|Message: Re: Material Definitions||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)|
On Mon, 07 Mar 2016 19:23:29 GMT, Christopher Cotter wrote:
> To better illustrate the issue, I've generated a quick plot. > > The 'control' material is just water, after which the isotope varies in > concentration in water from 1ppm to 'pure.' > > I would not expect the dropoff I'm getting from the control to 1ppm, > since it is the vast majority water itself. The production levels then > remain suspiciously constant across my varying concentrations, which > makes me think there's something wrong in my definition of the > materials. The levels for both alpha production and radioactive decay > then spike at the 'pure' material more like what I would expect. > > Are there any nuances to material definition that I may be overlooking > to get such a result? >
It would help if you explain what you do : gun ? energy ? size of absorber ? physics list ? what you look at ?
|Inline Depth:||Outline Depth:||Add message:|