Cooling time and activity for individual isotopes

So far I have been using RESNUCLEi to score the yields for various cooling times (written in ***_sum.lis and ***tab.lis files). This works fine. However, now I am trying to get the same results in the unit of ‘activity’, i.e, instead of having the number of isotopes, I want their activities (Bq) listed in a data file. I tried various ways (thought EVENDAT would do the job), but no luck so far.

Can someone please tell me what is the right way? A script can be written to calculate the activity for each isotope, but I am sure FLUKA readily does it.

Best regards,

Now, the manual says " 1) WARNING: when the DCYSCORE option is applied to a detector with WHAT(1) > 0.0, all quantities are expressed PER UNIT TIME (in seconds). For instance, the RESNUCLEi estimator will output Bq". However, the summary file (***_sum.lis) clearly mentions the unit, which is not Bq. I am a bit more confused now.


Hi, if you activate the radioactive decay calculation for specific cooling times by RADDECAY (WHAT(1)=1.0) and you link a RESNUCLEi scoring to a cooling time by DCYSCORE (WHAT(1) > 0.0), then what you get are indeed already activities in Bq, as the manual says. Still, in the _sum.lis file you should read:
**** Residual nuclei distribution **** **** (Bq/cmc) ****
which is consistent with the above (and where /cmc holds only if you wanted to put the region volume in the RESNUCLEi card, otherwise you just get the isotope total activity over the scoring region).

Hi Ceruttif,
Thanks a lot! I checked and found that some of my files were indeed recording in Bq. There were some SDUM and decay timing related mistakes in my input files. Now I am getting the Bq outputs consistently. However, now looks like I can’t have the yields for those cooling times, i.e. the number/ratios of isotopes for each cooling time!

Any comment?

Best regards,

Well, these differ from the respective activity just by the isotope decay constant. :wink:

“Well, these differ from the respective activity just by the isotope decay constant. :wink:
You are right. But the same can be said for the yield to activity conversion. The concern is that one then ends up doing it ‘by hand’ :slight_smile: