Deuterium beam on deuterated polyethylene

Dear FLUKA users,

I want to make a radiological risk assessment for a 600 keV deuterium beam hitting on a 2 microns deuterated polyethylene (CD2).
I was wondering whether this new FLUKA release (4.2.0) can handle this very low energy for deuterons, because as far as I understood, up until now it was not possible to do this kind of assessment. Also, whether or not I can use such small thicknesses for targets.
I tried to create an input for my particular case but I get a ton of errors and I do not know how I can solve them, given how this is the first time that I am trying to work with deuterons as primary beam.
I attach the .inp and .flair project.
TEST_DEUTERON.inp (2.3 KB)
TEST_DEUTERON.flair (2.0 KB)

1 Like

Dear Irina,

Your problem should indeed be treatable in FLUKA 4.2, but you should carefully consider the points and warnings below.

Your input contained the following main errors:

  • The LOW-MAT cards should assign cross sections to H-2 and C-12 respectively (not CD2).
  • Comment out the IONTRANS with DEUTERON
  • You don’t really need the PHYSICS card with the LOWDEU and WHAT(1)=0, as this is anyway the default. The intention of the card is to be able to switch off the low-energy-d interaction model if ever desperately needed (misbehavior etc).
  • Forget the PHOTONUC card (one would not expect to see photons with ~10s of MeV here)
  • Forget the LOW-NEUT card (you ask anyway for the defaults).
  • The PART-THR cards for PHOTON and ELECTRON are ineffective (the thresholds for these particles go rather through the EMFCUT).
  • In the PART-THR for d you can put e.g. 1e-5 GeV.
  • You can comment out the PART-THR for neutrons.

Note that your geometry is immersed in air: 600 keV deuterons will undergo electronic stopping, so their energy upon arrival on the slab will critically depend on where your beam starts. You may want instead
to put vacuum.

Thin (say, down to a micron) targets should not be a problem per se in FLUKA. There is one physical consideration to make though: if you look at the output file you’ll see a table with the inelastic scattering
lengths for deuterons on various materials. You’ll see that deuterons (at the beam energy) undergo one nuclear inelastic interaction in your CD2 every 70 cm or so. Considering that your target is 2 um thick, this begs for a LAM-BIAS card, shortening the inelastic scattering length of primary deuterons by a factor say 1e-5 (otherwise you’d need to sample for an excessively long time to even begin to see nuclear inelastic interactions). Consider using SDUM=INEPRI to bias only the primary deuterons.

Increase the number of primaries to e.g. 10000 (and beyond once you’re sure things run).

What do you want to score exactly? If you wish to look at the production of residual nuclei, add a RESNUCLE card. You’ll witness radioisotope production (as opposed to previous versions of FLUKA, where even with the IONSPLIT recipe one would not score any residual nuclei!).

If you care about prompt radiation (mainly n, I presume), you should be able to see it as well, e.g. with a USRBDX card scoring one-way fluence of say neutrons from the target onto the void/air.

One warning: whereas the reaction cross section for d+D should be reasonable, the parametrization for the reaction cross section of d on heavier nuclei (including C) can suffer from considerable uncertainties
at such low deuteron energies.

Note that although the recently included model for low-energy deuterons has been reasonably tested (especially for target nuclei with atomic number Z>2 and mostly for energies above a few MeV, for which it was conceived), its performance on deuterium, tritium, and helium targets is still tentative, as disclaimed in the RELEASE-NOTES.

For all of the above It would be advisable to put a sizeable safety margin on top if you use it for your estimates.

With kind regards,

Cesc

3 Likes

Thank you so much for your detailed answer and sorry for the very late reply.
I managed to implement all your suggestions.
I am interested in calculating the doses that would arise from performing this kind of experiment and also I would like to calculate the neutron flux.
I still have one question. Is it possible to check which cross sections are used in FLUKA for this kind of computation? I looked it up on TENDL and EXFOR databases and I know what values are known from experimental measurements (ENDFB VII.1 2011). So I think that if in FLUKA are implemented the same databases I should be a bit closer to reality with my results? Please correct me if I am wrong.
Also, what do you mean by that sizeable safety margin?
I attach the new .inp and .flair projects.
input_3MV.flair (10.6 KB)
input_3MV.inp (7.2 KB)

Hello Irina,

I still have one question. Is it possible to check which cross sections are used in FLUKA for this kind of computation?

The plot below displays the (d,n) cross section for deuterons on D (red) and T (blue) used by FLUKA 4.2 (solid curves) at your energies, as well as the experimental data from EXFOR (symbols).

Also, what do you mean by that sizeable safety margin?

The low-energy deuteron interaction model for FLUKA 4.2 was conceived for target isotopes from Li onward. For lighter isotopes (He, T, D) the performances are tentative. For D and T you’ll get the right reaction rate as per the reaction cross sections above and the (integrated) neutron flux should be fine as well. Nevertheless, when looking e.g. at higher energies or at differential quantities (say angular distributions) it is still advisable to keep an open eye for possible artifacts and to accommodate a safety factor in your estimates to be on the conservative side. Ultimately it depends on which quantity you are looking at and to which purposes

With kind regards,

Cesc

Thank you for answer and again sorry for the delayed answer.
My range of energies of interest is well between the range from the plot you showed. So as long as I am in that interval I can see that the CS are well within reasonable doubt. Correct me please if I understood it wrong.
Regarding my other question I still don’t think I understood quite right. We are interested in scoring the DOSE-EQs for our d(d,n)3He and d(d,p)3H. Could I obtain the doses or this kind of scoring is on that “sizeable safety margin” that you were mentioning?
Another idea that comes to mind in order to double check whether or not I could use FLUKA to make this scoring was to also score the Residual Activities and compare them with experimental data. Could that work?

Best regards,
Irina

Dear Irina,

Thank you for answer and again sorry for the delayed answer.

My range of energies of interest is well between the range from the plot you showed. So as long as I am in that interval I can see that the CS are well within reasonable doubt. Correct me please if I understood it wrong.

If your deuterons have some multiple of 100 keV energy, the FLUKA description of their nuclear interactions on D should a priori be reasonable (but do keep an open eye for inconsistencies).

Regarding my other question I still don’t think I understood quite right. We are interested in scoring the DOSE-EQs for our d(d,n)3He and d(d,p)3H. Could I obtain the doses or this kind of scoring is on that “sizeable safety margin” that you were mentioning?

Since the evaluation of DOSE-EQ relies on particle fluences as a function of position, the angular distribution of the D(d,n) and D(d,p) processes matter. For the former, things should be reasonable at the aforementioned energies, whereas performances are tentative for the latter.

Another idea that comes to mind in order to double check whether or not I could use FLUKA to make this scoring was to also score the Residual Activities and compare them with experimental data. Could that work?

Provided you have a well calibrated/understood experimental setup, such a comparison would be very valuable. Do not hesitate to get back to us in case of mismatches that may warrant further development activity.

With kind regards,

Cesc