Can MCNP solve the geometric coincidence issue with a semi-cylinder and cuboid?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on resolving the geometric coincidence issue encountered when modeling a semi-cylinder within a cuboid using MCNP (Monte Carlo N-Particle Transport Code). Users highlighted the importance of Constructive Solid Geometry (CSG) in defining shapes and their intersections. A specific problem arose with cell definitions, particularly with the signs of surfaces in the surface card, which led to discrepancies in the displayed geometry. The resolution involved correcting the X-axis orientation, although issues persisted with cell card definitions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of MCNP (version unspecified) and its Constructive Solid Geometry capabilities
  • Familiarity with cell definitions and surface cards in MCNP
  • Knowledge of geometric modeling principles, particularly for intersecting shapes
  • Experience with visualization tools like VisEd for MCNP
NEXT STEPS
  • Investigate the use of MCNP's Constructive Solid Geometry for complex shapes
  • Learn about proper cell and surface definitions in MCNP
  • Explore troubleshooting techniques for visualization issues in VisEd
  • Review best practices for modeling intersecting geometries in MCNP
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for computational physicists, nuclear engineers, and anyone involved in geometric modeling using MCNP, particularly those facing challenges with complex shape intersections.

chengmo
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
How do we solve the geometric coincidence problem? I need a semi-cylinder that fits into the cuboid but if I use the cuboid and the cylinder directly it's geometrically problematic
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
I'm not quite following the question. MCNP does Constructive Solid Geometry. Shapes are supposed to intersect and then you tell it which volumes are what part of the problem.
 
I set up four cubes but only two are displayed. In my setting, there should be cuboids in the middle and under the ring. Why?

QQ图片20230426151847.png
 

Attachments

In a cell definition a positive surface typically means above or outside. A negative surface means below or inside. If you take a look at cell 3, you have -3 4, meaning below x=4 and at the same time above x=6. The space between x=4 and 6 is "3 -4". Now have a look at cell 4 and see if you can find something similar.
 
Thank you very much Alex A, I got the X-axis wrong. The sign of 1, 2,3, and 4 surfaces in the surface card is wrong
 
However, after I corrected the error of x axis, the modeling problem still occurred in cell card 1. Why is cell card 2 and cell card 1 written in the same way? cell1 caused the problem, but cell2 did not
 

Attachments

  • QQ图片20230427163840.png
    QQ图片20230427163840.png
    19.3 KB · Views: 171
  • QQ图片20230427163848.png
    QQ图片20230427163848.png
    28.7 KB · Views: 155
  • A1++.txt
    A1++.txt
    328 bytes · Views: 160
MCNP seems happy. When I try the interactive plotter I see the full D. VisEd does not seem happy from your picture. Maybe VisEd does not like the comment. I do not see an error.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
3K