| Summary: | Adding MT numbers to G4Step and G4ParticleHP | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Geant4 | Reporter: | Artem Zontikov <zontikov.a> |
| Component: | processes/hadronic/models/neutron_hp | Assignee: | dennis.herbert.wright |
| Status: | RESOLVED MOVED | ||
| Severity: | enhancement | CC: | dennis.herbert.wright |
| Priority: | P5 | ||
| Version: | 10.2 | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Attachments: | Adding MT numbers | ||
|
Description
Artem Zontikov
2016-03-09 19:56:17 CET
Created attachment 391 [details]
Adding MT numbers
Thank you for proposing an interesting extension. I am not sure this can be achieved in current structure of Geant4 and particleHP (neutronHP). I will investigate the possibility of this extension. However the information should be added to G4Track instead of G4Step as you proposed. Tatsumi Before the submission I checked proposed changes with G4 version 10.2, it works. The information was added to G4Step on the analogy with GetProcessDefinedStep() method. There is no problem in adding the information to G4Track instead of G4Step - only one additional function call is required. But it will also require changes to be made for some other processes outside particle_hp directory (transportation, step limiters, etc.). The proposed fix modifies a class (G4Step) which is used throughout Geant4 and not just hadronic physics. Changing such a general class to accommodate a specific model violates Geant4 design principles. The proposed fix will therefore not be implemented, but other means of retrieving the MT information will be considered. Understood. Then what if we replace the proposed "G4int fReactionNumber" in "G4Step" class with "G4Cache<G4int> ReactionNumber" in "G4ParticleHPManager" class? I guess it would not violate any principle or interfere with any model other than ParticleHP. This also would probably not be allowed. However, we are considering changing the Geant4 hadronic framework to allow MT numbers. If approved, we will add this capability in a more ENDF-friendly way. I will move this issue to hadronic development and close it here. |