What is the general difference between pyPENELOPE, and PENELOPE from NEA?
pyPenelope distribution has a beautiful GUI, and a project wizard.
Does PENELOPE from NEA has the same?
Then ,I did not find a way of simulating photon filtering on Be windows with Cu, or Al filters in pyPENELOPE.
But in the paper [Chul-Young YI, et al. "Simulation of the Mammography X-ray Spectrum"] I see kind of geometrical model with a window, and outer air volume. Moreover, the target seems to be a constrained object, asymmetric relatively to the beam axis.
I wonder, can I define an elliptic electron beam produced by a filament, rather than pointy cold emitters?
Thank you! The application is imaging, but my current goal is optimizing the target, spectrum, and the spot inside the detector specs.
It appears, pyPENELOPE is a quick tool with predefined geometry. I try feeding there models scripted in PENGEOM.js, but something is just not right there. Shower gives too little tracks. When I define Al as a target (just as a test), simulation fails with beam energies above 26kV.
I do it with PENGEOM+pyPENELOPE. Just mark .geo as read-only, preventing overwriting it with generated geometry. It is just operating strangely. As I said, pure Al target with transversely directed Be window fail to simulate with fixed electron beam hotter than 26keV. It drops out, saying "negative F parameter in forcing interaction" (which should be negative for x-ray simulations). Below that it simulates.
(still can not try official PENELOPE, the path of registration is long)
The thing I do not understand is, should I enclose all the objects in common "outer shell" module, or just live them floating in void?
Hi Andrey,
I used to use PENELOPE in detector characterization in MeV energy ranges. Normally if you file a request on the website of NEA and if you're working for an institute in OECD countries, the procedure is pretty straight forward. I have not used that much of pyPENELOPE, but I was lurking on Github and following the work of P.Pinard and H. Demers for quite some time. From what I understood, pyPENELOPE should be just a wrap layer so that it can help you handle the preparation of simulations nicely. But the simulation should still be executed with PENELOPE. In any case with the GUI, I recommend you to resolve it to the authors of pyPENELOPE, they are pretty active on Github :).
I am working for private business, so the boss should make suspicious face, put his sign after a week of considerations. Then the same will be done in couple of institutions on the route between Japan and France. :) I just removed myself from this, If they do, they do; If not, so let it be. At the moment I stopped on pyPENELOPE as it is...
but the project itself seems died a few years ago. I could not contact P.Pinard.
BTW, how about my previous question?
Should the tube component bodies/modules be confined in the unifying outer 0-maerial module?
Hi Andrey, sorry for the late response,
You can get the tube module embodied by a larger spheric shell filled in with vaccum for example, or you can leave it as floating in the void as well, because PENELOPE by default would add a 10^23 cm vacuum sphere to enclose all the user-defined structures.
I am surprised that you can actually run simulation with pyPENELOPE without PENELOPE installed beforehand, because pyPENELOPE seems to be only an interfacing program to pilot the simulations.
PyPENELOPE program has been merged into pyMONTECARLO
https://github.com/pymontecarlo/pymontecarlo
Best regards,
Thank you for explaining the sphere thing. It was really confusing.
I am surprised as well. I am getting beautiful X-ray spectra from pyPenelope alone. Seems like the the code was ported to Python in the latest version available. I could not complete the papers, so I do not have an official version. There are some peculiarities and limitations with setup, but some tweaks for parallel beam were also added. Still no support for wide shaped beam, or multi-source.
Moreover, I found PENGEOM, edit 3D there, port it to pyPenelope project (as read-only file), so it calculates more than just a stack of plates. I got a screen, a window, and flanges there... and I nearly died building that 3D model, because the engine is too far from perfection with a lot of ambiguities.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Engineering
- Modeling