Understanding MCNP Output File: Mean Alpha Energy and Particle Distribution

  • Thread starter Thread starter zincsulphide
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    File Mcnp Output
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding an MCNP output file, specifically regarding the mean alpha energy reported as 7.1931E-04. It is clarified that the results are normalized to one particle, meaning the number of simulated particles does not affect the outcome. Additionally, the term "alpha energy" is incorrectly used since the input file is configured for photon transport, and the tally used measures fluence, not energy. Questions about input dimensions and plotting fluence against detector distance are addressed, confirming dimensions are in centimeters and suggesting that energy response is a more relevant measurement. The conversation highlights the complexities of self-teaching MCNP and the importance of accurate terminology and understanding of the output data.
zincsulphide
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Hi there,

I would like some help understanding the attached MCNP output file.

The file tells me that the mean alpha energy is 7.1931E-04 after a million simulations.

I have two questions:
  1. Does the file tell me anywhere what the error in the mean value is (+/-)? Or can I simply work this out from the central limit theroem (1/sqr(number of samples)) = 0.001 MeV
  2. Does the output file list the number of particles in each energy bin, or the average energy of each energy bin? I would like to plot a histogram of number of particles in each bin (or mean bin energy) vs. energy bins. I think the mean energy of each bin is as follows, but I am not sure.
2.0000E-01 1.97533E-04 0.0018
4.0000E-01 1.88478E-04 0.0018
6.0000E-01 3.33297E-04 0.0010
8.0000E-01 0.00000E+00 0.0000
1.0000E+00 0.00000E+00 0.0000
1.2000E+00 0.00000E+00 0.0000
1.4000E+00 0.00000E+00 0.0000
1.6000E+00 0.00000E+00 0.0000
1.8000E+00 0.00000E+00 0.0000
2.0000E+00 0.00000E+00 0.0000
total 7.19309E-04 0.0002

https://docdro.id/M06dhFQ

Thank you for any help
 
Last edited:
Engineering news on Phys.org
Hi,
you write:
"The file tells me that the mean alpha energy is 7.1931E-04 after a million simulations."
remember that MCNP normalized the results with one particule. The result does not depend of the number of particle simulated.
Second you write "alpha Energy" but your input file is in mode p (only photons are transported no alpha !)
you write " mean alpha Energy" but you used a F4 tally : it is not not a enrgy but a fluence !
etc.
 
PSRB191921 said:
Hi,
you write:
"The file tells me that the mean alpha energy is 7.1931E-04 after a million simulations."
remember that MCNP normalized the results with one particule. The result does not depend of the number of particle simulated.
Second you write "alpha Energy" but your input file is in mode p (only photons are transported no alpha !)
you write " mean alpha Energy" but you used a F4 tally : it is not not a enrgy but a fluence !
etc.

Yes I'm self-teaching MCNP and finding it quite difficult.

Can I ask two questions:

1. When inputting dimensions into the cell and surface cards, does MCNP assume they are in centimeters?

2. For my task I am modelling the detection of efficiency of zinc sulphide for detecting alpha particles. If I am altering detector distance, is it appropriate to plot a graph of fluence against detector distance, or is there a more appropriate measurement?

Thanks again
 
hi
1 yes in cm
2it is interesting to have the response in function of energy
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top