Nested sensitive volumes, Primary particle sources

Feature Requests
1

I have a dream list of features that can be added to expand the current potentialities of G4SEE.

  1. Inclusion of nested sensitive volumes may be needed to go beyond the standard single sensitive volume model. The benefit achieved by nested volumes is that of reproducing also high-energy hadron cross-sections.

  2. At the moment it is possible to simulate mono-directional, mono-particle, mono-energetic beams. However, extending the simulation range to, e.g., isotropic fluxes, mixed-field particle and wide energetic spectra will enable the simulation of the device under more realistic operating conditions, such as the space trapped and galactic radiation or the accelerator mixed-field.

This is everything for the list by now, but I will provide more entries to the list if I found them interesting for me and to the larger collaboration.

1 Like
2

Hi @acoronet!

Thank you for sharing these here!

  1. This feature (nested sensitive volumes) is already on my todo list for a long time, you can find the Gitlab issue here. According to the plans, the release v0.6 will include this major feature as well, also requested by other users earlier. I am already thinking how it could be implemented, I will ask you soon for some inputs :wink:

  2. These are already possible with G4SEE: using General Particle Source (GPS) macro commands you can define any type of source you want. You can find the most useful GPS commands in the G4SEE documentation here as well. Here are some examples:

  • Isotropic flux defined on plane, so particles are coming from all directions within a 2*pi solid angle:
/gps/ang/type      cos          # cosine-law
/gps/direction     0 0 -1
/gps/pos/centre    0 0 10 um
/gps/pos/type      Plane
/gps/pos/shape     Rectangular
/gps/pos/halfx     1 mm
/gps/pos/halfy     2 mm
  • G4SEE example macro with a point-wise differential spectrum for primaries
  • A mixed-field using multiple GPS sources could be defined in one simulation, however I would rather recommend to run multiple simulations and use the linear combination of the results. But if you really need multiple different sources at the same time for a special case (e.g. pile-up), let’s talk about that.
1 Like