<div dir="auto">Sorry for all again.<div dir="auto">I don't know why the attachment was not uploaded. Here you are again.</div><div dir="auto">Thanks.</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Thu, Apr 19, 2018, 16:54 Mahmoud Yaseen Suaifan <<a href="mailto:mahma7@gmail.com">mahma7@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto">Hello Dr. Peter,<div dir="auto"><br><div dir="auto">Sorry that i haven't done it from the beginning.</div><div dir="auto">Please find attached a zip file contains the whole story. The main confusing idea that i can't find reasonable justifications for results.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Thanks in advance.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Best regards,</div><div dir="auto">Mahmoud</div><div dir="auto"><br></div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Thu, Apr 19, 2018, 15:05 Peter Kjær Willendrup <<a href="mailto:pkwi@fysik.dtu.dk" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">pkwi@fysik.dtu.dk</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">
Hello again Mahmoud,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Please send a copy of your instrument file along, otherwise I can do nothing but guesswork. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Peter</div>
<div><br>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On 18 Apr 2018, at 02:51 , Mahmoud Yaseen Suaifan <<a href="mailto:mahma7@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">mahma7@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="m_-6095297309211403739m_-7737197393323434482Apple-interchange-newline">
<div>
<div dir="auto">Thank you Dr. peter.
<div dir="auto">Your replies are always appreciated & of course helpful.</div>
<div dir="auto">Actually, i'm aware of the beam divergence, that's why i always use larger detector window than expected beam size. The confusing thing is that i'm following the same methodology while handling output flux (counts/sec normalized over
beam area). After 2m simulation results matches calculation, but after 6m the simulation almost half of calc. Not that much complicated script. Straight forward (source + slit aperture + det) that's all. I guessed because of air ( as i know every 1 m of air
reduces flux by 7% right?) But you confirmed it's vacuum. I'll think about it again.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Best regards,</div>
<div dir="auto">Mahmoud</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr">On Wed, Apr 18, 2018, 03:37 Peter Kjær Willendrup <<a href="mailto:pkwi@fysik.dtu.dk" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">pkwi@fysik.dtu.dk</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word;line-break:after-white-space">Dear Mahmoud,
<div><br>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On 16 Apr 2018, at 06:05 , Mahmoud Yaseen Suaifan <<a href="mailto:mahma7@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">mahma7@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="m_-6095297309211403739m_-7737197393323434482m_2944751217251282736Apple-interchange-newline">
<div>
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">I have simple question please: In McStas, what is the default propagation medium of neutrons? </div>
<div dir="auto">And if such concept is there, how can we handle it (for exsmple, changing mediums like Vacuum, Air, or Helium ...etc ) to study effects or to get more accurate outputs? Since i noticed from some results that the intensity after few
meters from aperture was reduced by some factor as if it is propagating in Air (Air scattering is affecting the results ?? ), ( my thought that the medium is vacuum). Shall i take into consideration some correction factor to modify my data?</div>
<div dir="auto">A<span style="font-family:sans-serif">ny help regarding this issue is appreciated.</span><span style="font-family:sans-serif"> </span></div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<div>
<div>In between the “components” in a McStas simulation, the neutrons are indeed propagated in vacuum. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div>Not having access to your instrument file, my best guess is that what you are observing is an effect of divergence in your beam. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(With a divergent beam and a fixed, limited monitor area being placed at increasing distance from an aperture, the highest divergence neutrons will eventually get lost due to distance collimation.)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If you on the other hand wanted to approximate effects of scattering or attenuation by e.g. air, I would suggest that you add a “sample component”, e.g. by means of the Incoherent (<a href="http://mcstas.org/download/components/samples/Incoherent.html" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://mcstas.org/download/components/samples/Incoherent.html</a>)
component - with your best estimate of the needed cross-sections in the medium.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best and hope this helps,</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Peter</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
mcstas-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:mcstas-users@mcstas.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">mcstas-users@mcstas.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mailman2.mcstas.org/mailman/listinfo/mcstas-users" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mailman2.mcstas.org/mailman/listinfo/mcstas-users</a><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div></blockquote></div>