|Message: Re: G4 vs FLUKA at MeV energies||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)|
This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323328-1678387526-1267612744=:3724 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Tue, 2 Mar 2010, Daniel Egger sent: |----------------------------------------------------------------------| |"Dear Geant4 users, | | | |I'm trying to compare a Geant4 simulation with a FLUKA one. In both | |codes, the geometry is a cube of either Graphite, Stainless Steel or | |Tungsten into which a monoenergetic pencil beam of electrons is sent. | |The beam energy is either 5 MeV, 50 MeV or 200 MeV. | | | |The results show that the higher the energy and the Z of the material | |the more the two codes tend to disagree. The worst case is 200 MeV e- | |into a Tungsten bloc. | | | |I've attached a .pdf with the energy deposition profiles in the target| |(G4 is the blue curve that tends to spread out more transversely) as | |well as the physics list. I can't figure out what is the source of the| |problem. Any ideas? | | | |Best regards, Daniel" | |----------------------------------------------------------------------| Dear Daniel Egger, Geant4 and FLUKA and all other Monte Carlo codes are make-believe instead of reality. They might accurately reproduce reality in certain circumstances but always be suspicious of any extrapolations to anything even slightly different than what has already been experimentally confirmed. Changing the models or the data may drastically change simulated results. I note that the shapes of the curves which you attached are similar, though the numbers are dissimilar. So though you believe that they "tend to disagree", they tend to agree qualitatively instead of quantitatively. Though these were not actually re electrons, I quote them anyway... J. Ranft had in "Hadronic Collisions: Physics, Models and Event Generators" in "Advanced Monte Carlo for radiation physics, particle transport simulation, and applications: proceedings of the Monte Carlo 2000 Conference, Lisbon, 23--26 October 2000" edited by A. Kling et al., Springer, 2001: "[..] Most hadronic event generators which can be used for simulating hadronic and nuclear collisions up to the highest energies are quite similar in their con- struction and in the underlying theoretical concepts. At energies, where data from accelerator and collider experiments are available the models agree rather well with each other and with the most important features of the data. As soon as we compare the extrapolations of the models at higher energy we find in spite of the similarities in the underlying theoretical concepts quite often striking dif- ferences between the predictions of the models. [..] [..]" F. Goldenbaum, M. Enke, D. Filges, J. Galin, C.-M. Herbach, D. Hilscher, U. Jahnke, A. Letourneau, B. Lott, R.-D. Neef, K. Nünighoff, N. Paul, A. Péghaire, L. Pienkowski, H. Schaal, U. Schröder, G. Sterzenbach, A. Tietze, V. Tishchenko, J. Toke, and M. Wohlmuther had in "Validation of MC Models of Spallation Reactions in Thin and Thick Targets in the GeV Range" in the same book: "[..] [..] While the predictive power of inter- and intra-nuclear cascade models coupled to evaporation codes and transport systems is excellent as far as neutron pro- duction in thick targets is concerned, there are considerable discrepancies not only between experiments and models, but also among the different codes themselves when regarding charged particle production in thin targets. [..] [..]" Best regards, Colin Paul Gloster --8323328-1678387526-1267612744=:3724--