Hi Mohammad,
Thanks for reporting this. About comparisons between G3-G4 regarding
Cerenkov photons I remember we also saw some notable differences between
the number of detected photons in ALICE RICH detectors (less in G4) -
not explained yet.
Regards,
Andrei
Mohammad Al-Turany wrote:
> 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.
>> 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...
>> 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 >>>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Feb 03 2009 - 11:25:02 CET