Can MCNP solve the geometric coincidence issue with a semi-cylinder and cuboid?

In summary, the conversation discusses how to solve a geometric coincidence problem in MCNP, where shapes need to intersect and be defined in a specific way. The conversation also addresses a specific issue with cell definitions and the use of positive and negative surfaces. The issue is eventually resolved by correcting an error in the x-axis, but there is still a problem with cell card 1. There is also mention of a discrepancy between MCNP and VisEd in terms of displaying the model.
  • #1
chengmo
9
0
How do we solve the geometric coincidence problem? I need a semi-cylinder that fits into the cuboid but if I use the cuboid and the cylinder directly it's geometrically problematic
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
I'm not quite following the question. MCNP does Constructive Solid Geometry. Shapes are supposed to intersect and then you tell it which volumes are what part of the problem.
 
  • #3
I set up four cubes but only two are displayed. In my setting, there should be cuboids in the middle and under the ring. Why?

QQ图片20230426151847.png
 

Attachments

  • A1++.txt
    322 bytes · Views: 127
  • #4
In a cell definition a positive surface typically means above or outside. A negative surface means below or inside. If you take a look at cell 3, you have -3 4, meaning below x=4 and at the same time above x=6. The space between x=4 and 6 is "3 -4". Now have a look at cell 4 and see if you can find something similar.
 
  • #5
Thank you very much Alex A, I got the X-axis wrong. The sign of 1, 2,3, and 4 surfaces in the surface card is wrong
 
  • #6
However, after I corrected the error of x axis, the modeling problem still occurred in cell card 1. Why is cell card 2 and cell card 1 written in the same way? cell1 caused the problem, but cell2 did not
 

Attachments

  • QQ图片20230427163840.png
    QQ图片20230427163840.png
    19.3 KB · Views: 110
  • QQ图片20230427163848.png
    QQ图片20230427163848.png
    28.7 KB · Views: 104
  • A1++.txt
    328 bytes · Views: 115
  • #7
MCNP seems happy. When I try the interactive plotter I see the full D. VisEd does not seem happy from your picture. Maybe VisEd does not like the comment. I do not see an error.
 

FAQ: Can MCNP solve the geometric coincidence issue with a semi-cylinder and cuboid?

What is geometric coincidence in the context of MCNP simulations?

Geometric coincidence in MCNP simulations refers to the scenario where two or more geometrical shapes share a common boundary or overlap in such a way that it can cause inaccuracies or difficulties in the simulation. This can lead to issues like incorrect calculation of particle interactions or fluxes.

Can MCNP handle complex geometries like a semi-cylinder and a cuboid?

Yes, MCNP is capable of handling complex geometries, including combinations like a semi-cylinder and a cuboid. The software uses constructive solid geometry (CSG) to define and manage complex shapes and their interactions, allowing for precise modeling of such configurations.

What methods can be used in MCNP to address geometric coincidence issues?

To address geometric coincidence issues in MCNP, users can employ techniques such as using fine mesh grids, applying transformations to slightly separate coincident surfaces, and ensuring proper boundary definitions. Additionally, users can use the "importance" and "weight window" features to control particle tracking and reduce errors.

Does MCNP provide any built-in tools to detect and resolve geometric coincidence problems?

MCNP includes built-in diagnostic tools like the "geometry plotter" and "cell overlap check" to help users identify and resolve geometric coincidence problems. These tools can visually display the geometry and highlight areas where overlaps or boundary issues might occur, allowing for easier troubleshooting.

Are there any specific best practices for modeling a semi-cylinder and cuboid in MCNP to avoid geometric coincidence issues?

Best practices for modeling a semi-cylinder and cuboid in MCNP include ensuring precise definition of surfaces and boundaries, using appropriate cell definitions to avoid overlaps, and validating the geometry with the built-in diagnostic tools. Additionally, users should carefully check the input file for any potential errors and run preliminary simulations to verify the correctness of the geometry setup.

Similar threads

Back
Top