucl. Instr. Meth. A and is currently in press. As I believe that this study may be of interest to some of you, please allow me to draw your kind attention to the following URL where you can find the paper: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2007.09.045 Best regards Henning Gast

How to add new gamma cross-section? Keywords: cross section, gamma by Ilan <ilanmor@yahoo.com>, 02 Nov, 2007 Hi, I'm new to Geant4. I need to enter a new cross-section (which appears in the form of a function formula). The cross section is for the reaction 14N(g,p)13C for 9.17 MeV gammas. How can it be done? I would appreciate any help. Ilan

Nuclear Coulomb Excitation implemented? Keywords: coulomb excitation by <frotaru@tandem.nipne.ro>, 28 Oct, 2007 Hi, I would like to know if there's any chance to simulate the coulomb excitation of an incoming beam (around 40 MeV/u - mass region A=40) on a thin (200 microns) lead target. I saw a previous post (dating nov.2003) asking the same thing, but at that time "this physics is not implemented in geant4. There is work progressing at ESA, that will allow for this, though"". I'm using geant4.9.0. Any "include" I could use for the above mentioned purpose? Thanks a lot, Florin.

scintillator NaI 3"x3" efficiency!? Keywords: efficiency of scintillator by Ibrahim <Ibrahim>, 25 Oct, 2007 Hi; i am simulating the interaction of gammas in scintillator NaI 3"x3". I' d like to calculate the efficiency of this detector. the distance between scintillator and the source of gammas is 4 cm; i have sent gammas of 662 keV and i have foud that the efficiency is 2.7043 percent. With experience it is 2.342 percent, do you have any idea about this efficency? i have another question about efficiency of scintillator NaI 3"x3"" and energy. When i increase the energy ( 1 Mev, 1.5 Mev, 2 meV until 5 Mev) the efficieny increases too. I think it must not increase? what is worong? best Regards

Secondary effects in testem7 Keywords: fluorescence auger low energy atomic deexcitation by <carsten.rohde@trash-mail.de>, 25 Oct, 2007 Hello, I want to activate Fluorescence and Auger for example testem7. There the processes are registered like. } else if (particleName == "e-") { //electron pmanager->AddProcess(new G4MultipleScattering, -1, 1, 1); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4LowEnergyIonisation, -1, 2, 2); pmanager->AddProcess(new G4LowEnergyBremsstrahlung, -1,-1, 3); ... from the manual page I got for the activation: G4LowEnergyIonization* eIonisationProcess->ActivateFluorescence(true); But following the advice in other posts I don't want to change the physics list and in testem7 I can't find the name for the instance ("eIonisationProcess") which I have to use. How can I activate fluorescence and Auger in this case? Thank you for helping Carsten

1 Re: Secondary effects in testem7 (Vladimir IVANTCHENKO - 25 Oct, 2007)

Re: Secondary effects in testem7 (carsten.rohde@trash-mail.de - 25 Oct, 2007)

Re: Secondary effects in testem7 (Vladimir IVANTCHENKO - 25 Oct, 2007)

Re: Secondary effects in testem7 (carsten.rohde@trash-mail.de - 25 Oct, 2007)

Re: Secondary effects in testem7 (Vladimir IVANTCHENKO - 25 Oct, 2007)

Re: Secondary effects in testem7 (carsten.rohde@trash-mail.de - 25 Oct, 2007)

Re: Secondary effects in testem7 (Vladimir IVANTCHENKO - 25 Oct, 2007)

Re: Secondary effects in testem7 (carsten.rohde@trash-mail.de - 26 Oct, 2007)

Re: Secondary effects in testem7 (Vladimir IVANTCHENKO - 26 Oct, 2007)

Re: Secondary effects in testem7 (carsten.rohde@trash-mail.de - 29 Oct, 2007)