1 / 11

MARS flux simulations - update

This technical update discusses the challenges of determining the optimal source and detector sizes in MARS flux simulations and suggests two simulation methods and three detector sizes to achieve accurate results. The results show that a large number of primary protons is required for stable energy deposition in detectors, and slight simplification of the geometry description can speed up the simulation.

dyerc
Download Presentation

MARS flux simulations - update

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. MARS flux simulations - update Sergei Striganov Fermilab August 12, 2009

  2. Technical problems • Detectors are small 0.75x0.75x0.05 cm3 • Direct MARS simulations can not provide acceptable statistical accuracy in reasonable time (7x24 hours 16 CPU) • Two ways to get small enough statistical errors: • using large detector size • pre-calculate particle sources around detectors and run sources many times How to determine optimal source&detector sizes?

  3. Source&detector size dependence 2 simulation methods: • direct simulation • 2 stage simulation & big box source - 50x50x10 cm3 • 2 stage simulation & small box source - 20x20x0.05 cm3 • 2 stage simulation & very small box - 2x2x0.05 cm3 source 3 detector sizes: • real size – 0.75x0.75x0.05 mm3 • small size – 2x2x0.05 cm3 • large size – 20x20x0.05 cm3

  4. Source&detector size dependence 2 simulation methods: • direct simulation • 2 stage simulation & big box source – 50x50x10 cm3 • 2 stage simulation & small box source – 20x20x0.05 cm3 • 2 stage simulation & very small box source – 2x2x0.05 cm3 3 detector sizes: • real size – 0.75x0.75x0.05 mm3 • small size – 2x2x0.05 cm3 • large size – 20x20x0.05 cm3 If number of primary protons is large enough (1.e8) results don’t depend on source&detector size!

  5. Probability to make energy deposition in -20 degree detector

  6. Probability to make energy deposition in -20 degree detector

  7. Probability to make energy deposition in 20 degree detector

  8. Probability to make energy deposition in 20 degree detector

  9. Probability to make energy deposition in -7.5 degree detector

  10. Probability to make energy deposition in -7.5 degree detector

  11. Conclusion • Very large number of primary protons on target (1e8) should be simulated to reach stable energy deposition in detectors • In this case signal has weak dependence on detector&source size. Optimal detector size should be determine • It is possible slightly simplify geometry description to speed up simulation (about 2 times) • It is needed about 140h&24 CPU to get energy deposition in detectors for one beam intensity and one target type (elliptical, round …).

More Related