Analyzing Pulse Height vs. Time Response of a Scintillator Detector in Front of a Pulsed X-Ray Source

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the feasibility of observing pulse height versus time response in MCNP for a scintillator detector exposed to a pulsed X-ray source. It is suggested that while MCNP can utilize the F8 tally for pulse height, it may not directly show the time response as seen on an oscilloscope. Instead, users are encouraged to combine F8 tally results with the source's pulse details, the scintillator's decay time, and any charge integration from the preamplifier to predict the pulse shape. The conversation emphasizes the complexity of accurately modeling this response in MCNP. Overall, achieving a precise pulse shape prediction requires careful consideration of multiple factors.
Salman Khan
Messages
35
Reaction score
2
TL;DR Summary
Analyzing Pulse Height vs. Time Response of a Scintillator Detector in Front of a Pulsed X-Ray Source
F8 tally is pulse height tally use in MCNP. Is it possible to see pulse height vs. time response in MCNP (as we can see on the oscilloscope) of, say, a scintillator detector placed in front of a pulsed X-ray source?
 
Last edited:
Engineering news on Phys.org
I don't think so. Try using an F8 and then use the pulse details of the source, the decay time of the scintillator, and any charge integration in the preamp or processing to predict the pulse shape. Good luck!
 
  • Like
Likes Salman Khan
Hello, I'm currently trying to compare theoretical results with an MCNP simulation. I'm using two discrete sets of data, intensity (probability) and linear attenuation coefficient, both functions of energy, to produce an attenuated energy spectrum after x-rays have passed through a thin layer of lead. I've been running through the calculations and I'm getting a higher average attenuated energy (~74 keV) than initial average energy (~33 keV). My guess is I'm doing something wrong somewhere...
Back
Top