MCNP RHP/HEX Geometry Clarifications

  • Thread starter Thread starter MadGander
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mcnp
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on building a fuel compact using hexagonal lattice cells, with issues arising in replicating the lattice along the Z axis. The error-free deck suggests a problem with the definition of the hexagonal prism cell, potentially due to only using one facet. A solution is proposed involving the use of specific MCNP commands to define the lattice in three dimensions, such as FILL= -1:1 -1:1 0:1, which allows for multiple copies of the basic cell. Additionally, a Python library called CardSharpForMCNP is mentioned as a tool that can simplify the generation of MCNP input decks, with a specific test demonstrating a hexagonal lattice. The discussion emphasizes the importance of correctly specifying dimensions to achieve the desired lattice structure.
MadGander
Messages
28
Reaction score
1
TL;DR Summary
What are right hexagonal prism "facets" and how does one define them? Help with MCNP geometry.
Hi all,

I'm working on building a fuel compact using hexagonal lattice cells, but I'm running into trouble with the RHP/HEX definition. The deck is error free, but for one reason or another the lattice cell isn't replicating along the Z axis.. only the X and Y, or at least this is what I'm interpreting from the plotter. My guess is that it has to do with how I'm defining the right hexagonal prism cell (only using one facet). Any help is appreciated.
 

Attachments

Engineering news on Phys.org
MCNP commands (cards) have many different ways of doing things. I have not generated a 3D hex lattice the way you are trying to without specifying the extent in the three dimensions.

The way I have generated 3D hex lattices is to use the FILL= -1:1 -1:1 0:1 which specifies the indices in each of the three dimensions. Here it would be 3x3x2=18 copies of the basic cell.

I am the author of a python library that can ease the generation of MCNP input decks.
https://github.com/pnnl/CardSharpForMCNP
Test 5 in the geometry tests illustrates a hexagonal lattice using the method above.

If you are comfortable with using Python, I suggest giving the library a try.
 
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...
Back
Top