Help debugging MCNP code - particle lost and zero latice element found

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on troubleshooting a "particle lost" error in MCNP code, emphasizing the importance of ensuring that every part of the 3-D space is filled with exactly one cell without any gaps. Users are advised to utilize the MCNP plotting package to identify geometry errors, particularly by looking for dotted lines around cells. The interactive plotter can help visualize the geometry, revealing issues such as the void cell being incorrectly defined. It is suggested that using simple surfaces instead of macrobodies for defining reflectors may simplify the void cell definition. Proper geometry setup is crucial to prevent errors in MCNP simulations.
AlexFi
Messages
19
Reaction score
5
TL;DR
Help identify gap in geometry or something
I keep getting particle lost error even though there were no hole in the lattice.
Can someone identify any mistake in my code?
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Engineering news on Phys.org
The first thing to do is fire-up the plotting package that comes with MCNP. Look for those dotted lines around some cells. These indicate geometry errors.

In an MCNP model, every part of 3-D space must be filled with exactly one cell. There must be no gaps that are not part of a defined cell. And no point can be part of more than one cell.
 
To give a few more hints, search for "interactive plotter" in the manual and use the "ip" option on the command line.
 
  • Like
Likes Alex A and Grelbr42
I ran mcnp5 ip inp=file
i means process the input file, p means plot the geometry in the interactive plotter.
I click on the "Click here or picture or menu" and type "pz 0" to get a cross section through the reactor. Nothing is coloured in, everywhere I click on the plot is cell 99. This strongly suggests an error in the definition of cell 99, the void cell. Without having much time to look into it :5:6 where 5 and 6 are macrobody surfaces "Top reflector" and "Bottom reflector" feels wrong. Defining those reflectors with simple surfaces rather than macrobodies might make defining the void cell easier.
 
What type of energy is actually stored inside an atom? When an atom is split—such as in a nuclear explosion—it releases enormous energy, much of it in the form of gamma-ray electromagnetic radiation. Given this, is it correct to say that the energy stored in the atom is fundamentally electromagnetic (EM) energy? If not, how should we properly understand the nature of the energy that binds the nucleus and is released during fission?

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
659
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K