Message: Re: polishedbackpainted calculation order Not Logged In (login)
 Next-in-Thread Next-in-Thread
 Next-in-Forum Next-in-Forum

Warning Re: polishedbackpainted calculation order 

Forum: Processes Involving Optical Photons
Re: None polishedbackpainted calculation order (Robert Penny)
Re: Feedback Re: polishedbackpainted calculation order (Gumplinger Peter)
Re: None Re: polishedbackpainted calculation order (Robert Penny)
Re: None Re: polishedbackpainted calculation order (Robert Penny)
Date: 29 Jun, 2010
From: Gumplinger Peter <Gumplinger Peter>

Hi Rob,

All users who are concerned about the various issues that have arisen with G4OpBoundaryProcess since the release of 9.3 should please switch to the attached versions (also in 9.4-BETA). Note, not all of the required fixes are in patch01. for 9.3. Specifically, bug report #1114 and the problem brought up in thread #334. The attached version should work as advertised earlier in this thread; e.g. in that the 'polished' and 'ground' in combination with 'backpainted' revere to the wrapping. The initial interface in that option is specified by the UNIFIED parameters. This newest interpretation is unfortunately also contary to my comments in thread #313.

This version of the code also fixes the issue you brought up in this thread. The reflectivity in the backpainted (and frontpainted) option is the reflectivity of the wrapping.

What caused much of the bugs since 9.3 was that since 9.3 there is now an option to have a reflectivity/finite-transmission for a 'polished' and 'ground' dielectric_dielectric surfaces which was a user request. My initial code applied this reflectivity erroneously also to the initial interface in the case of backpainted options.

Hope this helps to clear up things, Peter


 Add Message Add Message
to: "Re: polishedbackpainted calculation order"

 Subscribe Subscribe

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