If you had the heating tally for the cell, then the heating density in [watt/cc] will be the heating divided by the cell volume. But if you use the mesh tally, then the power reported by each mesh corresponds to each mesh volume, making the heating density heating divided by each mesh volume.
heating and heating-local accounts for heating that comes from other interactions right? but what are the difference between this two?
I think it will be better if you check the documentation on the tally score and the corresponding heating-energy deposition description.
In general, heating local takes into account the photon energy deposited locally in the site without considering the photon transport.
On the other hand, when you activate photon transport, by using the neutron particle filter, the heating score accounts for neutron-induced heating. But if you use a photon particle filter for your heating score, the heating induced by the photon will be tallied.
Hence, from what I understand, without photon transport and a proper particle filter, the heating tally will only report the neutron heating without considering the photon heating. But by using local heating score, some heating induced by secondary photons will be reported to the heating local.
Ya, I am using that approach when using kappa to find the source. You can compare that to the direct Power/kappa-fission score.
Also, regarding the other discussion, don’t forget to check for the tally’s stdev, since the difference might fall below the stdev when simulating with low #particles.
In this picture, there are the number of fission per second calculate by normalizing kappa-fission (with f) and heating local (with f’). Why when i approximate the number with kappa-fission when i insert 24 control rod the number of fission is small between the number when 12 control rod is inside.. and with heating local, It’s the opposite case.
Since the difference is below the uncertainty, I recommend that you use higher particles in your simulation to lower the uncertainty.