- Magnetic saturation occurs smoothly (
*i.e.*, there are no abrupt changes). - We know the variation at extremely high fields.

The key is choosing a good method to plot the data.

First, some background. The typical measurement setup is a torus of material with a drive coil winding. The quantity *H* (in A/m) is the magnetic field produced by the coil in the absence of the material. A useful quantity is *B0* = μ0**H* (in Tesla), the magnetic flux density produced by the coil inside the torus with no material. The quantity *B* is the total flux density in the torus with the material present. In this case, alignment of atomic currents adds to the field value so that *B* > *B0*. In a soft magnetic material (*i.e.*, no permanent magnetization), both *B0* and *B* equal zero when there is no drive current. The alignment of magnetic domains increases as the drive current increases; therefore, *B* grows faster than *B0*. The relative magnetic permeability is defined as μr = *B/B0*. At high values of drive current, all the material domains have been aligned. In this state, the material makes a maximum contribution to the total flux density of *Bs* (the saturation flux density). This contribution does not change with higher drive current. For high values of *B0*, the total flux density is approximated by

*B* ≅ *B0* + *Bs*. (1)

To illustrate the estimation procedure, we’ll consider the specific example of Magnifer 50 RG, a nickle alloy with a high value of *Bs*. Figure 1 shows a graph from a data sheet supplied by VDM Metals. The sheet lists the saturation flux density as *Bs* = 1.55 T. The plot shows *B* (in mT) versus *H* (mA/cm) at several frequencies. Because we are interested in the static properties, we’ll consider only curve 1. The data extend to a peak value of *H* = 200 A/m. At this point, μr > 1000, so that the material is well below saturation. I have an application where the material is driven well into to saturation by applied fields up to *H* = 5000 A/m, about 400 times the highest known value! Is it possible to make calculations with confidence?

The first step is convert the graphics data to a number set. The FP Universal Scale is the ideal tool for this task. After setting the correct log scales, I could record a set of points with simple mouse clicks, including the conversion factors to create a list of *B* versus *B0* in units of Tesla. In this case, the relative magnetic permeability is the ratio μr = *B/B0*.

The key to estimating the missing values is to create plots of the material behavior at the two extremes: the tabulated values at low *B0* and predictions from Eq. 1 at high *B0*. To ensure the validity of Eq. 1, I picked *B0* values corresponding to highly saturated material: 0.1, 0.2 and 0.5 T. The art is picking the right type of plot. Figure 2 shows *B* versus *B0* with log-log scales. With the requirement of a smooth variation, clearly the unknown values must lie close to the dashed red line connecting the data extremes. Accordingly, I used the **Universal Scale** to find several points along the line. I combined the interpolated values with the low field tabulated values and the high-field predictions to build a data set that spans the complete range of behavior for Magnifer 50. The new data are available on our magnetic materials page.

Finally, Figure 3 shows alternate plots to Fig. 2: *B0* versus μr and *B* versus μr. In all cases, the variation over the unknown saturation region is well approximated by a simple straight-line fit.

**Footnotes**

[1] Contact us : techinfo@fieldp.com.

[2] Field Precision home page: www.fieldp.com.

]]>Four types of particles may be generated in radioactive events:

- Fast electrons and positrons (beta rays)
- Photons (gamma rays)
- Heavy charged particles (protons, alpha rays,…)
- Neutrons.

This article deals with first two types. Radioactive sources of beta and gamma rays have extensive applications in areas such as medical treatments, food irradiation and detector calibration.

The activity of a radioactive source is determined by law of radioactive decay (Eq, 1). In the equation, the quantity *N* equals the total number of nucleii in the source. The left-hand side is the number of nucleii that decay per second. The quantity λ (with units of 1/s) is the decay constant. It depends on the energy state and quantum barrier of the nucleus. Accordingly, sources exhibit huge variations of λ. The historical units of activity for a source is the curie (Ci). One curie equals 3.7 × 10^10 decays/s (approximately equal the activity of 1 gram of Ra226. The modern standard unit is the becquerel (Bq) equal to 1 decay/s (1 Bq = 2.703 × 10^-11 Ci).

We can also interpret the decay constant in terms of a single nucleus. The probability that a nucleus has not decayed after a time *t* is given by Eq. 2. The *average lifetime* (the mean of the distribution) is 1/λ. The *halflife* is another useful quantity. It equals the time for half of the nucleii present in a source at *t* = 0.0 to decay. Equation 2 leads to the expression for the halflife of Eq. 3.

In comparison to particle accelerators, the main advantage of radioactive isotopes as sources is that they do not require power input and expensive ancillary equipment (*e.g.*, power supplies, vacuum systems,…). Many isotopes are produced by exposure in a nuclear reactor and may be relatively inexpensive when reactors are available. The disadvantages of radioactive sources are that they run continuously and produce a broad energy spectrum of electrons and positrons.

The most important nuclear processes for the production of beta and gamma rays are *beta decay* and *electron capture*. Figure 1 shows the atomic mass of the most stable isotopes as a function of atomic number *Z*. Isotopes above the line have an excess of neutrons — their usual route toward stability is to emit a β- particle (electron), converting a neutron to a proton while preserving the number of nucleons. In other words, the nucleus changes its isotopic identity while preserving its isomer identity. Similarly, isotopes with an excess of protons emit β+ particles (positrons). Both forms of nuclear transformations are called beta decay.

First, consider β- emission. There are two isotopes commonly used in research and industry: Cs137 and Co60. Nuclear processes are commonly illustrated with energy-level diagrams — Fig. 2a shows the decay scheme for Cs137. The horizontal axis represents isomer identity and the vertical axis shows energy levels. Dark lines indicate a nucleus in the ground state and light lines designate an excited state. The arrows indicate the directions of transformations. The starting point is the ground state of Cs137. The figure 30.17 years is the half-life for decay. Decay events of type ß- convert the nucleus to the more stable isomer, Ba137. The arrows indicate that there are two decay paths. In 94.6% of the decays, the emission process carries off 0.512 MeV (shared between the emitted electron and an anti-neutrino) and leaves the Ba137 nucleus in an excited state. The state decays with a half-life of 2.55 minutes, resulting in emission of a 0.662 MeV gamma ray. In 5.4% of the events, the ß- particle and antineutrino carry of 1.174 MeV and leaving the product nucleus in the ground state.

The emission process does not produce a single ß- particle of energy 0.512 or 1.174 MeV, but rather a broad spectrum of electrons with kinetic energy spread between zero and the maximum. The reason is the condition of conservation of spin. Nucleii have spin values an integer multiple of h/2π while electrons have spin ½(h/2π). For balance, an additional particle is required with half-integer spin. In his theory of beta decay, Fermi postulated the existence of neutrinos and antineutrinos, neutral particles with spin ½(h/2π) and very small mass, thereby almost undetectable. In a ß- decay, the available energy is partitioned between the electron, the nucleus and an antineutrino. The theory to determine the spectrum is complex — all ß- decays give rise to a spectrum similar to that of Fig. 3. The spectrum is skewed toward lower energy by the effect of Coulomb attraction as the electron escapes from the nucleus. Generally, Cs137 is used as a a source of 0.662 gamma rays because the ß- particles are preferentially absorbed by the source and surrounding structure and the antineutrinos pass away with no effect.

We next consider proton-rich isotopes that approach the stability line through emission of positrons. The mechanism is similar to ß- emission with the exceptions that a neutrino is emitted and the positron emission spectrum shifted toward higher energies because of Coulomb force repulsion from nucleus. Figure 2*b* shows the energy-level diagram for Na22, a positron emitter. The halflife for all decay processes is 2.60 years. There are several decay pathways. The most likely event (90.33% probability) is that a proton changes to a neutron by emission of a positron, leaving the product isotope Ne22 in an excited state. A gamma ray of energy 1.275 MeV is released almost immediately as the nucleus relaxes to the ground state. In this case, the maximum positron energy is 0.545 MeV. In rare instances, a positron with energy ≤1.82 MeV is released, leaving the product nucleus in the ground state. A third process that may occur is electron capture. In 9.62% of the decays, an inner orbital electron is captured by the nucleus, again resulting in the conversion of a proton to a neutron. The Ne22 nucleus is left in the same excited state as with ß+ emission, again followed by the release of a 1.27 MeV γ. The difference from ß+ decay is that no positron or neutrino is emitted. Electron capture leaves a vacancy in the *K* or *L* shell of the electron cloud, so characteristic X-rays are also emitted as the atom relaxes.

This table lists useful commercial radioactive sources of electrons, photons and positrons. A common feature is a halflife of one to a few years. For isotopes with lower values, it would be necessary to produce and use them quickly. A long half life means reduced activity.

We’ll now turn to **GamBet** modeling techniques, in particular how to create a particle input file to represent a radioactive source. There are some challenges:

- Particles are emitted over an extended spatial region, the volume of the source.
- Electrons and positrons have a broad energy distributions.
- Often, we want to normalize particle flux to represent a specific source activity.

Particle file creation is greatly facilitated through the use of statistical codes like **R** (Link to a comprehensive short course with examples on using **R** with **GamBet**).

Dealing with the finite source size is relatively easy. If the activity is uniform over the source volume, then the probability density for emission is uniform over the volume. As an example, consider a cylindrical source of length *L* and radius *R*. Given a routine that creates a random variable ξ in the range 0 ≤ ξ ≤ 1.0, then values of the *z* coordinate (along the cylinder axis) are assigned according to Eq. 4. We can use the *rejection method* to determine coordinates in the *x-y* plane. We assign coordinates by Eqs. 5 and 6 and keep only instances that satisfy Eq. 7.

With regard to energy distributions, photons from sources like Cs137 and Na22 are essentially monoenergetic. In contrast, the β particles have an energy distribution like that of Fig. 3. In principle, thin films could be used as sources of electrons or positrons. In this case, it would be necessary to represent the spectrum and to determine the effect of energy loss in the film The spectral shape and endpoint energy vary with the type of isotope. Chapter 10 of the reference Using R for **GamBet Statistical Analysis** discusses methods for creating arbitrary distributions. In practice, an exact model may not be necessary and the data may not even be available. In applications such as estimating shield effectiveness, it may be sufficient to model the β decay spectrum with a simple function like that of Eq. 8. In the equation, *Emax* is the maximum β energy. Taking the integral gives the cumulative probability distribution (i.e., the probability that a β has energy less than or equal to *E*) of Eq. 9. Values of *P(E)* range from 0.0 to 1.0. We can obtain the desired distribution by assigning energy from a random-uniform variable ξ using Eq. 10, the inverse of Eq. 9. Figure 4 shows the result with 10,000 particles having endpoint energy *Emax* = 0.512 MeV.

To conclude, we’ll address how to create a **GamBet** source file to represent a given source activity. We’ll follow a specific example — a Co60 source with activity 10 Ci. This figure corresponds to a disintegration rate of *Rd* = 3.7 × 10^11 1/s. Figure 5 shows an energy level diagram. The isotope decays through β- decay with a halflife of 5.27 years. Almost all events result in a excited state of the Ni60 nucleus that relaxes to the stable ground state by almost instantaneous emission of γ rays of energy 1.17 and 1.33 MeV. A source assembly typically consists of the source combined with shielding and collimators to create a directional photon flux. A goal of a calculation could be to compare radiation fluxes in the forward and reverse directions.

We specify *Np* = 1000 model emission points uniformly distributed over the source volume using techniques like those discussed previously. At each emission point, we generate *Ng* = 500 photons of energy 1.17 MeV and *Ng* photons of energy 1.33 MeV. The photons are randomly distributed over 4π steradians of solid angle. Equations 11 and 12 can be used to pick the azimuthal and polar angles. In the continuous-beam mode of **GamBet**, each photon in the file should be assigned a flux value given by Eq. 12. In this case, **GamBet** gives absolute values of particle flux through and deposited dose in structure surrounding the source assembly. Note that this case is relatively simple because almost all events follow the same decay path. In the case of Cs137 (Fig. 2*a*), we need to multiply *Rd* by 0.946 to get the correct absolute flux of 0.617 MeV γ rays.

The procedure as described may be inefficient to calculate forward photon flux or shielding leakage because most of the model particles would not contribute. A simple variance reduction technique is to limit the range of solid angle dΩ so that photons are preferentially directed toward the measure point. The solid angle should be large enough to include the possibility of scattering from the shield or collimator. To properly normalize the calculation, the photon flux values should be adjusted by a factor dΩ/4π.

**Footnotes**

[1] Use this link for a copy of the full report in PDF format: **Modeling radioactive sources with GamBet**.

[2] Contact us : techinfo@fieldp.com.

[3] Field Precision home page: www.fieldp.com.

]]>

- In the transport equation approach to the two-dimensional random walk, the idea is to seek average quantities
*n*or**J**and to find relationships between them (like Fick’s first and second laws). These relationships are accurate when there are large numbers of particles. To illustrate the meaning of large, note that the number of electrons in one cubic micrometer of aluminum equals 3 × 10^15. When averages are taken over such large numbers, the transport equations are effectively deterministic. - In the Monte Carlo method, the idea is to follow individual particles based on a knowledge of their interaction mechanisms. A practical computer simulation may involve millions of model particles, orders of magnitude below the actual particle number. Therefore, each model particle represents the average behavior of a large group of actual particles. In contrast to transport equations, the accuracy of Monte Carlo calculations is dominated by statistic variations.

An additional benefit of transport equations is that they often have closed-form solutions that lead to scaling relationships like Eq. 22 of the previous article. We could extract an approximation to the relationship from Monte Carlo results, although at the expense of some labor.

Despite the apparently favorable features of the transport equations, Monte Carlo is the primary tool for electron/photon transport. Let’s understand why. One advantage is apparent comparing the relative effort in the demonstration solutions — the Monte Carlo calculation is much easier to understand. A clear definition of physical properties of particle collisions was combined with a few simple rules. The only derivation required was that for the mean free path. The entire physical model was contained in a few lines of code. In contrast, the transport model required considerable insight and the derivation of several equations. In addition, it was necessary to introduce additional results like the divergence theorem. Most of us feel more comfortable staying close to the physics with a minimum of intervening mathematical constructions. This attitude represents good strategy, not laziness. Less abstraction means less chance for error. A computer calculation that closely adheres to the physics is called a *simulation*. Program managers and funding agents have a warm feeling for simulations.

Beyond the emotional appeal, there is an over-riding practical reason to apply Monte Carlo to electron/photon transport in matter. Transport equations become untenable when the interaction physics becomes complex. For example, consider the following scenario for a demonstration calculation:

In 20% of collisions, a particle splits into two particles with velocity 0.5*v0* and 0.2*v0*. The two particles are emitted at a random angles separated by 60°. Each secondary particle has its own cross section for interaction with the background obstacles.

It would be relatively easy to modify the code of the first article to represent this history and even more complex ones. On the other hand, it would be require consider effort and theoretical insight to modify a transport equation. As a second example, suppose the medium were not uniform but had inclusions with different cross sections and with dimensions less than λ. In this case, the derivation of Fick’s first law is invalid. A much more complex relationship would be needed. Again, it would relatively simple to incorporate such a change in a Monte Carlo model. Although these scenarios may sound arbitrary, they are precisely the type of processes that occur in electron/photon showers.

In summary, the goal in collective physics is to describe behavior of huge numbers of particles. We have discussed two approaches:

**Monte Carlo method**. Define a large but reasonable set of model particles, where each model particle represents the behavior of a group of real particles with similar properties. Propagate the model particles as single particles using known physics and probabilities of interactions. Then, take averages to infer the group behavior.**Transport equation method**. Define macroscopic quantities, averages over particle distributions. Derive and solve differential equations that describe the behavior of the macroscopic quantities.

The choice of method depends on the nature of the particles and their interaction mechanisms. Often, practical calculations usually use a combination of the two approaches. For example, consider the three types of calculations required for the design of X-ray devices (supported in our **Xenos** package):

**Radiation transport in matter**. Photons may be treated with the Monte Carlo technique, but mixed methods are necessary for electrons and positrons. In addition to discrete events (hard interactions) like Compton scattering, energetic electrons in matter undergo small angle scattering and energy loss with a vast number of background electrons (soft interactions). It would be impossible to model each interaction individually. Instead, averages based on transport calculations are used.**Heat transfer**. Here, particles are the energy transferred from one atom to an adjacent one. Because the interaction model is simple and the mean-free-path is extremely small, transport equations are clearly the best choice.**Electric and magnetic fields**. The standard approach is through the Maxwell equations. They are transport type equations, derived by taking averages over a large number of charges. On the other other hand, we employ Monte-Carlo-type methods to treat contributions to fields from high-current electron beams.

**Footnotes**

[1] Use this link for a copy of the full report in PDF format: Monte Carlo method report.

[2] Contact us : techinfo@fieldp.com.

[3] Field Precision home page: www.fieldp.com.

]]>- Although the density may vary in space, the distribution of particle velocities is the same at all points. Particles all have constant speed
*v0*and there is an isotropic distribution of direction vectors. - There is a uniform-random background density of scattering objects.
- Equation 8 of the previous article gives the probability distribution of
*a*(the distance particles travel between collisions) in terms of the mean-free-path λ.

We want to find how the density changes as particles perform their random walk. Changes occur if, on the average, there is a flow of particles (a *flux*) from one region of space to another. If the density *n* is uniform, the same number of particles flow in one direction as the other, so the average flux is zero. Therefore, we expect that fluxes depend on gradients of the particle density. We can find the dependence using the construction of Fig. 2. Assume that the particle density varies in *x* near a point *x0*. Using a coordinate system with origin at *x0*, the first order density variation is given by Eq. 9. The goal is to find an expression for the number of particles per second passing through the line element Δy. To carry out derivation, we assume the following two conditions:

- The material is homogeneous. Equivalently, λ has the same value everywhere.
- Over scale length λ, relative changes in
*n*are small.

Using polar coordinates shown centered on the line element, consider an element in the plane of area (*r* Δθ)(Δ*r*)$. We want to find how many particles per second originating from this region pass through Δ*y*. We can write the quantity as the product *Jx* Δ*y*, where *Jx* is the linear flow density in units of particles/m-s. On the average, every particle in the calculation volume has the same average number of collisions per second, given by Eq. 10. The rate of scattering events in the area element equals ν times the number of particles in the area (Eq. 11). The fraction of scattered particles aimed at the segment is given by Eq. 12.

Finally, the probability that a particle scattered out of the area element reaches the line element was given in the previous article as exp(-*r*/λ). Combining this expression with Eqs. 10 and 11, we can determine the current density from all elements surrounding the line segment. Taking the density variation in the form of Eq. 13 leads to the expression of Eq. 14. The integral of the first term in brackets equals zero, so that only the term proportional to the density gradient contributes. Carrying out the integrals, the linear current density is given by Eq. 15. The planar *diffusion coefficient* (with units m^2/s) is given by Eq. 16. Generalizing to possible variations in both *x* and *y*, can write Eq. 15 in the form of Eq. 17. This relationship between the vector current density and the gradient of density is called Fick’s first law. Equation 18 lists Fick’s second law, a statement of conservation of particles. In the equation, the quantity ∇•**J** is the divergence of flux from a point and *S* is the source of particles at that point (particles/m^2-s). Equation 18 is the *diffusion equation* for particles in a plane. It states that the density at a point changes in time if there is a divergence of flux or a source or sink.

We are now ready to compare the predictions of the model with the Monte Carlo results of the previous section. Equation 19 gives is solution to the diffusion equation for particles emission from the origin of the plane. The quantity *r* equals √(x^2 + y^2). We can verify Eq. 19 by direct substitution by using the cylindrical form of the divergence and gradient operators and taking *D* as uniform in space. In order to make a comparison with the Monte Carlo calculation, we pick a time value *t0* = *Nc* λ/*v0* and evaluate A based on the condition of Eq. 20. The resulting expression for the density at time *t0* is given by Eq. 21. The prediction of Eq. 21 s plotted as the solid line in Fig. 1. The results from the two methods show close absolute agreement.

Finally, we can determine the theoretical 1/e radius of the particle cloud from Eq. 21 to yield Eq. 22. In a random walk, the particle spread increases as the square root of the number of transits between collisions. For *Nc* = 100, the value is *re*/λ ≅ 14.1.

**Footnotes**

[1] Use this link for a copy of the full report in PDF format: Monte Carlo method report.

[2] Contact us : techinfo@fieldp.com.

[3] Field Precision home page: www.fieldp.com.

]]>In the Monte Carlo method, the full set of particles is represented by a calculable set of model particles. In this case, each model particle represents a group. We follow detailed histories of model particles as they undergo random events like collisions with atoms. Characteristically, we use a random-number generator with a known probability distribution to determine the outcomes of the events. In the end, the core assumption is that averages over model particles represent the average behavior of the entire group. The alternative to this approach is the derivation and solution of *moment* (or *transport*) equations. The following article covers this technique.

Instead of an abstract discussion, we’ll address a specific example to illustrate the Monte Carlo method. Consider a random walk in a plane. As shown in Fig. 1, particles emerge from a source at the origin with uniform speed *v0*. They move freely over the surface unless they strike an obstacle. The figure represents the obstacles as circles of diameter *w*. The obstacles are distributed randomly and drift about so we can never be sure of their position. The velocity of obstacles is much smaller than *v0*. If a particle strikes an obstacle, we’ll assume it bounces off at a random direction with no change in speed. The obstacles are unaffected by the collisions.

In a few sentences, we have set some important constraints on the physical model:

- The nature of the particles (constant speed
*v0*). - The nature of the obstacles (diameter
*w*, high mass compared to the particles), - The nature of the interaction (elastic collision with isotropic emission from the collision point)

The same type of considerations apply to calculations of radiation transport. The differences are that 1) the model particles have the properties of photons and electrons, 2) the obstacles are the atoms of materials and 3) there are more complex collision models based on experimental data and theory. To continue, we need to firm up the features of the calculation. Let’s assume that 10^10 particles are released at the origin at time *t* = 0. Clearly, there are too many particles to handle on a computer. Instead, we start *Np* = 10,000 model particles and assume that they will give a good idea of the average behavior. In this case, each model particle represent 10^6 real particles. We want to find the approximate distribution of particle positions after they make *Nc* collisions. The logic of a Monte Carlo calculation for this problem is straightforward. The first model particle starts from the origin moving in a random direction. We follow its history through *Nc* collisions and record its final position. We continue with the other *Np* – 1 model particles and then interpret the resulting distribution of final positions.

The source position is *x* = 0, *y* = 0. To find the emission direction, we use a random number generator, a component of all programing languages and spreadsheets. Typically, the generator returns a random number ξ equally likely to occur anywhere over the interval of Eq. 1. Adjusting the range of values to span the range 0 → 2π, the initial unit direction vector is given by Eq. 2.

The particle moves a distance *a* from its initial position and then has it first collision. The question is, how do we determine *a*? It must be a random quantity because we are uncertain how the obstacles are lined up at any time. In this case, we seek the distribution of expectations that the particle has a collision at distance *a*, where the distance may range from 0 to ∞. To answer the question, we’ll make a brief excursion into probability theory.

Let *P(a)* equal the probability that the particle moves a distance *a* without a collision with an object. By convention, a probability value of 0.0 corresponds to an impossible event and 1.0 indicates a certain event. Therefore, *P*(0) = 1.0 (there is no collision if the particle does not move) and P(∞) = 0.0 (a particle traveling an infinite distance must encounter an object). We can calculate *P(a)* from the construction of Figure 2. The probability that a particle reaches *a* + Δ*a* equals the probability that the particle reaches *a* times the probability that it passes through the layer of thickness Δ*a* without a collision. The second quantity equals 1.0 minus the probability of a collision.

To find the probability of a collision in the layer, consider a segment of height *h*. If the average surface density of obstacles is *N* particles/m^2, then the segment is expected to contain *Nh* Δ*a* obstacles. Each obstacle is a circle of diameter *w*. The distance range for an interaction with an obstacle is called the cross-section σ. In this case, we will associate the interaction width with the obstacle diameter, or σ = *w*. The fraction of the height of the segment obscured by obstacles is given by Eq. 3. The exit probability is given by Eq. 4.

A first-order Taylor expansion (Eq. 5) leads to Eq. 6. Equation 6 defines another useful quantity, the *macroscopic cross section* Σ = n σ with dimensions 1/m. Solving Eq. 6 leads to Eq. 7. The new quantity in Eq. 7 is the mean free path, λ. It equals the average value of *a* for the exponential probability distribution. The ideas of cross section, macroscopic cross section and mean-free path are central to particle transport.

We can now solidify our procedure for a Monte Carlo calculation. The first step is to emit a particle at the origin in the direction determined by Eq. 2. Then we move the particle forward a distance *a* consistent with the probability function of Eq. 7. One practical question is, how do we create an exponential distribution with a random number generator that produces only a uniform distribution in the interval of Eq, 1? The plot of the probability distribution of Eq. 7 in Fig. 3 suggests a method. Consider the 10% of particles with collision probabilities between *P*(0.3) and *P*(0.4). The corresponding range of paths extends from *a*(0.6)/λ = -ln(0.4) = 0.9163 to – \ln(0.3) = 1.204. If we assign path lengths from the uniform random variable according to Eq, 8, then we can be assured that on the average 10% will lie in the range *a*/λ = 0.9163 to 1.204. By extension, if we apply the transformation of Eq. 8 to a uniform distribution, the resulting distribution will be exponential. To confirm, the lower section of Fig. 3 shows a random distribution calculation with 5000 particles.

To continue the Monte Carlo procedure, we stop the particle at a collision point a distance *a* from the starting point determined by Eq. 8 and then generate a new random number ξ to determine the new direction according to Eq. 2. Another call to the random-number generator gives a new propagation distance *a* from Eq. 8. The particle is moved to the next collision point. After *Nc* events, we record the final position and start the next particle. The simple programing task with the choice λ = 1 is performed by the following code:

`DO Np=1,NShower`

! Start from center

XOld = 0.0

YOld = 0.0

! Loop over steps

DO Nc=1,NStep

! Random direction

CALL RANDOM_NUMBER(Xi)

Angle = DTwoPi*Xi

! Random length

CALL RANDOM_NUMBER(Xi)

Length = -LOG(Xi)

! Add the vector

X = XOld + Length*COS(Angle)

Y = YOld + Length*SIN(Angle)

XOld = X

YOld = Y

END DO

END DO

Figure 4 shows the results for λ = 1 (equivalently, the plot is scaled in units of mean-free-paths). The left-hand side shows the trajectories of 10 particles for *Nc* = 100 steps. With only a few particles, there are large statistical variations, making the distribution in angle skewed. We expect that the distribution will become more uniform as the number of particles increases because there is no preferred emission direction. The right-hand side is a plot of final positions for *Np* = 10,000 particles. The distribution is relatively symmetric, clustered within roughly 15 mean-free-parts of the origin. In comparison, the average total distance traversed by each particle is 100.

Beyond the visual indication of Fig. 4, we want quantitative information about how far particles move from the axis. To determine density as a function of radius, we divide the occupied region into radial shells of thickness Δ*r* and count the number of final particle positions in each shell and divide by the area of the shell. Figure 5 shows the results. The circles indicate the relative density of particles in shells of width 0.8λ. Such a plot is called a *histogram* and the individual shells (containers) are called *bins*. Histograms are one of the primary methods of displaying Monte Carlo results. Note that the points follow a smooth variation at large radius, but that they have noticeable statistical variations at small radius. The reason is that the shells near the origin have smaller area, and therefore contain fewer particles to contribute to the average. Statistical variations are the prime concern for the accuracy of Monte Carlo calculations.

**Footnotes**

[1] Use this link for a copy of the full report in PDF format: Monte Carlo method report.

[2] Contact us : techinfo@fieldp.com.

[3] Field Precision home page: www.fieldp.com.

]]>

The utility collection started with the FP Universal Scale. It grew out of my frustration with conventional [...]]]>

The utility collection started with the **FP Universal Scale**. It grew out of my frustration with conventional screen rulers which were either rigidly referenced to screen pixels or absolute units like inches or centimeters. A more useful approach is to reference the ruler to the units of the graph or photograph to be measured. Accordingly, after several years of thought I set out to create an on-screen version of the much-loved Gerber Variable Scale. The implementation involved intensive interactions with the Windows API, so I decided to use **RealBasic** with purchased plugins to handle screen overlays. During development, the program expanded from a simple screen ruler to a complete screen digitization system for scientists and engineers.

There were three motivations for the next utility, the **FP File Organizer**:

- In comparison to sophisticated two-window file managers like
**Free Commander**, I wanted a simple, clean interface that supported the functions I used every work day. - Our technical programs involve extended file organization. In discussing file management in tutorials, I wanted a standard reference environment.
- I needed a general file-manager unit for my MIDI programs.

**FP File Organizer** has several nice features like fast file searches, full path copy to the clipboard, definable tools, special folders and desktop shortcut creation. I use the program for all my work except for multi GB file transfers. For these, I use xcopy or robocopy.

The **Cecil_B** program converts an organized set of BMP files into an AVI movie. I developed it in response to a customer request to make animations of solutions in time-domain programs like **TDiff** and **HeatWave**. I created the final two utilities, **Computer Task Organizer** (**CTO**) and **Boilerplate** to reduce frustrations I noticed over the last 30 years using Windows. With regard to **CTO**, I found that most of my work day involved running the same programs with the same documents or going to the same website repetitively. The program reduces the 100 tasks that I perform every day to single button clicks.

The new utility **Boilerplate** (Figure 1) expands the functions of the Windows clipboard in two ways:

- You can build a library of standard text selections (
*i.e.*, boilerplate) that can be transferred to the clipboard with a single button press — ready to paste into a document. - You can recall items previously on the clipboard.

The second feature deals with an irritating limit of the clipboard — it stores only one item at a time. **Boilerplate** keeps a running record of the last twenty clipboard texts — they can be recalled to the clipboard with a single button click. I got the idea from the old utility **Clipboard Magik**. The program had a lot of potential, but was difficult to utilize in practice.

**Footnotes**

[1] Contact us : techinfo@fieldp.com.

[2] Field Precision home page: www.fieldp.com.

]]>

The complicating factor is that the inner workings of the MRI magnet are proprietary, so my contact would not know the geometry of the drive currents and iron poles that generate the field. He would have to base his shielding calculations entirely on fringing field patterns supplied by his customer (like that of Fig. 1). Everything inside the inner line would be a mystery. My contact was being pursued by a sales rep for a well-known alternative to **Magnum**. I won’t name names, but for the sake of discussion let’s refer to the program as Lucia di Lammermoor (LDL). The sales rep felt he had the perfect solution. On top of the high price of LDL, my contact could buy a special inverse-solution add-on that would determine the unknown magnet configuration from the fringing-field pattern. There are two drawbacks to this approach:

- James Clerk Maxwell says it’s impossible.
- It’s totally unnecessary.

The critical insight is that the fringing fields of any solenoid assembly (no matter how complex) approach those of a simple magnetic dipole in the region outside the assembly. This tutorial reviews the theory:

Magnetic Dipole Moment of a Coil Assembly

To emphasize the point, Figure 2 shows contours of |**B**| calculated by **Magnum** for a current loop of radius *R* = 0.5 m carrying current *I* = 1000.0 A (the plot plane includes the magnet *z* axis). The line shapes clearly resemble those of Fig. 1. Complicating the comparison is the fact that the lines and intervals of Fig. 1 (supplied by my contact’s customer) are physically impossible. There are three possible explanations:

- LDL gave the wrong answer.
- The LDL user at the magnet manufacturer did not pay attention to the potentially large effects of computation boundaries on the weak fringing fields.
- The magnet manufacturer was reluctant to send actual data to my contact, so they had a draftsman create them.

Supposing that some day my contact receives a PDF document with real data, here’s how the analysis would proceed.

1) Use the **Universal Scale** (shown in Fig. 1) to measure the locations (*zi*) of contours |*Bi*| along the *z *axis and an axis normal to *z* passing through the magnet center (*xi*).

2) Calculate estimates of the magnet dipole moment from the equations

*mi* = *Bi***zi*^3/(μ0/2*π), *mi* = 2**Bi***xi*^3/(μ0/2*π).

For a valid field distribution, all of the estimated values should be close, giving an average value *m*.

3) Set up a **Magnum** solution volume (large compared to the diagnostic room to minimize boundary effects). For the applied field, define a circular coil normal to *z* at the origin with a radius *R* comparable to that of the magnet assembly. Assign the coil current according to *I* = *m*/(π**R*^2) to replicate the fringing field pattern.

4) Add shielding walls as needed, and run a standard **Magnum** calculation. Analyze the 5 gauss contour to make sure it is everywhere within the diagnostic room.

In the calculation, scaling relationships may be applied to deal with thin sheets of iron following the discussion in this tutorial:

To facilitate the application, we have added two features to **Magnum**:

- We have modified the contour-line plot routines in
**MagView**to enable users to enter a set of specific values (e.g., the 5 gauss limit). - We have doubled the number of entries in the library of soft magnetic materials supplied with the code to include common shielding materials like M36.

Magnetic material data are available at http://www.fieldp.com/magneticproperties.html.

**Footnotes**

[1] You can get information on Magnum at http://www.fieldp.com/magnum.html.

[2] Contact us : techinfo@fieldp.com.

[3] Field Precision home page: www.fieldp.com.

]]>Let’s start by creating some data to work with. We’ll model the kinetic energy distribution of positrons emitted in the β decay of Na22. The maximum value is 540 keV. To approximate the probability mass density, we’ll use one half cycle of a sine function skewed toward higher energies to represent Coulomb repulsion from the product nucleus. Copy and paste the following commands to the **RStudio** script editor:

rm(list=objects()) xmax = 540.0 nmax = 50 MassDens = function(x) { Out = sin(x*pi/(xmax))*(0.35+0.4*x/xmax) return(Out) } xval = c(seq(from=0.0,to=xmax,length.out=(nmax+1))) mdens = numeric(length=(nmax+1)) for (n in 1:(nmax+1)) { mdens[n] = MassDens(xval[n]) } plot(xval,mdens) curve(MassDens,0.0,xmax,xname="x",add=TRUE)

The commands

MassDens = function(x) { Out = sin(x*pi/(xmax))*(0.35+0.4*x/xmax) return(Out) }

define a function *MassDens* that follows the curve of Figure 1. The command

xval = c(seq(from=0.0,to=xmax,length.out=(nmax+1)))

creates a vector of 51 points equally spaced along the energy axis from 0.0 to 540.0 keV. The commands

mdens = numeric(length=(nmax+1)) for (n in 1:(nmax+1)) { mdens[n] = MassDens(xval[n]) }

create an empty vector to hold the probability mass density *p(x)* and fill the values with a loop that uses the *MassDens* function. At this point, the relative probability is sufficient — it is not necessary to worry about normalization.

To assign energy values for a particle distribution, we need the cumulative probability distribution, defined as

*P(x)* = ∫ *p(x’)dx’*

from *xmin* to *xmax*. The function *P(x)* equals the probability that the energy is less than or equal to *x*. It has a value of 0.0 at *xmin* and 1.0 at *xmax*. The following commands use the trapezoidal rule to perform the integral:

dx = xmax/nmax cdens = numeric(length=(nmax+1)) cdens[1] = 0.0 for (n in 2:(nmax+1)) { cdens[n] = cdens[n-1] + (mdens[n-1]+mdens[n])*dx/2.0 } cdens = cdens/cdens[51]

Note that the final command normalizes the function. The result is a vector *cdens* of 51 points to represent the cumulative distribution.

The cumulative probability *P(x)* is a monotonically-increasing function of *x* — there is a unique value of *x* for every value of *P(x)*. Therefore, we can view *x* as a function of *P(x)*, as illustrated by Fig. 2 created with the command:

plot(cdens,xval)

We can also make an accurate calculation of *x* for any *P(x)* using the spline interpolation functions of **R**. The line in Fig. 2 was created with the command:

lines(spline(cdens,xval))

Figure 3 illustrates the principle underlying of the sampling method. Suppose we want to create 10,000 particles. By the definition of the cumulative probability distribution, a total of 1000 of the particles should be contained within the interval 0.6 ≤ *P* ≤ 0.7. The graph show that these particles should be assigned energies in the range 320 keV ≤ *x* ≤ 360 keV. In other words, if ζ represents a uniform sequence of 10,000 numbers from 0.0 to 1.0, then the desired distribution will result if the energy values are assigned according to

*x*[*n*] = Inv*P*(ζ[*n*])

The **R** expression for the assignment operation uses a form of the *spline()* function that creates values at specified points:

NMax = 10000 dpoints = numeric(length=NMax) zetavals=c(seq(from=0.0,to=1.0,length.out=NMax)) ztemp = spline(cdens,xval,xout=zetavals) dpoints = ztemp$y hist(dpoints,breaks=35)

In this case, the *spline()* function returns a data frame containing both the independent and dependent values. The assigned energies are set equal to the dependent values, *dpoints = ztemp$y*. The top graph in Figure 4 shows a histogram of the resulting distribution.

The routine creates the same distribution each time the script is run. In some circumstances, you may want to add variations so that runs are statistically independent. In this case, the uniform sequence of ζ values may be replaced with a random-uniform distribution:

zetavals=runif(NMax,0.0,1.0)

The lower graph in Fig. 4 shows the result.

In conclusion, the **R** package has a vast set of available commands and options that could occupy several textbooks. In this tutorial, I’ve tried to cover the fundamental core. My goal has been to clarify the sometimes arcane syntax of R so you have the background to explore additional functions. A compendium of scripts and data files for the examples is available. To make a request, please contact us.

**Footnotes**

[1] The entire series is available as a PDF book at http://www.fieldp.com/rintroduction.html.

[2] Contact us : techinfo@fieldp.com.

[3] Field Precision home page: www.fieldp.com.

]]>

The parameters of primary particles for Monte Carlo simulations in **GamBet** are specified in source (*SRC*) files. Output escape files have the same format, so the output from one **GamBet** calculation can be used as the input to a subsequent one. For initial **GamBet** simulations, a source file representing specific distributions in position, velocity and energy in usually prepared. Although the **GenDist** utility can create several useful distributions, the possibilities with **R** are greatly expanded.

As a test case, we’ll generate an input electron beam for a 3D calculation with current *CurrTotal* = 2.5 A and average energy *E0* = 20.0 keV. The beam has a circular cross section with a Gaussian distribution in *x* and *y* of width *Xw* = *Yw* = 1.4 mm. The average position is [*X0,Y0,Z0*] = [0.0 mm, 0.0 mm, 0.0 mm). The parallel electrons move in *z*. There is a Gaussian energy spread of *Ew* = 500 eV.

To begin, we set up a script that can be tested in the interactive environment of **RStudio** and then see how to convert it to an autonomous program that can be run from a batch file. The first set of commands clears the workspace, sets a working directory and defines parameters:

rm(list=objects()) WorkDir = "C:/USINGRFORGAMBETSTATISTICALANALYSIS/Examples/Section09/" setwd(WorkDir) CurrTotal = 2.5 X0 = 0.0 Y0 = 0.0 Z0 = 0.0 Xw = 1.4 Yw = 1.4 E0 = 20000.0 Ew = 500.0 Ux0 = 0.0 Uy0 = 0.0 Uz0 = 1.0 NPart= 100000

The previous article discussed the *SRC* file format. The strategy will be to set up a vector of length *NPart* for each quantity in the file data lines, combine them into a data frame and then use the *write.table()* command to create the file. These commands create the vector for the *Type* column:

Type = character(length=NPart) for (n in 1:NPart) { Type[n] = "E" }

The first command creates a character vector called *Type* with *NPart* blank entries. The loop fills the vector with the character *E*.

The quantities *Z, Ux, Uy*, and *Uz* are numerical vectors of length *NPart* that contain identical values. For this, it is convenient to create and to fill the vectors with the *seq()* and *c()* commands:

Z = c(seq(from=Z0,to=Z0,length.out=NPart)) Ux = c(seq(from=Ux0,to=Ux0,length.out=NPart)) Uy = c(seq(from=Uy0,to=Uy0,length.out=NPart)) Uz = c(seq(from=Uz0,to=Uz0,length.out=NPart))

The position vectors *X* and *Y* and the *Energy* vector are created using the *rnorm()* function. It generates *NPart* values following a specified normal distribution:

X = rnorm(NPart,mean=X0,sd=Xw) Y = rnorm(NPart,mean=Y0,sd=Yw) Energy = rnorm(NPart,mean=E0,sd=Ew)

The set of vectors is assembled into a data frame. Note that the column names are the same as the vector names, *Type*, *Energy*, *X*, …:

SRCRaw = data.frame(Type,Energy,X,Y,Z,Ux,Uy,Uz)

We must take some precautions. With the normal distribution, there is a very small but non-zero probability of extreme values of the position and energy. They could result in electrons outside the **GamBet** solution volume or negative energy values. Both conditions would lead to a program error. We create a subset of the raw data such that no electron has *r* > 7.0 mm or *Energy* ≤ 0.0:

SRCFile = subset(SRCRaw,((X^2+Y^2)<=25.0*Xw^2) & (Energy > 0.0))

We need to add the current per electron to complete the *SRCFile* data frame. Note the use of *NLength*, the number of electrons in the modified data frame, which may be less than *NPart*:

NLength = length(SRCFile$Type) dCurr = CurrTotal/NLength

A column vector of identical current values is constructed and appended to the *SRCFile* data frame with the *cbind()* command:

Curr = c(seq(from=dCurr,to=dCurr,length.out=NLength)) SRCFile = cbind(SRCFile,Curr)

We also define two plotting vectors for latter use:

RVector = sqrt(SRCFile$X^2 + SRCFile$Y^2) EVector = SRCFile$Energy

We’re ready to write the file. Some variables are set up in preparation:

FNameOut = "TestSRCGeneration.SRC" HLine1 = "* GamBet Particle Escape File (Field Precision)" HLine2 = paste("* NPart:",NLength) HLine3 = "* Type Energy X Y Z Ux Uy Uz Curr" HLine4 = "* =========================================================================================================="

Note that the actual number of electrons was written to *HLine2*. The following commands open the file (over-writing any previous version) and write the header using the *cat()* command:

cat(HLine1,file=FNameOut,append=FALSE,fill=TRUE) cat(HLine2,file=FNameOut,append=TRUE,fill=TRUE) cat(HLine3,file=FNameOut,append=TRUE,fill=TRUE) cat(HLine4,file=FNameOut,append=TRUE,fill=TRUE)

We could add the table in its current form, but it would be nice to have the fixed-width format illustrated in the previous article. This command adds three initial spaces to the *Type* column:

SRCFile$Type = paste(" ",SRCFile$Type,sep="")

These commands convert the numbers in the columns to character representations with width 12 in either scientific or standard notation:

SRCFile$Energy = format(SRCFile$Energy,scientific=TRUE,digits=5,width=12) SRCFile$X = format(SRCFile$X,scientific=TRUE,digits=5,width=12) SRCFile$Y = format(SRCFile$Y,scientific=TRUE,digits=5,width=12) SRCFile$Z = format(SRCFile$Z,scientific=TRUE,digits=5,width=12) SRCFile$Ux = format(SRCFile$Ux,scientific=FALSE,digits=6,width=12) SRCFile$Uy = format(SRCFile$Uy,scientific=FALSE,digits=6,width=12) SRCFile$Uz = format(SRCFile$Uz,scientific=FALSE,digits=6,width=12) SRCFile$Curr = format(SRCFile$Curr,scientific=TRUE,digits=6,width=12)

Note that *RVector* and *EVector* were defined when the data entries were still numbers. Finally, this command writes the *SRC* file:

write.table(SRCFile,file=FNameOut,sep=" ",append=TRUE,col.names=FALSE,quote=FALSE,row.names=FALSE)

Here is a sample of the result:

* GamBet Particle Escape File (Field Precision) * NPart: 100000 * Type Energy X Y Z Ux Uy Uz Curr * ========================================================================================================== E 2.0448e+04 -6.8232e-01 8.4354e-01 0e+00 0 0 1 2.5e-05 E 1.9949e+04 -4.8475e-02 1.5114e+00 0e+00 0 0 1 2.5e-05 E 2.1422e+04 -6.9644e-01 -4.9890e-01 0e+00 0 0 1 2.5e-05 E 1.9291e+04 -1.9870e+00 5.5780e-01 0e+00 0 0 1 2.5e-05 E 2.0032e+04 -5.6534e-01 -2.0669e-01 0e+00 0 0 1 2.5e-05 E 2.0752e+04 1.2376e+00 7.0758e-01 0e+00 0 0 1 2.5e-05 ...

The format isn’t precisely the way we would like. For example, despite the setting *digits*=6, the entries in *Ux* are 0 rather than 0.00000. This is a quirk of **R**. The program will not write more significant figures than the defining values, no matter what you tell it. Perhaps there is a solution, but I haven’t found it. **GamBet** and **GenDist** will recognize the above form. Figure 1 shows a **GenDist** scatter plot of model particles in the *x-y* plane.

The following commands create histograms to display the distribution of electrons in radius and energy (Figure 2):

hist(RVector,breaks=100) hist(EVector,breaks=100)

To conclude, we’ll modify the script so it may be called from a batch file. Suppose we want to make a series of GamBet runs with beams of differing width. For each run, we regenerate the input *SRC* file with R to represent the new width, run **GamBet** and rename critical output files so they are not over-written. Here’s a sample of a **Windows** batch file showing the first operation

START /WAIT RScript Sect09DemoScript.R "C:\USINGRFORGAMBETSTATISTICALANALYSIS\Examples\Section09\" "1.4" START /WAIT C:\fieldp_basic\gambet\gambet BatchDemo RENAME BatchDemo.GLS BatchDemo01.GLS RENAME BatchDemo.G3D BatchDemo01.G3D ...

The */WAIT* option in the *START* command ensures that the *SRC* file is available before starting **GamBet** and that there will not be a file access conflict when **GamBet** is running. Consider the first command. **RScript** is a special form of **R** to run scripts. To avoid typing the full path to program every time, I modified the Windows path to include *C:\Program Files\R\R-3.2.0\bin\*. The next command-line parameter is the name of the script followed by two character values that are passed to the script. The first is the working directory for the data and second is the value of *Xw*.

Here’s how the script we have been discussing is modified to act as an autonomous program. The first set of commands becomes:

rm(list=objects()) args = commandArgs() WorkDir = args[6] setwd(WorkDir)

The second command stores the command line parameters in a character vector *args*. You may wonder, why start with *args[6]*? A listing of *args* gives the following information:

[1] C:\PROGRA~1\R\R-32~1.0\bin\i386\Rterm.exe [2] --slave [3] --no-restore [4] --file=Sect09DemoScript.R [5] --args [6] C:\USINGRFORGAMBETSTATISTICALANALYSIS\Examples\Section09\ [7] 1.4

The first argument is the name of the running program, a typical convention in **Windows**. The next four are the values of options set in **RTerm**. The values of interest start at the sixth component. The next change is in the initialization section:

Xw = as.numeric(args[7])

Because command line parameters are strings, we force the value to be interpreted as a number to define *Xw*. Finally, suppose we want to inspect the histograms, even though the program is running in the background. The ending statements are modified to:

pdf(file="Test.pdf") hist(RVector,breaks=100) hist(EVector,breaks=100) dev.off()

The results of all plot commands between *pdf()* and *dev.off()* are sent to the specified PDF file where they can be viewed after the run.

In conclusion, the **R** package has a vast set of available commands and options that could occupy several textbooks. In this set of short articles, I’ve tried to cover the fundamental core. One of my goals has been to clarify the sometimes arcane syntax of **R** so you have the background to explore additional functions. A book form of the articles with an index will be available soon on our website.

**Footnotes**

[1] The entire series is available as a PDF book at http://www.fieldp.com/rintroduction.html.

[2] Contact us : techinfo@fieldp.com.

[3] Field Precision home page: www.fieldp.com.

]]>**GamBet**escape files have a name of the form*FName.SRC*. They record the parameters of electrons, photons and positrons that escape from the solution volume. An example is the distribution of bremsstrahlung photons produced by an electron beam striking a target. Escape files may serve as the particle source for a subsequent simulation. You can also use**R**to prepare source files with mathematically-specified distributions, the topic of the next article.- Files of the spatial distribution of deposited dose produced the
*MATRIX*commands in**GBView2**and**GBView3**.

We’ll begin with a discussion of the **GamBet** SRC file. Here’s an example, the output from a bremsstrahlung target:

* GamBet Particle Escape File (Field Precision) * Output from run: BremGen * DUnit: 1.0000E+03 * NPrimary: 1 * NShower: 500 * * Type Energy X Y Z ux uy uz curr/flux * ==================================================================================================== E 1.8276E+07 1.0000E+00 -2.2093E-01 -9.5704E-03 0.95867 -0.28441 -0.00726 P 1.0476E+06 1.0000E+00 -2.2099E-01 -9.6599E-03 0.96046 -0.27838 0.00421 P 1.4681E+07 1.0000E+00 -2.2079E-01 -9.4444E-03 0.96751 -0.24988 0.03846 P 1.1157E+05 1.0000E+00 -2.2125E-01 -9.0243E-03 0.93991 -0.33167 0.08099 ... P 3.7167E+06 1.0000E+00 -1.1189E-01 -6.2985E-02 0.99157 -0.11335 -0.06279 P 8.2996E+05 1.0000E+00 3.3150E-01 -2.6303E-01 0.91975 0.30757 -0.24386 ENDFILE

There is a file header consisting of eight comment lines marked by an asterisk. The header is followed by a large number of data lines. The file terminates with an *ENDFILE* marker. Each data line contains 8 or 9 entries separated by space delimiters. A data line contains the following components:

- The marker in the first column gives the type of particle, electron (
*E*or*E-*), photon (*P*) and positron (*E+*). In the example, the output is a mixture of the primary electron beam and the secondary photons. - The kinetic energy in eV.
- The position at the exit, (
*x,y,z*). - Components of a unit vector giving the particle direction (
*ux,uy,uz*).

The ninth column is present only in runs where flux weighting is assigned to the model input particles.

If we are going to perform a standard analysis on many files, it would be an advantage to create an **R** script where the user could choose the working directory and the *SRC* file interactively. Here is the section of the script to specify and to load a file. It introduces several new concepts and commands. Copy and paste the text to a script file window in **RStudio**:

library(utils) if (!exists("WorkDir")) { WorkDir = choose.dir(default = "", caption = "Select folder") } setwd(WorkDir) FDefault = paste(WorkDir,"\\*.src",sep="") FName = choose.files(default=FDefault,caption="Select GamBet SRC file",multi=FALSE) CheckFile = read.table(FName,header=FALSE,sep="",comment.char="*",fill=TRUE,nrows=1) NColumn = ncol(CheckFile) if(NColumn==8) { # Standard column names cnames = c("Type","Energy","X","Y","Z","ux","uy","uz") } else { cnames = c("Type","Energy","X","Y","Z","ux","uy","uz","Flux") } SRCFile = read.table(FName,header=FALSE,sep="",comment.char="*",col.names=cnames,fill=TRUE) NLength = nrow(SRCFile) SRCFile = SRCFile[1:(NLength-1),]

The first command

library(utils)

occurs often in work with **R**. Many default commands are loaded when you start the **R** console. Although they have been sufficient for our previous work, they represent only a fraction of the available features. In this case, we load a library *utils* that supports interactive file operations. The command lines constitute an if statement:

if (!exists("WorkDir")) { WorkDir = choose.dir(default = "", caption = "Select folder") }

Simple *if* statements consist of a conditional line followed by any number of commands in braces. In this case, the commands are executed only if the object *WorkDir* does not exist (! designates the logical not operation). If we had a number of *SRC* files to analyze in the same directory, we would not want to reset the working directory every time. The *choose.dir()* operation brings up the standard Windows selection dialog of Fig. 1 and returns the path as *WorkDir*. The path is then set as the working directory.

After picking a directory, we’ll use the *choose.files()* command to pick a file. One of the command parameters is a default file name. We again use the paste operation to concatenate the path name and the default file name:

FDefault = paste(WorkDir,"\\*.src",sep="")

The result looks like this:

FDefault = "C:\\USINGRFORGAMBETSTATISTICALANALYSIS\\Examples\\Section08\\*.src"

The double backslash is synonymous with the forward slash used in **R**. The command:

FName = choose.files(default=FDefault,caption="Select GamBet SRC file",multi=FALSE)

opens a standard dialog to return the name of a a single file in the working directory of type **.SRC* (Figure 2). The example file contains 47,892 entries.

The *read.table()* command provides a simple option for reading the file, but there are two challenges:

- We don’t know whether there will be 8 or 9 data columns.
- The line with
*ENDFILE*does not contain any data.

These commands address the first problem:

CheckFile = read.table(FName,header=FALSE,sep="",comment.char="*",fill=TRUE,nrows=1) NColumn = ncol(CheckFile) if(NColumn==8) { cnames = c("Type","Energy","X","Y","Z","ux","uy","uz") } else { cnames = c("Type","Energy","X","Y","Z","ux","uy","uz","Flux") }

The *read.table()* command ignores the header comment lines and reads a single data line (*nrows*=1) to the dummy data frame *CheckFile*. The *ncol ()* operator returns the number of data columns as *NColumn*. Depending on the value, we define a vector *cnames* of column names containing 8 or 9 components. The next *read.table()* command inputs the entire set of data lines plus the *ENDFILE* line:

SRCFile = read.table(FName,header=FALSE,sep="",comment.char="*",col.names=cnames,fill=TRUE)

Note that the number of columns and their names is set by *col.names=cnames*. In the absence of the *fill=TRUE* option, the operation would terminate with an error because the *ENDFILE* line has only one entry. The option specifies that a line with fewer entries than specified should be filled out with N/A values. The last line is meaningless, so we delete it with the commands:

NLength = nrow(SRCFile) SRCFile = SRCFile[1:(NLength-1),]

Clearly, the procedure for loading a **GamBet** source file has several tricky features. Discovering them takes some trial-and-error. The advantage of a script program like **R** is that the effort is required only once. The script we have discussed provides a template to load all *SRC* files.

Now that the file has been loaded as the data frame *SRCFile*, we can do some calculations. Copy and paste the following information below the load commands:

electrons = subset(SRCFile,Type=="E" | Type=="E-") photons = subset(SRCFile,Type=="P") elecavg = mean(electrons$Energy) photavg = mean(photons$Energy) hist(electrons$Energy,breaks=20,density=15,main="Electron energy spectrum",xlab="T (eV)",ylab="N/bin") hist(photons$Energy,breaks=20,density=15,main="Photon energy spectrum",xlab="T (eV)",ylab="N/bin")

This command:

electrons = subset(SRCFile,Type=="E" | Type=="E-")

creates a data frame *electrons* that contains only rows where the *Type* is *E* or *E-*. We calculate the mean kinetic energy of electrons emerging from the target and create a histogram. Figure 3 shows the result. At this point, you should be able to figure out the meanings of options in the* hist()* command. Use the *Help* tab in **RStudio** and type in *hist* for more detailed information.

To conclude, we’ll briefly discuss importing a matrix file from the two-dimensional **GBView2** post-processor. A matrix file is a set of values computed over a regular grid (uniform intervals in *x* and *y* or *z* and *r*). In this case, the quantity is total dose (deposited energy/mass), dose from primary electrons, dose from primary photons, etc. Here is a sample of the first part of a file:

Matrix of values from data file alumbeam.G2D XMin: 0.0000E+00 YMin: -5.0000E-02 XMax: 1.0000E-01 YMax: 5.0000E-02 NX: 20 NY: 20 X Y NReg DoseTotal DoseElecP DosePhotP DosePosiP DoseElecS DosePhotS DosePosiS ========================================= 0.0000E+00 -5.0000E-02 1 3.3101E+04 2.6251E+04 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 6.8504E+03 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 5.0000E-03 -5.0000E-02 1 3.5977E+05 3.0285E+05 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 5.6925E+04 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 1.0000E-02 -5.0000E-02 1 3.5977E+05 3.0285E+05 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 5.6925E+04 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 1.5000E-02 -5.0000E-02 1 3.9705E+05 3.1705E+05 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 8.0007E+04 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 2.0000E-02 -5.0000E-02 1 3.9705E+05 3.1705E+05 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 8.0007E+04 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 2.5000E-02 -5.0000E-02 1 3.8548E+05 3.1449E+05 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 7.0986E+04 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 ...

The data lines are space delimited and can easily be loaded with the *read.table()* command. The challenge is the header, where the lines are not comments. Because the header information is not required for the **R** analysis, we can simply omit it by using the *skip* option. The following code loads matrix file information, limits data to a scan along *x* at *y* = 0.0, carries out a fourth-order polynomial fit and plots the results (Figure 4).

cnames = c("x","y","NReg","DRate","DoseElecP","DosePhotP","DosePosiP","DoseElecS","DosePhotS","DosePosiS") MatrixData = read.table(file="Demo.MTX",header=FALSE,sep="",col.names=cnames,skip=6) AxisPlot = subset(MatrixData,y > -0.00001 & y < 0.00001) plot(AxisPlot$x,AxisPlot$DRate) DFit = lm(DRate~I(x)+I(x^2)+I(x^3)+I(x^4),AxisPlot) PlotSeq = seq(from=0.0,to=0.10,length.out=101) PlotPos = data.frame(x=PlotSeq) lines(PlotPos$x,predict(DFit,newdata=PlotPos))

**Footnotes**

[1] The entire series is available as a PDF book at http://www.fieldp.com/rintroduction.html.

[2] The *read.fortran()* command of **R** provides a path to import information from the binary output files of any Field Precision technical program.

[3] Contact us : techinfo@fieldp.com.

[4] Field Precision home page: www.fieldp.com.

]]>