Cylindrical tallies, negatives fluxes?

Hello,

Using some cylindrical tallies to perform a benchmark, I’ve found that i’ve got negative values for fluxes ?
What can explain this result ?

I can’t share the model with you but here are my tallies details :

CylindricalMesh
ID = 27
Name = mesh_lat_E
Dimensions = 3
Origin = [-305 0 10]
N R pnts: = 2
R Min: = 0
R Max: = 10
N Phi pnts: = 2
Phi Min: = 0.0
Phi Max: = 6.283185307179586
N Z pnts: = 2
Z Min: = 0
Z Max: = 25

MeshFilter
Mesh ID = 27
ID = 39
Translation = None

ParticleFilter
Bins = [‘neutron’]
ID = 19

EnergyFilter
Values = [1.00001e-05 3.00000e-03 5.00000e-03 6.90000e-03 1.00000e-02 1.50000e-02
2.00000e-02 2.50000e-02 3.00000e-02 3.50000e-02 4.20000e-02 5.00000e-02
5.80000e-02 6.70000e-02 7.70000e-02 8.00000e-02 9.50000e-02 1.00001e-01
1.15000e-01 1.34000e-01 1.40000e-01 1.60000e-01 1.80000e-01 1.89000e-01
2.20000e-01 2.48000e-01 2.80000e-01 3.00000e-01 3.14500e-01 3.20000e-01
3.50000e-01 3.91000e-01 4.00000e-01 4.33000e-01 4.85000e-01 5.00000e-01
5.40000e-01 6.25000e-01 7.05000e-01 7.80000e-01 7.90000e-01 8.50000e-01
8.60000e-01 9.10000e-01 9.30000e-01 9.50000e-01 9.72000e-01 9.86000e-01
9.96000e-01 1.02000e+00 1.03500e+00 1.04500e+00 1.07100e+00 1.09700e+00
1.11000e+00 1.12535e+00 1.15000e+00 1.17000e+00 1.23500e+00 1.30000e+00
1.33750e+00 1.37000e+00 1.44498e+00 1.47500e+00 1.50000e+00 1.59000e+00
1.67000e+00 1.75500e+00 1.84000e+00 1.93000e+00 2.02000e+00 2.10000e+00
2.13000e+00 2.36000e+00 2.55000e+00 2.60000e+00 2.72000e+00 2.76792e+00
3.30000e+00 3.38075e+00 4.00000e+00 4.12925e+00 5.04348e+00 5.34643e+00
6.16012e+00 7.52398e+00 8.31529e+00 9.18981e+00 9.90555e+00 1.12245e+01
1.37096e+01 1.59283e+01 1.94548e+01 2.26033e+01 2.49805e+01 2.76077e+01
3.05113e+01 3.37201e+01 3.72665e+01 4.01690e+01 4.55174e+01 4.82516e+01
5.15780e+01 5.55951e+01 6.79041e+01 7.56736e+01 9.16609e+01 1.36742e+02
1.48625e+02 2.03995e+02 3.04325e+02 3.71703e+02 4.53999e+02 6.77287e+02
7.48518e+02 9.14242e+02 1.01039e+03 1.23410e+03 1.43382e+03 1.50733e+03
2.03468e+03 2.24867e+03 3.35463e+03 3.52662e+03 5.00451e+03 5.53084e+03
7.46586e+03 9.11882e+03 1.11378e+04 1.50344e+04 1.66156e+04 2.47875e+04
2.73944e+04 2.92830e+04 3.69786e+04 4.08677e+04 5.51656e+04 6.73795e+04
8.22975e+04 1.11090e+05 1.22773e+05 1.83156e+05 2.47235e+05 2.73237e+05
3.01974e+05 4.07622e+05 4.50492e+05 4.97871e+05 5.50232e+05 6.08101e+05
8.20850e+05 9.07180e+05 1.00259e+06 1.10803e+06 1.22456e+06 1.35335e+06
1.65299e+06 2.01897e+06 2.23130e+06 2.46597e+06 3.01194e+06 3.67879e+06
4.49329e+06 5.48812e+06 6.06531e+06 6.70320e+06 8.18731e+06 1.00000e+07
1.16183e+07 1.38403e+07 1.49182e+07 1.73325e+07 1.96403e+07]

Tally
ID = 7
Name = Flux n for lat_E detector
Filters = ParticleFilter, MeshFilter, EnergyFilter
Nuclides =
Scores = [‘flux’]
Estimator = None

Using estimator = ‘collision’ solves the issue.

I think that, as for spheres detectors, tracklengths calculations for cylindrical detectors are bugged…

See the topic about spheres here :

Hi @Thomas,

Is there a chance you could share this model or a minimal working example of this issue?

Also, could you provide the version of OpenMC that you’re using for your simulation?

Best,

Patrick