Real Experiment-MCBEND Simulation

AI Thread Summary
Normalization may be necessary to align the experimental results with the MCBEND simulation, particularly if the simulation data hasn't been scaled appropriately. The method of normalization will depend on the specific goals of the analysis, such as matching integrals or peak values. However, even with normalization, discrepancies may persist if the experimental graph shape differs significantly from the theoretical one. The discussion also highlights the importance of providing clear data visuals, suggesting the use of PDFs or JPEGs for clarity. Ultimately, achieving similarity in the graphs requires careful consideration of both the normalization method and the inherent differences in the data.
gxa
Messages
24
Reaction score
3
TL;DR Summary
Normalization for simulation results
Do I need to apply normalization these two graphs to make them similar to each other and if so, how can I do this? I would be very grateful if you can help me if these results are consistent. I compared the results of the experiment and the results of the mcbend simulation.
 

Attachments

Engineering news on Phys.org
gxa said:
TL;DR Summary: Normalization for simulation results

Do I need to apply normalization these two graphs to make them similar to each other and if so, how can I do this? I would be very grateful if you can help me if these results are consistent. I compared the results of the experiment and the results of the mcbend simulation.
It's best not to post documents that can contain macros, like Word or Excel documents. It's better to upload a PDF or JPEG image of your work to help folks understand your question.

Is this for MCNP work? If so, I can move the thread to the Nuclear Engineering forum, where such questions usually go. Finally, is this for schoolwork? What is the context of the question? Thanks.
 
Got it, thanks. Can you move my question to nuclear engineering section and this is not a homework. Also, I added the necessary graphics for my question as a picture again.
 

Attachments

  • graph.PNG
    graph.PNG
    6.6 KB · Views: 119
What do you want to learn from your data? Where does it come from?

It's possible the simulation hasn't been scaled to match the expected experimental result. In that case a normalization is useful. If you want to normalize to the same integral, or same integral of a peak, or something else, will depend on your experiment and your data analysis goal.
 
yes, I did not scale the data. what I want to do is to make the graphs similar. But I don't know exactly how to make normalization
 
gxa said:
what I want to do is to make the graphs similar.
Similar in what way, for what purpose?

Your experimental graph doesn't have the same shape as the theoretical one so they won't match up nicely no matter what you do.
 
I think my code is the same as the environment I have set up. I am investigating the accuracy of the simulation. These are the measurements of my detector and I added my code
1692791605783.png
 

Attachments

Similar threads

Background Analysis for MCBEND Simulation
Replies
0
Views
2K
Gaussian Energy Broadening tally
Replies
1
Views
2K
Experiment-Simulation comparing count values in MCNP
Replies
17
Views
4K
I need help please for Simulation of Xenon Oscillations in a Nuclear Reactor
Replies
4
Views
1K
Help with F4 Fm4 dose calculation in MCNP simulation
Replies
7
Views
2K
Where can I find chemistry experiments that are accurately described with the Dirac equation?
Replies
19
Views
3K
I Simulation of CHSH inequality experiment in Excel
2
Replies
61
Views
4K
Help Needed with MCNP Simulation for Brachytherapy Treatment Room
Replies
1
Views
3K
Computer simulation of MSR work
Replies
8
Views
2K
MCNP Modelling Detector Energy Response Vs Empirical Results
Replies
3
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top