Respected @jemancza,
I am really thankful to you for your valuable suggestions and help it sorted out most part of my problem. However, I have one last query before this section can be closed. this query is related to the identification of objects inside a box filled with water. For clarification i am attaching the geometry sample here,
Here I have two materials e.g., TNT, and PMMA both are of different shapes and are inside the polyethylene box filled with water. What I want is that when I will irradiate the both objects and plot the scored coordinated both objects should be clearly differentiate able from one another based on their geometry. This is true when I did this without box and water filling where upon plotting both objects depicted the exact geometry as they had in flair interface. But problem arises when I enclosed them in the box filled with water. here is what I am getting
To do this what I am doing is that scoring the interactions happens inside the Targets (TARGET and TARGET1, one by one irradiation ) using USDRAW and stupre.f and in BXDRAW scoring the photons from the outerwall of the box into the air. For now I just irradiate the objects from one point which was at (0, 1,9) for TNT and (0,-1,9) for PMMA.
Moreover, I want to irradiate the object from multiple points (e.g., z=9, y=4,3,2,1,0,-1,-2,-3,-4) and want that it will be done in a single run rather than running multiple time over and over. For this I know that preprocessors, loop variables, etc., can be used for this purpose, but they are time and space-consuming, and each method generates separate files for each position/run. I would like to accomplish this in a single run with minimal CPU time and disk space. So, is there another way to do so? for this purpose can beamspot, and SPECSOUR be used?
I would be very thankful to you for your valuable suggestions
Sincerely,
Let me start with the object separation in your scoring. You didn’t specify what is the quantity that you are trying to score, but in general whether you are able to distinguish your objects depends on material properties of the given objects. For example, the materials that you are using in your simulation have fairly similar density so it could be that they will not be clearly separated in your scoring.
About irradiation from different points in a single run - you have a very comprehensive presentation from the last FLUKA beginner’s course about the options to customize your source using built-in cards:
You should be able set up the source the way you described using the instructions from the above presentation.
What you have to do is randomize your beam position (keeping in mind that they direction will have to change accordingly) using for example a uniform distribution. To understand better how this works, I suggest you have a look at another presentation from the beginner’s course:
I am working on scoring the backscatter photons across the entire geometry, specifically targeting Compton-scattered photons influenced by material density. We had discussion in the following post ( Photon backscattering depth measurement and modifying angular distribution graph).
The goal is to clearly differentiate between the materials and object shapes, as I have successfully done in this case.
Here I had two objects same as asked in question one was carbon where as one was Copper but were not enclosed inside a box.
However, the objects should still be distinguishable based on their shapes and materials. In another example, I used concrete with rebar reinforcement inside it, but I was unable to reconstruct the entire geometry from the backscatter photons. Additionally, the steel rebars were not detected in the backscatter photons.
In another example, I had a wall composed of different layers such as concrete, soil, and paint. I set the conditions like this: (IF(NRGNAM .EQ. "AIR" .AND. MRGNAM.EQ."TARGET" .OR. MRGNAM.EQ."soil" .OR. MRGNAM.EQ."paint" )). The results I obtained seemed reasonable, but I’m uncertain if the condition was correctly set. I also modified the MRGNAM in both USDRAW and stupre.f.
The three layers were clearly distinguishable: the first from -2 to -1, the second from 0 to 1, and the final one from 0 to 2, based on both density and geometry, as shown.
I am attaching my input files and routines with this email for the original question I asked.
Respected @jemancza
I have tried various ways but I am not able to succeed in getting the desirable results. I need your kind suggestions on this problem.
Thank you
