Where Are the Other Detectors for F5 Tally in MCNP?

AI Thread Summary
The MCNP manual indicates that multiple detectors can be defined for a single F5 tally, but users report that only the first detector's results appear in the output file. There is speculation that the code may sum results for multiple points or rings into a single answer, leading to confusion. While separate tally numbers like F15, F25, and F35 can provide distinct outputs, the current method of defining multiple detectors is not user-friendly due to limitations in the code's design and documentation. The latest MCNP versions (6.2 and 6.3) should show results for all detectors unless the 'ND' keyword is used to suppress this. Overall, the complexity and lack of clarity in the output process highlight the need for improved usability in the software.
Will_007
Messages
6
Reaction score
1
TL;DR Summary
where is the output for multiple F5 tally detectors
The MCNP manual states that you can have multiple detectors for a single F5 tally. Say you have f15:n x1 y1 z1 r x2 y2 z2 r.....Thing is, my output file only lists the tally result for the first f5 detector (x1,y1,z1). Where are other detectors for this tally? Is there a reason code developers enabled this method of defining multiple detectors vs just using f15, f25, f35....for each one?

Thanks,
Will
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
f15, f25, f35 should all work and give separate answers, I wonder if you specify multiple rings or points on the same tally if it sums all the calculations to a single answer. I might do a test. I'd say the code is not 'clever' but internally it's extremely clever. What it's not is user friendly. It's derived from an old code and it's still in FORTRAN, which has limited string handling capabilities, everything has to be quite explicit; syntax is fairly brittle and error checking is woefully lacking.
 
Hey Alex - so yes, F15, F25....can be used separately but this option allows you to use F15 and then list multiple detector locations (not ring or a sum...the results appear to be as if you separately assigned a tally number to each). Discussion in the manual is limited, but in latest manual online (MCNP 6.3), this is the statement below. It looks like only the first detector belonging to the tally is in the output file, the rest are in the .m file but minimal labels (not user friendly at all)
1675206546484.png
 
I have almost no experience with MCNP6, so I've done some reading. There also isn't much in the way of a glossary. I understand a tally is an F card, a bin is when it's split into multiple results by energy, position or time and a detector is an object that has to be inserted in addition to the existing geometry and cell cards.

F1,2,3,4,6 and 7 don't involve detectors, they use an existing object. MCNP5 and later allows many objects on the same tally and how the results are shown depends upon parentheses.

MCNP5 only allows one ring or point per tally but the same note is in the MCNP5 manual, just meaning F5 can do point arrays (and maybe other reasons) so don't expect to do 20 (the detector limit for that version) F5 tallies under all circumstances.

X 2.6.0, 6.2 and 6.3 manuals allow multiple ring and point detectors per tally and the expected behavior is that is write a tally total as well as individual results for each detector unless this is suppressed with the 'ND' keyword.

The 6.1 and 6.1.1 manuals are maybe unhelpful, and they appear to be derived from the MCNP5 manual, so the behavior might not match the code.

So yeah, unless you are using the 'ND' keyword you should see a result for every detector on the line according to the manual. I also have no idea what the .m file is. :)
 
thanks - .m file is the MCTAL file (obviously! :) )...one day when LANL makes this a user-friendly code it will transform it from formula one to bentley
 
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...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
Back
Top