How to convert MCNP-generated data

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hamidul
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
To convert MCNP-generated data to match spectrometer-generated data, it's essential to understand the units involved. MCNP results are expressed in neutrons per square centimeter per source neutron, while the spectrometer measures neutron fluence in n/(cm²*s). Multiplying the MCNP tally results by the source emission rate of 70,292,091 n/s is a recommended starting point. It's also important to ensure that the spectrometer data is adjusted for its response function. Comparing the adjusted MCNP results with the spectrometer data will help in achieving compatibility.
Hamidul
Messages
24
Reaction score
5
TL;DR Summary
Convert MCNP data to a practical spectrometer unit.
In MCNP, the flux value (f2 or f4 tally) comes with the flux per neutron. But in the practical spectrometer, the unit is different. How can I convert MCNP data that matches my spectrometer-generated data? When I go to plot both datasets, the units are different. However, my source emission rate is 70292091 n/s (252Cf). Below is the attached file of my MCNP-generated data. This data was taken at a distance of 100cm from the source. The source anisotropy according to the calibration certificate is 1.01. feel free to seek info that can be necessary.
 

Attachments

Engineering news on Phys.org
Hi @Hamidul,

What are the units of your spectrometer result and can you share that result?

MCNP results will be in neutrons per square cm per source neutron (I assume these tallies are for neutrons). So multiplying by the source activity is not a bad start.

You may need to know if the spectrometer result is adjusted for it's response function.
 
Hi
Alex A said:
Hi @Hamidul,

What are the units of your spectrometer result and can you share that result?

MCNP results will be in neutrons per square cm per source neutron (I assume these tallies are for neutrons). So multiplying by the source activity is not a bad start.

You may need to know if the spectrometer result is adjusted for it's response function.
Hi Alex, The spectrometer result is below. Here I am using a Nested Neutron Spectrometer. Here it measures neutron fluence (n/(cm^2*s). The data are taken for a bare Californium-252 neutron source at a distance of 100cm from the source.
Yes, the data are unfolded with the aid of the response function.
 

Attachments

Hamidul said:
Hi

Hi Alex, The spectrometer result is below. Here I am using a Nested Neutron Spectrometer. Here it measures neutron fluence (n/(cm^2*s). The data are taken for a bare Californium-252 neutron source at a distance of 100cm from the source.
Yes, the data are unfolded with the aid of the response function.
Hello @Alex
 
Hi @Hamidul,

Okay, so this is just testing the SDEF really at this point. When you multiply the MCNP tally results by your emission rate and put them side by side with the spectrometer result, what does it look like?
 
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