|Message: Unexpected results for fluence and TID using Spenvis/GRAS||Not Logged In (login)|
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.
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.
|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.
|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)|
I did the following calculations using Spenvis/GRAS(gdml):
1. Independent runs for two vacuum spheres with r = 19cm and r = 15 cm. Source: Monoenergetic (100MeV) electrons with fluence 100 (1/cm^2 s), sphere with r = 20cm.
SPENVIS calculated fluences 28390 and 17644 for the first and the second spheres. The ratio of fluences/surface_area is constant for these cases (6.24 and 6.26) and is very close to 2pi :-) but is very different from the incident fluence (100).
First confusion: I thought the calculated fluence is normalized to the target's areas. But looks like it is not. Second confusion: after dividing by the surface areas I still have a number very different to the incident environment number (100).
Maybe I do not understand what the incident fluence really mean? How do I get a number that would relate to it?
2. Ta sphere r = 15cm, calculating TID in MeV with the source described. I get 1.6564e+06MeV/s.
If all e were to absorb, I would expect 100(1/cm^2 s)*100MeV*SurfaceArea = 1e+4 MeV/s *2826cm^2 = 2.8e+7 MeV/s.
So about 1/16 of the electrons gets absorbed, I guess? If I change normalization to CURRENT instead of FLUX, I will get 1/4 difference, I assume. Still a big difference. Any intuitive reaction to this difference?
Best regards, Sveta
|Inline Depth:||Outline Depth:||Add message:|