| Message: Re: Optical Surfaces and Sigma_Alpha | Not Logged In (login) |
|
> a) is there a practical difference between "polishedbackpainted" and
> "groundbackpainted" with "prob_ss = 1.0"? no, prob_ss = 1.0 turns 'ground' into 'polished' > b) ... and "groundbackpainted" with "prob_sl = 1.0" + "sigma_alpha = > 0.0"? (I just found out: this should be treated exactly as the case > above) again, no, sigma_alpha = 0 turns 'ground' into 'polished' > c) is there a practical difference between "dielectric_metal" + > "polished" and "polishedfrontpainted"? no > d) I am biasing my scintillation yield down from 9200 to 92 photons/MeV > and weight my results to save CPU time. Is that too much? It looks good > to me, though. this question is for you to decide; it'll depend on the statistics you require to maybe see subtleties > However, that will only make sense if I define a physical air gap and > set the "specular lobe" & "sigma_alpha" for the back surface, right? yes > Because with a "painted" surface it would affect the front interface > (scintillator-gap) ... with the "painted" option the reflector is always Lambertian either as a backup to a gap or directly on the scintillator.
|
| Inline Depth: | Outline Depth: | Add message: |
|
to: |