Hallo again,
I tried the following new packages:
Root 5.22
Geant4.9.2
Geant4 VMC r375
Vgm 3.01
And fortunately with these packages two problems I reported before are
solved:
> Another issue here was the report of Mohammad that assemblies do appear
> sometime as current volume in tracking (which should never happen).
> - I did a recent development that fixed a related issue for divided
> volumes (using the same method to propagate). I suggest to Mohammad to
> try again and report back. Anyway I cannot test without a simple example.
This error does not appear any more with the new root! So I would say it is
solved.
> 5. Report from Mohammad that reflections are not handled correctly via
> G4root interface.
> - I checked with the example provided with G4root in test directory
> (propagation of optical photons in a water tank with bubbles - N06).
> Reflections *are* taken into account. No example provided yet by Mohammad...
Now the results of Root navigation and native geant4 navigation are
identical concerning the total reflection of cerenkov photons. Still a big
deference to Geant3 but this has to be investigated (cuts, no. Of steps and
so on).
Still the problem with I id and assemblies I will try to discuss with Ivana
before the meeting!
Regards
Mohammad
On 19.01.2009 14:36 Uhr, "Andrei Gheata" <Andrei.Gheata_at_cern.ch> wrote:
> Hi Mohammad,
>
> OK, we will discuss this at the next meeting and decide there what
> changes (from you and Alessandra should be applied in GEANE. BTW, since
> we did not have Andrea last time he will be very welcome.
>
> I am now booking the meetings for the whole year and make a general
> announcement of the details.
>
> Thanks,
> Andrei
>
> Mohammad Al-Turany wrote:
>> Hallo everyone,
>>
>> Just a comment to the first point:
>>
>>> 1. Try to figure out the timeline/responsible for re-writing EUSTEP and
>>> possibly come-up with more development requirements (Mohammad).
>>> - status ?
>>
>> I rewrote the eustep completely in c++ (TGeant3gu), I also had to interface
>> some common blocks, modify the Makefile and so on. Any way it is working now
>> for me and I can send the changes at anytime to Rene. The only point which
>> we may discuss here is that if we should implement in the
>> TVirtualMCApplication a new method GeaneStepping and call this from the
>> eustep instead of the stepping which is used usually by G3/G4/Fluka, me
>> personally I prefer to do this new method! The question is, would it be ok
>> to everybody should we discuss this in the meeting or there is no need for
>> discussion?
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Mohammad
>>
>>
>>
>> On 14.01.2009 8:43 Uhr, "Andrei Gheata" <Andrei.Gheata_at_cern.ch> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello everyone,
>>>
>>> We promised another meeting last year but due to several reasons we did
>>> not do it. For the next ones I will follow Federico's suggestion and
>>> book them in advance for the whole year so that we will be forced to
>>> keep up.
>>>
>>> OK, now a reminder for the action list from the last meeting:
>>> http://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?resId=minutes&materialId=minutes&con
>>> fI
>>> d=41169
>>>
>>> 1. Try to figure out the timeline/responsible for re-writing EUSTEP and
>>> possibly come-up with more development requirements (Mohammad).
>>> - status ?
>>>
>>> 2. Notify M.Maire about the issue (un-physical peaks in GEANE low
>>> momentum spectra) so that it can be replaced in the GEANE release.
>>> (Rene) Apply patch from Alessandra to ERTRCH
>>> - I know there was a discussion with M.Maire who agreed with the results
>>> of Alessandra and basically said that the ball is on our side. Any news
>>> if the patch was applied ?
>>>
>>> 3. The idea was to remove assembly volumes from the tree path (Ivana had
>>> to supply an example to Mohammad.
>>> - status ?
>>> Another issue here was the report of Mohammad that assemblies do appear
>>> sometime as current volume in tracking (which should never happen).
>>> - I did a recent development that fixed a related issue for divided
>>> volumes (using the same method to propagate). I suggest to Mohammad to
>>> try again and report back. Anyway I cannot test without a simple example.
>>>
>>> 4. Implement the possibility to configure not having G3 defaults so the
>>> user can use DefineParticle()/SetDecayMode() for defining his own.
>>> - I admit I did not look yet into this. Ivana, is it better on your side
>>> ? It is something simple to do but we should actually do it.
>>>
>>> 5. Report from Mohammad that reflections are not handled correctly via
>>> G4root interface.
>>> - I checked with the example provided with G4root in test directory
>>> (propagation of optical photons in a water tank with bubbles - N06).
>>> Reflections *are* taken into account. No example provided yet by Mohammad...
>>>
>>> 6. A particle may end-up outside the setup giving the error message: "No
>>> physical volume found at track vertex: (107635,-190901,-638802)"
>>> - I have fixed this and to my knowledge does not happen again.
>>>
>>> 7. "Proposed step is 0" issue in FLUKA-VMC.
>>> - I have fixed this in TFluka thanks to the fact that I have got the
>>> FLUKA source from Alfredo Ferrari.
>>>
>>> To do's:
>>> Responsibles for the items not yet solved, please let me know the
>>> status. For everybody: I will try to book the next meeting at the very
>>> beginning of February and after every 2 months after - let me know if
>>> you are happy with this. Any new items to add to the agenda are welcome.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Andrei
>>>
>>
Received on Thu Jan 22 2009 - 14:16:40 CET