[Gate-users] Surfaces definition in GATE v9.0
강한규
lovehangulp at naver.com
Sat Dec 19 10:30:58 CET 2020
Dear Carlotta Trigila,
I had the same experience before.
Until the GATEv7.2, thesurface definition can be place BEFORE the initialization command.
However, since the GATEv8.0, the surface definition MUST be placed AFTER the initialization command.
Hopefully, someone can answer the question on why this significant change was arose since the GATEv8.0.
Best regards,
Han Gyu Kang
--------Han Gyu Kang, Ph.D, Researcher
National Institute of Radiological Sciences (NIRS)
National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology (QST)
4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8555, JAPAN
-----Original Message-----
From: "JAN Sebastien"<sebastien.jan at cea.fr>
To: "Carlotta Trigila"<ctrigila at ucdavis.edu>; "Mathieu Dupont"<mdupont at cppm.in2p3.fr>; "lovehangulp at naver.com"<lovehangulp at naver.com>; "gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org"<gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org>;
Cc:
Sent: 2020-12-17 (목) 01:09:48 (GMT+09:00)
Subject: RE: [Gate-users] Surfaces definition in GATE v9.0
Hi Carlotta,
It was and it is not clear for me but the “trouble” is probably associated to the G4 modifications between the 10.4 and 10.5 versions (when we moved on G4 10.5 for the Gate8.2 release)…This was not really studied at that time.
Cheers
Seb
De : Gate-users <gate-users-bounces at lists.opengatecollaboration.org> De la part de Carlotta Trigila
Envoyé : mercredi 16 décembre 2020 16:32
À : Mathieu Dupont <mdupont at cppm.in2p3.fr>; 강한규 <lovehangulp at naver.com>; gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org
Objet : [Gate-users] Surfaces definition in GATE v9.0
Dear GATE Users,
I am specifically addressing this e-mail to anyone using optical simulations and surface definition with GATE v9.0.
I noticed that in the last versions of GATE the definition of the surfaces for optical simulations has to be performed AFTER the "/gate/run/initialize" command.
E.g. from optical.mac benchmark example
"
/gate/run/initialize
# Definition of surfaces
/gate/detector/surfaces/name Detection1
/gate/detector/surfaces/insert Electronics
/gate/detector/surfaces/Detection1/setSurface perfect_apd
/gate/Electronics/surfaces/name Detection2
/gate/Electronics/surfaces/insert detector
/gate/Electronics/surfaces/Detection2/setSurface perfect_apd
"
If we move these commands BEFORE the initialization, the simulation crashes with a message like
"[G4-cerr] ***** Illegal application state </gate/detector/surfaces/insert Electronics> *****".
However, I am sure that with GATE v8.0 (and older) we were able to define them BEFORE the initialization. I am not sure of what happens with the v8.2.
Did someone ever notice it before? Did you have an idea of what could have changed?
Many thanks for your help,
Carlotta Trigila
--
Carlotta Trigila, PhD
Department of Biomedical Engineering – GBSF 2505
University of California, Davis
451 East Health Sciences Drive
Davis, CA 95616
ctrigila at ucdavis.edu
From: Gate-users <gate-users-bounces at lists.opengatecollaboration.org> on behalf of Mathieu Dupont <mdupont at cppm.in2p3.fr>
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2020 2:17 AM
To: 강한규 <lovehangulp at naver.com>
Cc: GATE-users <Gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org>
Subject: Re: [Gate-users] GATEv9.0 Scintillation Process is NOT working.(Solved)
Thx for your report,
The aim of my fix is to make scintillation working for the combination
"GATEv9.0 (with my patch) + Geant4.10.06.p02 "
Can you test it, if you have time ?
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 16:52:32 +0900
강한규 <lovehangulp at naver.com> wrote:
> Dear Mathieu Dupont and GATE users,
>
> After downgrading the Geant4 version from Geant4.10.06.p02 to
> Geant4.9.05.p01, the scintillation process works in GATEv9.0
> (Attached file). (Before)GATEv9.0 + Geant4.10.06.p02 -> Scintillation
> Process does NOT work. (After) GATEv9.0 + Geant4.9.05.p01 ->
> Scintillation Process does work.
> You can find issue and fix on the following links of the GATE git hub.
> Issue: https://github.com/OpenGATE/Gate/issues/346
> Fix: https://github.com/OpenGATE/Gate/pull/368
>
> Thanks Mathieu Dupont for your good advice.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Han Gyu Kang
>
>
> --------Han Gyu Kang, Ph.D, Researcher
>
> National Institute of Radiological Sciences (NIRS)
> National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and
> Technology (QST) 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8555, JAPAN
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "강한규"<lovehangulp at naver.com>
> To: "GATE-users"<Gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org>;
> Cc:
> Sent: 2020-06-08 (월) 20:20:02 (GMT+09:00)
> Subject: [Gate-users] GATEv9.0 Scintillation Process is NOT working.
>
> Dear GATE users,
>
> Is there anyone who checked the scintillation process in GATEv9.0?
>
> I installed GATEv9.0 on my Ubuntu Linux PC.
> Of course, the "GATE_USE_OPTICAL" option was turned ON during the
> installation. After GATE installation, I checked that everything
> works fine except the scintillation process.
> The optical.mac in the benchImaging folder is working well as it uses
> "opticalphoton" as a source. I checked that Cerenkov process is also
> working well.
> However, "Scintillation Process" is NOT working in GATEv9.0 optical
> simulation. If there is anyone who succeeded in scintillation process
> in GATEv9.0, please let me know.
> Best regards,
>
> Han Gyu Kang
>
> --------Han Gyu Kang, Ph.D, Researcher
>
> National Institute of Radiological Sciences (NIRS)
> National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and
> Technology (QST) 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba 263-8555, JAPAN
>
>
>
--
Démobilisé contre la réforme des retraites et la LPPR
--
Mathieu Dupont - Ingénieur de Recherche
CENTRE DE PHYSIQUE DES PARTICULES DE MARSEILLE
UMR 7346 - Aix-Marseille Université - CNRS/IN2P3
163 avenue de Luminy, Case 902, F -13288 Marseille CEDEX 09
Tél.: +33 (0) 4 91 82 72 19
Site : cppm.in2p3.fr - Email : mdupont at cppm.in2p3.fr
_______________________________________________
Gate-users mailing list
Gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org
http://lists.opengatecollaboration.org/mailman/listinfo/gate-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opengatecollaboration.org/pipermail/gate-users/attachments/20201219/22ed22de/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Gate-users
mailing list