Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add a discussion of different tools and analyses for radiation shielding. #5

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: source
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

gonuke
Copy link
Member

@gonuke gonuke commented Apr 11, 2016

This depends on #4

@gonuke
Copy link
Member Author

gonuke commented Apr 12, 2016

Looking for a review of this @makeclean? @elliottbiondo? It's part of a strategy of establishing where CNERG has unique expertise

numbers, then their mean behavior can be taken as representative of the real
system. The single biggest advantage of Monte Carlo radiation transport is
its ability to model the entire phase space of radiation transport (space,
direction and energy) as continuous. Continuous modeling of space allows for
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

as being continuous? as continuous variables?

@makeclean
Copy link
Contributor

Looks good, should we also include some figures to break up the text?

@gonuke
Copy link
Member Author

gonuke commented Apr 12, 2016

I'll have to think about figures. It would be useful on the website, but for current purposes is not important.

* Add level 1 heading for advanced capabilities
* Add section on activation of flowing systems
* Fix edits by @makeclean
simulated particles, a number of schemes have been introduced, collectively
known as *variance reduction* techniques to help improve this situation.

The most widely used tool for Monte Carlo radiation transport is:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe we should put most widely use for fusion analysis? I think Geant4 has more overall users

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hmmm... maybe we should say on neutron-based systems (somehow) rather than just fusion?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants