Message: RE: Optically conected volumes Not Logged In (login)
 Next-in-Thread Next-in-Thread
 Next-in-Forum Next-in-Forum

None RE: Optically conected volumes 

Forum: Processes Involving Optical Photons
Re: None Optically conected volumes (Robert Penny)
Date: 24 Mar, 2010
From: Robert Penny <Robert Penny>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01CACBA9.1FBF0BCE
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Problem found.  It was a simple mistake on my part.  My silicon detector =
was logically nested within the scintillator (even though it was =
physically placed outside of it), instead of being nested in the World =
volume.  No wonder it was occasionally getting confused.  When I saw the =
opticalphoton appear to travel through the silicon detector without =
deflecting, it knew it was outside the scintillator so it ergo could not =
have intersected with a bounding surface of the silicon detector.  I was =
seeing it travel through free space in the world volume, even though the =
silicon detector block was=20

I'd still like a clarification if possible.

1.  Are surfaces between daughter volumes in the same parent volume just =
defined by their placements being such that two of their surfaces =
overlap to within a certain geometric tolerance?

2.  Does this cause a geometry problem with possible overlap of bounding =
surfaces when tracking other particles?

3.  Does the definition of a G4LogicalBorderSurface help the geometry or =
tracking manager solve this problem?

Thanks,

-Rob.

------_=_NextPart_001_01CACBA9.1FBF0BCE
Content-Type: text/html;
 charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3DISO-8859-1">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
6.5.7655.4">
<TITLE>RE: Optically conected volumes</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Problem found.&nbsp; It was a simple mistake on my =
part.&nbsp; My silicon detector was logically nested within the =
scintillator (even though it was physically placed outside of it), =
instead of being nested in the World volume.&nbsp; No wonder it was =
occasionally getting confused.&nbsp; When I saw the opticalphoton appear =
to travel through the silicon detector without deflecting, it knew it =
was outside the scintillator so it ergo could not have intersected with =
a bounding surface of the silicon detector.&nbsp; I was seeing it travel =
through free space in the world volume, even though the silicon detector =
block was<BR>
<BR>
I'd still like a clarification if possible.<BR>
<BR>
1.&nbsp; Are surfaces between daughter volumes in the same parent volume =
just defined by their placements being such that two of their surfaces =
overlap to within a certain geometric tolerance?<BR>
<BR>
2.&nbsp; Does this cause a geometry problem with possible overlap of =
bounding surfaces when tracking other particles?<BR>
<BR>
3.&nbsp; Does the definition of a G4LogicalBorderSurface help the =
geometry or tracking manager solve this problem?<BR>
<BR>
Thanks,<BR>
<BR>
-Rob.</FONT>
</P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01CACBA9.1FBF0BCE--

Inline Depth:
 1 1
 All All
Outline Depth:
 1 1
 2 2
 All All
Add message: (add)

1 Feedback: Re: RE: Optically conected volumes   (Gumplinger Peter - 25 Mar, 2010)
 Add Message Add Message
to: "RE: Optically conected volumes"

 Subscribe Subscribe

This site runs SLAC HyperNews version 1.11-slac-98, derived from the original HyperNews