Meaning of "Average" Flux Tallies in MCNP

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the calculation and significance of average flux tallies in MCNP, specifically the F2 and F4 tallies. The F2 tally represents the flux averaged over a surface by dividing the number of particles incident on that surface by its area, adjusted by a source strength multiplier. The user seeks clarification on how this constitutes an "average" flux and how the standard deviation, which indicates relative error, is determined. The F4 tally measures the total path length of particles in a cell divided by the volume, which, while dimensionally correct, raises questions about its conceptual understanding. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the complexities and nuances of understanding flux calculations in MCNP.
a1234
Messages
78
Reaction score
6
Hello, I've been working with MCNP on and off for a few years now, but just recently realized that I don't entirely understand how tallies are actually calculated in MCNP, and what they signify.

Taking the example of the F2 tally, the user manual (Section 3.3.5.1) states that F2 is the "flux averaged over a surface." I understand that the F2 tally takes the number of particles incident on a surface and divides it by the surface area. This value is multiplied by the source strength/flux multiplier card to obtain the true value of the flux on the surface.

I don't fully understand how this is an "average" flux. Is it simply an average in the sense that it is divided by the total surface area? And if so, how is the standard deviation (which is used to find the relative error) calculated, and what does this value represent physically?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
It's an average because different parts of a surface usually have different flux, and this is the total crossings over the total area. I would expect something similar to Poisson statistics, if 100 particles go through a surface then the uncertainty is SQR(100)=10 (to within a certain sigma).

I found F4 tallies to be stranger. They are the total path length of all particles in a cell divided by the volume. Dimensionally it works and it is right, and probably a better way of doing it, but it still feels all kinds of weird.
 
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