CFG4 PMT Edge Double Reflect¶
Loading cfg4 tag 2 (0.97,1) ie edge photons with optixviz enabled then adjusting near/far and scanparam.z to just look at thin slice. NB the OptiX analytic geometry visualized is not the actual (G4) geometry being used : however the boundary positions look correct.
ggv-;ggv-pmt-test --cfg4 --load --optixviz
96.995 100.005
96.995 100.005
2:PmtInBox -2:PmtInBox c2
8ccd 391394 391429 0.00 [4 ] TO BT BT SA
4ccd 29418 29306 0.21 [4 ] TO BT BT AB
4d 22602 22571 0.02 [2 ] TO AB
8bd 18671 19186 7.01 [3 ] TO BR SA
8cd 10338 10116 2.41 [3 ] TO BT SA
4cd 7554 7510 0.13 [3 ] TO BT AB
86ccd 4602 4626 0.06 [5 ] TO BT BT SC SA
86d 3762 3729 0.15 [3 ] TO SC SA
7cd 3233 3181 0.42 [3 ] TO BT SD
4bd 1811 1662 6.39 [3 ] TO BR AB
8cbbcd 0 3598 3598.00 [6 ] TO BT BR BR BT SA
8cccccbcd 1885 0 1885.00 [9 ] TO BT BR BT BT BT BT BT SA
8ccccbcd 762 0 762.00 [8 ] TO BT BR BT BT BT BT SA
8ccccccbcd 746 0 746.00 [10] TO BT BR BT BT BT BT BT BT SA
8c6d 509 440 5.02 [4 ] TO SC BT SA
8ccc6ccd 386 2 380.04 [8 ] TO BT BT SC BT BT BT SA
46ccd 275 310 2.09 [5 ] TO BT BT SC AB
8cbc6ccd 26 307 237.12 [8 ] TO BT BT SC BT BR BT SA
8c6ccd 20 296 241.06 [6 ] TO BT BT SC BT SA
Push out the edge to accentuate the problem, the radial range from 99:100 mm should always do this edge clipping.
How are all these things still happening right out at edge ?
98.994 100.005
98.995 100.005
WARNING:env.numerics.npy.seq:code bad abbr ?0?
WARNING:env.numerics.npy.seq:code sees 1 bad abbr in TO BR SC BT BT BT BT ?0? BT BT
5:PmtInBox -5:PmtInBox c2
8ccd 385483 385663 0.04 [4 ] TO BT BT SA
8bd 38310 38104 0.56 [3 ] TO BR SA
4ccd 29398 29220 0.54 [4 ] TO BT BT AB
4d 22949 23089 0.43 [2 ] TO AB
86ccd 4633 4570 0.43 [5 ] TO BT BT SC SA
4cd 4541 4435 1.25 [3 ] TO BT AB
8cbbcd 0 4268 4268.00 [6 ] TO BT BR BR BT SA
86d 3802 3702 1.33 [3 ] TO SC SA
4bd 3102 3248 3.36 [3 ] TO BR AB
8cccccbcd 2332 0 2332.00 [9 ] TO BT BR BT BT BT BT BT SA
8ccccbcd 898 0 898.00 [8 ] TO BT BR BT BT BT BT SA
8ccccccbcd 887 0 887.00 [10] TO BT BR BT BT BT BT BT BT SA
86bd 557 542 0.20 [4 ] TO BR SC SA
Switch to pencil beam in hope for simplification.
if [ "$tag" == "5" ]; then
typ=point
src=99,0,300
tgt=99,0,0
fi
98.999 98.999
98.999 98.999
5:PmtInBox -5:PmtInBox c2
8ccd 406449 404024 7.26 [4 ] TO BT BT SA
4ccd 30692 30456 0.91 [4 ] TO BT BT AB
4d 22743 23062 2.22 [2 ] TO AB
8bd 17024 18367 50.96 [3 ] TO BR SA
4cd 6302 6266 0.10 [3 ] TO BT AB
86ccd 4984 4866 1.41 [5 ] TO BT BT SC SA
8cbbcd 0 4280 4280.00 [6 ] TO BT BR BR BT SA
86d 3758 3725 0.15 [3 ] TO SC SA
8ccccccbcd 3666 0 3666.00 [10] TO BT BR BT BT BT BT BT BT SA
4bd 1469 1672 13.12 [3 ] TO BR AB
8c6d 498 505 0.05 [4 ] TO SC BT SA
8ccc6ccd 334 2 328.05 [8 ] TO BT BT SC BT BT BT SA
46ccd 321 327 0.06 [5 ] TO BT BT SC AB
8cbc6ccd 16 301 256.23 [8 ] TO BT BT SC BT BR BT SA
8c6ccd 20 295 240.08 [6 ] TO BT BT SC BT SA
4cbbcd 0 287 287.00 [6 ] TO BT BR BR BT AB
86bd 274 257 0.54 [4 ] TO BR SC SA
46d 253 209 4.19 [3 ] TO SC AB
cccccc6ccd 126 220 25.54 [10] TO BT BT SC BT BT BT BT BT BT
Use circular beam of radous 0.5mm centered in the point (tag 6) for better visibility Visualize the optix equivalent process “TO BT BR BT BT BT BT BT BT SA” with a single reflect.
TO
BT enter Pyrex
BR 1st reflect on inner side of lower Pyrex hemi
BT ... angles look like a reflect but labelled BT
BT ??? subsequent transmit out into MO looks like it happens at wrong position
Make this explicit with pmt_skimmer.py
With CPropLib::m_groupvel_kludge=true 1st 4 recs agree, apart from 4th flag BT/BR:
INFO:env.numerics.npy.evt:Evt seqs ['TO BT BR BR BT SA']
A(Op)
0 z 300.000 300.000 300.000 r 98.999 98.999 98.999 t 0.098 0.098 0.098 smry m1/m2 4/ 14 MO/Py -28 ( 27) 13:TO
1 z 67.559 67.559 67.559 r 98.999 98.999 98.999 t 1.251 1.251 1.251 smry m1/m2 14/ 4 Py/MO 28 ( 27) 12:BT
2 z 50.832 50.832 50.832 r 100.372 100.372 100.372 t 1.331 1.331 1.331 smry m1/m2 14/ 11 Py/OV -125 (124) 11:BR
3 z 35.551 35.551 35.551 r 93.176 93.176 93.176 t 1.416 1.416 1.416 smry m1/m2 14/ 4 Py/MO 28 ( 27) 12:BT
4 z 2.005 2.005 2.005 r 81.137 81.137 81.137 t 1.532 1.532 1.532 smry m1/m2 4/ 14 MO/Py -28 ( 27) 12:BT
5 z -114.115 -114.115 -114.115 r 42.253 42.253 42.253 t 1.953 1.953 1.953 smry m1/m2 14/ 13 Py/Vm -29 ( 28) 12:BT
6 z -123.875 -123.875 -123.875 r 39.250 39.250 39.250 t 1.990 1.990 1.990 smry m1/m2 14/ 13 Py/Vm -29 ( 28) 12:BT
7 z -150.810 -150.810 -150.810 r 39.250 39.250 39.250 t 2.051 2.051 2.051 smry m1/m2 4/ 14 MO/Py -28 ( 27) 12:BT
8 z -169.002 -169.002 -169.002 r 39.250 39.250 39.250 t 2.081 2.081 2.081 smry m1/m2 4/ 12 MO/Rk 124 (123) 12:BT
9 z -300.000 -300.000 -300.000 r 39.250 39.250 39.250 t 2.301 2.301 2.301 smry m1/m2 4/ 12 MO/Rk 124 (123) 8:SA
B(G4)
0 z 300.000 300.000 300.000 r 98.999 98.999 98.999 t 0.098 0.098 0.098 smry m1/m2 4/ 0 MO/?0? 0 ( -1) 13:TO
1 z 67.559 67.559 67.559 r 98.999 98.999 98.999 t 1.251 1.251 1.251 smry m1/m2 14/ 0 Py/?0? 0 ( -1) 12:BT
2 z 50.832 50.832 50.832 r 100.372 100.372 100.372 t 1.331 1.331 1.331 smry m1/m2 14/ 0 Py/?0? 0 ( -1) 11:BR
3 z 35.551 35.551 35.551 r 93.176 93.176 93.176 t 1.416 1.416 1.416 smry m1/m2 14/ 0 Py/?0? 0 ( -1) 11:BR
4 z 19.181 19.181 19.181 r 89.001 89.001 89.001 t 1.495 1.495 1.495 smry m1/m2 4/ 0 MO/?0? 0 ( -1) 12:BT
5 z -300.000 -300.000 -300.000 r 26.569 26.569 26.569 t 3.107 3.107 3.107 smry m1/m2 4/ 0 MO/?0? 0 ( -1) 8:SA
Note that OpaqueVacuum arrives dynamically (from high boundary index), it differs from Vacuum on by 0.1*absorption length:
simon:npy blyth$ ggv --mat 10
[2016-Mar-04 17:36:56.130002]:info: GPropertyMap<T>:: 10 material m:OpaqueVacuum k:refractive_index absorption_length scattering_length reemission_prob OpaqueVacuum
domain refractive_index absorption_length scattering_length reemission_prob
60 1 1e+06 1e+06 0
simon:npy blyth$ ggv --mat 12
[2016-Mar-04 17:38:23.829733]:info: GPropertyMap<T>:: 12 material m:Vacuum k:refractive_index absorption_length scattering_length reemission_prob Vacuum
domain refractive_index absorption_length scattering_length reemission_prob
60 1 1e+07 1e+06 0
FIXED : a TIR bug¶
- reported in npy-/pmt_skimmer.py