Fatal Error The Surface Appears More Than Once in A Chain

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around troubleshooting a series of errors related to surface definitions in a modeling software. Key warnings indicate that multiple surfaces are duplicated, leading to fatal errors in the output. The issue may stem from improper use of fills, where a surface is defined at multiple levels, causing conflicts. The output file is expected to provide more detailed explanations of the errors, including which cells are affected. Participants express a desire for further information to assist in resolving the problem and hope for updates from the original poster.
Ryan89
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
Hi, can anyone help me? I am running the code for the container for the radioactive waste. I run on Vised, but suddenly it can't run due to a fatal error. I also have attached the error. Kindly hit me up if you can help to solve this issue. Thank you!
1657613963656.png
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF.

Your image is not high enough resolution to read the error. Can you upload a zoomed-in picture of the output lines in the upper left?
 
It says:
Warning without Bremsstrahlung flux estimates will be low
Warning 39 surfaces were deleted as being the same as others
Fatal Error surface 2.1 appears more than once in a chain
Fatal Error surface 2.2 appears more than once in a chain
Fatal Error surface 2.3 appears more than once in a chain


I suppose repeated 39 times
 
How the heck were you able to read that?
 
berkeman said:
How the heck were you able to read that?
Could say lucky.
First time of many that with zoom that I could see what was there.
OP should come back and verify.
 
  • Like
Likes Alex A and berkeman
The error looks like it's normally caused by the use of fills where a surface appears at more than one level, say defining a fill and also in the cell description of the fill universe.

The VisEd errors will match the output file, but the output file should have more of an explanation; which offending cells that surface is in and where they are in the chain. The offending surface 2 is composite which is why we have decimals. Fills are normally done into a bigger volume and the filled cell acts as a cookie cutter, filling with the same size would produce this because edges would be coincident. It's normally a warning. I have no idea why this is a fatal error.

Just as an aside, VisEd X_ 22S corresponds to X 2.6 - circa 2008.

If we get more info, maybe we can help solve this. If the OP has solved this, I would hope we're told.
 
  • Like
Likes 19matthew89 and 256bits
Hello everyone, I am currently working on a burnup calculation for a fuel assembly with repeated geometric structures using MCNP6. I have defined two materials (Material 1 and Material 2) which are actually the same material but located in different positions. However, after running the calculation with the BURN card, I am encountering an issue where all burnup information(power fraction(Initial input is 1,but output file is 0), burnup, mass, etc.) for Material 2 is zero, while Material 1...
Hi everyone, I'm a complete beginner with MCNP and trying to learn how to perform burnup calculations. Right now, I'm feeling a bit lost and not sure where to start. I found the OECD-NEA Burnup Credit Calculational Criticality Benchmark (Phase I-B) and was wondering if anyone has worked through this specific benchmark using MCNP6? If so, would you be willing to share your MCNP input file for it? Seeing an actual working example would be incredibly helpful for my learning. I'd be really...
Back
Top