Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Monte Carlo N-Particle Transport Code”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

MCNP ® Code Version 6.3.1 Theory & User Manual

This document acts as a repository of knowledge for the Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP) transport computer code. It is maintained alongside the source code and attempts to introduce new users and re-familiarize experienced users with the theory and practices of using the MCNP code for the wide range of particle transport analyses that it is appropriate for. The latest version of the MCNP code, version 6.3.1, provides the Monte Carlo particle transport community with the latest feature developments and bug fixes in the MCNP code. The MCNP code version 6.0 and later is also known as the MCNP6 code.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2026

MCNP® Code Version 6.3.2 Theory & User Manual (Rev. 1)

This document acts as a repository of knowledge for the Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP) transport computer code. It is maintained alongside the source code and attempts to introduce new users and re-familiarize experienced users with the theory and practices of using the MCNP code for the wide range of particle transport analyses that it is appropriate for. The latest version of the MCNP code, version 6.3.2, provides the Monte Carlo particle transport community with the latest feature developments and bug fixes in the MCNP code. The MCNP code version 6.0 and later is also known as the MCNP6 code.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Validation of the single-event method for low-energy electron transport via stopping power calculations with $\mathrm{MCNP}$

Monte Carlo simulations of low-energy ( <50 keV) electron transport in matter are essential for a broad range of application fields. Several Monte Carlo codes have developed specialized treatments for this case, but a comprehensive validation of low-energy electron transport for general-purpose simulations remains lacking in the literature. One approach to accomplish this validation is calculation of stopping power using low-energy electron transport physics, as stopping power is a fundamental radiation transport quantity which must be simulated accurately for nearly any application. Here in this work, we use the Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP) radiation transport code with the single-event method for electron transport to calculate stopping powers of low-energy electrons (50 eV to 30 keV) in 41 elemental solids, 14 compound solids, and five rare gas solids, comparing simulation results to published semi-empirical stopping power calculations from optical measurements. In general, the simulations give good agreement (typically within ±10%) with semi-empirical stopping power values at higher energies: 300 eV and above for most elemental solids, 1 keV and above for compound solids, and 400 eV and above for rare gas solids. Agreement between MCNP and semi-empirical values is worse below these energies. The most significant source of error is the EPRDATA14 cross section data, which does not account for changes in electronic structure due to solid-state bonding, particularly in compound materials. The simplistic model of atomic excitation used to generate the EPRDATA14 cross sections is another key source of error. Additionally, the breakdown of the continuous slowing-down approximation introduces significant uncertainty at low energies, although this is a limitation of the calculation method and not of the simulation procedure. Accounting for these and other uncertainty sources, the single event method in MCNP is robust and able to give good accuracy for a variety of low-energy electron transport problems through diverse kinds of materials.

38 RADIATION CHEMISTRY, RADIOCHEMISTRY, AND NUCLEA↗
DOE OSTI2022

MCNP6.3 Unstructured Mesh Verification: GodivR and CANDU Models

A geometric cell of the Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP)1 transport code is traditionally created by using Boolean operators on defined surfaces. This constructive solid geometry (CSG) capability has been available in the MCNP code since its beginning. However, a CSG model approach is limited when it comes to constructing a representative geometry for a complex model in its ability to capture a correct model representation. Starting with the version 6.0, the MCNP code has the ability of embedding an unstructured mesh (UM) model into a CSG cell to create a hybrid geometry [1]. The MCNP UM feature provides the flexibility of defining very complex geometries because computer aided design (CAD) and mesh generation software packages can be utilized to construct UM models for MCNP simulations.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Athena-I CUBIT Journal Files

The Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP)1 transport code version 6 (also known as MCNP6) has the capability for tracking particles on unstructured mesh (UM) geometry models embedded into con structive solid geometry (CSG) cells. This feature has been developed for performing calculations of complex geometry models because manually creating CSG models is a time-consuming and error prone process as the complexities of geometries increase. The UM capability was originally designed to work with UM models created with the Abaqus software and ASCII input files that it generates. The MCNP code version 6.0 and later can process UM models formatted as Abaqus input files. Starting with version 6.3, MCNP can also process HDF5 mesh input files. External codes must be used to generate Abaqus input files for MCNP UM calculations. CUBIT, the Sandia National Laboratory automated mesh generation toolkit, can generate a UM model formatted as an Abaqus input file. However, the Abaqus input files exported from CUBIT cannot be used for MCNP simulations because it lacks the proper syntax. A Python script was developed to convert an Abaqus file created by CUBIT to an Abaqus file format that MCNP can process. Creating UM models for complex geometries is not an easy task. The process of creating UM models in CUBIT for MCNP simulations is detailed in. CUBIT provides several user interface options including a graphical user interface (GUI) and a command line interface. A GUI provides an easy way to use CUBIT without learning the CUBIT command syntax. When using CUBIT with either interface option, command lines are written into an ASCII file known as a journal file; this journal file can be edited and archived so that it can be played back in CUBIT to automatically generate a UM model. This report describes the CUBIT journal files of the UM models developed for Athena-I. The Athena platform, an energy-tuning assembly, was developed to spectrally shape the National Ignition Facility (NIF) deuterium-tritium fusion neutron source to a thermonuclear (fusion) plus prompt fission neutron spectrum with capability to act as a short-pulse neutron source. MCNP6 was used for the Athena experiment design analysis.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Generating MCNP Input Files for Unstructured Mesh Geometries

The Los Alamos National Laboratory’s (LANL) Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP)1 transport code version 6.3 (also known as MCNP6.3) has the capability for tracking particles on unstructured mesh (UM) geometry models embedded into constructive solid geometry (CSG) cells. This feature has been developed for performing calculations of complex geometry models because manually creating CSG models is time-consuming and error-prone as the complexities of geometries increase. A UM geometry model is a collection of finite elements representing a solid geometry. The first step of the MCNP UM calculation is using other software packages to create a finite element mesh representation of a solid 3D geometry because the MCNP code cannot be used to generate a UM model. Computer-aided design (CAD) software is typically used to create a solid geometry model, which is later imported into mesh generation software to create a UM model. Some mesh generation software packages may also be used to create solid geometries and thus CAD files are not needed. The MCNP UM feature was originally designed for models generated by the Abaqus/CAE software suite. The MCNP code version 6.0 and later can process UM models formatted as Abaqus input files. Starting with a 6.3 version, the MCNP code can process HDF5 mesh input files. We only focus on the UM models formatted as Abaqus input files in this report since currently no external software can be used to generate HDF5 mesh input files for MCNP UM calculations. The MCNP code version 6.3 can be used to convert the Abaqus mesh input files into the HDF5 mesh input files, but this option is typically used by the MCNP code development team to test the HDF5 mesh input file feature. Several software packages (such as Abaqus, Attila4MC, or Cubit) can be used to create the Abaqus input files for MCNP UM calculations. An MCNP UM calculation using an Abaqus model requires two input file types: MCNP and Abaqus input files. The Abaqus input files needed for MCNP UM calcu lations must have the correct Abaqus syntax and meet the additional requirements by the MCNP code. The MCNP code can process only Abaqus input files that make use of part and assembly definitions, where elements in each part must be grouped into one or more element sets (i.e., elset) using *Elset keyword lines with specified naming formats. The MCNP and Abaqus input files required for MCNP UM simulations must be related; pseudo-cells in an MCNP input file must be constructed from mesh model data from an Abaqus input file. For large complex UM models, it is tedious to manually create MCNP UM input files. The um pre op (unstructured mesh pre operations) program with the -m option can be used to create a skeleton MCNP input file from an Abaqus input file [6]. Since the um pre op program was written in Fortran and was not written for optimized performance, this program is a deprecated feature in the MCNP code version 6.3 and may be removed in the next release of the code. To improve calculation flow of multiphysics calculations, a Python3 code called write mcnp um input has been developed to generate an MCNP input file instead of using the um_pre_op -m option. This Python code was initially released to the public in 2020. We have updated this Python code for MCNP6.3 and it was used to generate the MCNP input files used to verify the MCNP6.3 code. The write_mcnp_um_input code is included with the MCNP6.3 code package which will be released to the public through the Radiation Safety Information Computational Center (RSICC) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. This report is a revision of LA-UR-20-27139 report.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Impact of Time Dependent Reactor and Sensor Physics on Core Power Synthesis

Online synthesis of the power distribution is critical in the operation and control of nuclear power reactors to ensure that the core is operating within safety margins, and to provide essential knowledge associated with the burnup of the fuel. In light water reactors (LWRs), power synthesis is achieved by using some a priori knowledge of the state of the reactor core and updating based on the signals coming from in-core sensors—namely, self-powered neutron detectors (SPNDs). This report aims to study the effects of fuel burnup and sensor degradation on the ability to accurately synthesize the power distribution in a LWR. Several modeling tools were used to simulate power synthesis based on the responses of SPNDs, with emitters made out of Rh or V. A representative pressurized water reactor low-enriched uranium (LEU) core was modeled using the Polaris/Purdue Advanced Reactor Core Simulator (PARCS) approach. The Monte Carlo N-Particle Transport 6 (MCNP6) code was used, as well, to calculate response functions between different segments of fuel to individual SPNDs; this is a crucial parameter for power synthesis. The Oak Ridge Isotope GENeration (ORIGEN) package in the Standardized Computer Analyses for Licensing Evaluation (SCALE) code was used to model the time-dependent isotopic transmutation in the SPND emitters. All these data were fed into a custom code that enacted the point-based iterative (PBI) method to simulate power synthesis. Developmental work was also performed on high-fidelity SPND models in the GEometry ANd Tracking 4 (Geant4) code, which enables higher-accuracy modeling of the current responses from SPNDs. In this work, five sets of time-dependent power synthesis test cases were conducted. In these test cases, systematic changes in the input conditions enabled an analysis of the effect of (1) slightly inaccurate a priori power distribution assumptions with respect to fuel burnup, (2) highly inaccurate a priori assumptions with respect to fuel burnup (such that burnup is not included in the a priori assumed distribution), and (3) differences between Rh and V SPNDs in terms of downstream consequences of the transmutation in the emitters. The authors discovered that one may permissibly have slightly inaccurate a priori assumptions of the fuel burnup (such that the level of burnup may be slightly under- or over-approximated by the accumulated burnup in approximately 9.3 full power days), but to not account for burnup at all in the a priori assumption leads to severe levels of error, approaching 25% at maximum. The authors also discovered that V SPNDs are extraordinarily robust in the low-enriched uranium fuel cycle considered in this modeling work, whereas Rh SPNDs undergo significant transmutation that can result in large errors in the synthesized power distribution.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Impact of Time-Dependent Reactor and Sensor Physics on Core Power Synthesis (Rev.1)

Online synthesis of power distribution is critical in the operation and control of nuclear power reactors to ensure that the core is operating within safety margins and to provide essential knowledge associated with the burnup of the fuel. In light-water reactors, power synthesis is achieved by using some a priori knowledge of the state of the reactor core and updating based on the signals coming from in-core sensors—namely, self-powered neutron detectors (SPNDs). This report examines the effects of fuel burnup and sensor degradation on the ability to accurately synthesize the power distribution in a pressurized water reactor (PWR), considering the typical low-enriched uranium (LEU, 3%-5% enrichment) fuel cycle as well as the higher enrichment LEU+ (5%-8% enrichment) fuel cycle. Several modeling tools were used to simulate power synthesis based on the responses of SPNDs, with emitters made out of Rh or V. A representative PWR LEU core was modeled using the Polaris/Purdue Advanced Reactor Core Simulator (PARCS) approach. The Monte Carlo N-Particle Transport 6 (MCNP6) code was used as well to calculate response functions between different segments of fuel to individual SPNDs; this is a crucial parameter for power synthesis. The Oak Ridge Isotope GENeration (ORIGEN) package in the Standardized Computer Analyses for Licensing Evaluation (SCALE) code was used to model the time-dependent isotopic transmutation in the SPND emitters. All these data were fed into a custom code that enacted the point-based iterative method to simulate power synthesis. Developmental work was also performed on high-fidelity SPND models in the GEometry ANd Tracking 4 (Geant4) code, which enables higher-accuracy modeling of the current responses from SPNDs. In this work, five sets of time-dependent power synthesis test cases were conducted. In these test cases, systematic changes in the input conditions enabled an analysis of the effect of (1) slightly inaccurate a priori power distribution assumptions with respect to fuel burnup, (2) highly inaccurate a priori power distribution assumptions with respect to fuel burnup (such that burnup is not included in the a priori assumed distribution), and (3) differences between Rh and V SPNDs in terms of downstream consequences of the transmutation in the emitters and the extended nature of the LEU+ fuel cycle in comparison with LEU. The authors discovered that one may permissibly have slightly inaccurate a priori assumptions of the fuel burnup (such that the level of burnup may be slightly underapproximated or overapproximated by the accumulated burnup in approximately 9.3 full power days), but to not account for burnup at all in the a priori assumptions leads to severe levels of error, approaching 25% at maximum (for LEU). The authors also discovered that V SPNDs are extraordinarily robust in both the LEU and LEU+ fuel cycles considered in this modeling work, whereas Rh SPNDs undergo significant transmutation that can result in large errors in the synthesized power distribution.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Activation Analysis in Preparation for a Tungsten Irradiation Experiment at LANSCE

To organize the safe handling of activated material, knowing the residual dose rates is crucial. Here, in this work, we present the pre-experiment activation analysis for an experiment in which tungsten blocks are irradiated by 800-MeV protons. In this analysis, we use the Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP) code for radiation transport, Attila4MC for unstructured mesh generation, and Activation in Accelerator Radiation Environments (AARE), including CINDER2008, for activation analysis. If the tungsten blocks must be removed within a day after the experiment, then exposure to personnel entering the room must be reduced. One exposure-reduction strategy is to add carbon steel shielding around the tungsten blocks, efficiently reducing the dose from the activated tungsten. However, the shielding becomes activated itself during irradiation: 56Mn is the dominant contributor for short decay times. The actual schedule at the time of the experiment allowed sufficient cool-off time for the tungsten in the room so that additional shielding was not necessary. A less rigorous comparison of the calculated values with the post-experiment measurements showed reasonable agreement.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Niowave Neutron Source Converter: Lead-Bismuth-Eutectic (LBE) Windowless Target Design and Evaluation

Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) is working with Niowave on the design and evaluation of their lead-bismuth-eutectic (LBE) windowless target (i.e., neutron source converter). Niowave plans to use 200 kW electron beam at 40 MeV beam energy to produce neutrons by photonuclear reaction with LBE. Then, the neutrons undergo fission at the surrounding uranium target assembly (UTA) to produce Molybdenum 99 (Mo-99) as a fission product, which eventually decays to Technetium-99 (Tc-99m). Tc-99m is one of important radioisotopes that is used for medical diagnostics. LANL conducted 3D multiphysics analysis for the Niowave neutron converter design and provided design assessment in thermohydraulic aspects. LANL conducted radiation transport calculations using Monte-Carlo N-Particle (MCNP) code with unstructured meshing scheme. The 3D volumetric heating profiles in the LBE and Stainless-Steel (SS) housing were imported into multiphase computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to obtain 3D temperature profiles of LBE and SS through conjugate heat transfer (CHT) analysis. The key findings are: LBE film thickness at the center of the beam is approximately 1.6 cm with a maximum LBE velocity of approximately 1.8 m/s, which is below a 2 m/s limit to avoid erosion issues on supporting structures; Heat deposition in the LBE peaks at ~1 cm depth from the LBE free-surface because of the forward interactions of electron, photon, and neutron with LBE; LBE maximum temperature is ~360 °C, which is below LBE evaporation initiative temperature, ~450 °C; LBE-SS interface temperature is ~350 °C, which is below the safety thermal limit to prevent severe corrosion on SS. The results indicate that Niowave’s neutron converter design satisfies both hydraulic and thermal criteria for safe operation. By virtue of such computational analysis, Niowave can move toward establishing an experimental setup to experimentally test their LBE neutron converter. The following sections describe the detailed work done by LANL.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
DOE OSTI2026

CADIS and FW-CADIS Variance Reduction in Gamma Transport for Predicting Prompt Forensics Signatures

The goal of prompt nuclear forensics is to determine the characteristics of a nuclear detonation based on the signatures available almost immediately after the explosion. An important characteristic is the reaction time history (RTH), a measure of the device’s rate of neutron multiplication. The RTH can be estimated by observation of the gamma radiation emitted from the detonation, which can be detected directly or observed indirectly as Teller light. Gamma transport simulations used to predict these radiation fields are often modeled stochastically using the Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP) code, which can be a computationally demanding task due to the number of particle histories needed to achieve statistical convergence. In an attempt to improve the efficiency of these calculations, we evaluate two variance reduction techniques: Consistent Adjoint-Driven Importance Sampling (CADIS) and Forward-Weighted Consistent Adjoint-Driven Importance Sampling (FW-CADIS). These methods use a deterministically calculated adjoint flux to create weight windows and source biasing that guide MCNP sampling. We study the utility of CADIS and FW-CADIS for their use in MCNP gamma transport for nuclear forensics prediction simulations. Furthermore, the results demonstrate that both CADIS and FW-CADIS improve the accuracy for forensics-focused simulations, with CADIS being most beneficial in direct detection and FW-CADIS being ideal for computing a global Teller light source.

CADIS↗
DOE OSTI2023

MCNP ® Code V.6.3.0 Release Notes

The Monte Carlo N-Particle ® (MCNP ® ) code is a general-purpose, continuous-energy, generalized geometry, time-dependent, radiation transport code developed by the MCNP development team. The MCNP calculations provide predictive capabilities that can replace expensive or impossible-to perform experiments. Specific application problems include simulations of experimental diagnostics, intrinsic radiation, radiation detection and measurement, criticality safety, nuclear threat reduction and response, radiation health protection, nuclear weapons effects, and nuclear forensics. This MCNP code, version 6.3.0, follows the MCNP6.2.0 version. Since the release of MCNP6.2.0, many changes have been made to the MCNP code. These changes include new or improved features, a new build system, code enhancement and modernization, and bug fixes. The MCNP code, version 6.3.0, theory and user input information is documented in MCNP ® Code Version 6.3.0 Theory & User Manual, the build guidance for various platforms is documented in MCNP ® Code Version 6.3.0 Build Guide, and the verification and validation testing for various application benchmark test suites is documented in MCNP ® Code Version 6.3.0 Verification & Validation Testing.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2025

MCNP® Code Version 6.3.1 Release Notes

The Monte Carlo N-Particle® (MCNP® ) code is a general-purpose, continuous-energy, generalized-geometry, time-dependent, radiation transport code developed by the MCNP development team. MCNP calculations provide predictive capabilities that can replace expensive or impossible-to-perform experiments. Specific application problems include simulations of experimental diagnostics, intrinsic radiation, radiation detection and measurement, criticality safety, nuclear threat reduction and response, radiation health protection, nuclear weapons effects, and nuclear forensics. This MCNP code, version 6.3.1, follows the MCNP6.3.0 version. Since the release of MCNP6.3.0, a variety of bug fixes and code enhancements have been completed for MCNP6.3.1. A few new features have also been added to this release to support both ongoing research and the release of the latest ENDF/B-VIII.1 nuclear data library. The MCNP code, version 6.3.1, theory and user input information is documented in MCNP® Code Version 6.3.1 Theory & User Manual, the build guidance for various platforms is documented in MCNP® Code Version 6.3.1 Build Guide, and the verification and validation testing for various application benchmark test suites is documented in MCNP® Code Version 6.3.1 Verification & Validation Testing.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Modeling Approach to Critical in the Upcoming CERBERUS Experiment

The planned Critical Experiment Reflected By coppEr to betteR Understand Scattering (CERBERUS) seeks to maximize sensitivity to elastic neutron scattering in the intermediate energy region (0.625 eV to 100 keV). It will be performed near the end of FY 2023 at the National Criticality Experiments Research Center (NCERC). Very few International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) benchmarks are sensitive to copper in this region. Creating a benchmark sensitive in this area will make the Zeus benchmark series, an intermediate benchmark evaluation that uses a copper reflector, more useful for code and nuclear data validation. Approaching criticality in a safe manner is of utmost importance to avoid a criticality accident, which would present a safety concern and could cause damage to equipment. The two rules that are followed closely to ensure that a criticality accident does not occur are the 3/4 rule and the 1/2 rule. The 3/4 rule states that no more than 3/4 of a critical mass can be assembled by hand, and the 1/2 rule states that no more than 1/2 of the material expected to reach criticality, or 1/2 the distance needed to reach criticality, can be added before another measurement of the count rate has been taken. This work will discuss the approach to criticality as modeled in MCNP6® 1 particle transport code with the ENDF/B- VIII.0 cross-section library and the .00c data library.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2025

The MCNP ® 6 code: A decade of progress

After several years of effort involved in merging the Los Alamos National Laboratory MCNP5 and MCNPX codes, in 2013 the first production release of version 6 of the Monte Carlo N-Particle ® , or MCNP ® , code MCNP6.1 was distributed publicly. Since then, three significant releases have been issued: MCNP6.1.1beta in 2014, MCNP6.2 in 2018, and MCNP6.3 in 2023. While each release always contains new features, code enhancements, and bug fixes, each version has had a different primary focus, ranging from improved calculational efficiency to new powerful utilities and tools, to software modernization of the code base. With all that has been learned over the first decade of the MCNP6 code, continuous progress is being made toward a modernized, general-purpose Monte Carlo radiation transport code that remains a trusted resource for the global community of practitioners. This paper describes these first 10+ years of the MCNP6 code and its continually improving data libraries, and gives some insight into how the next decade is expected to unfold.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Verifying MCNP Models of the TEX High 240 Plutonium Benchmark

Computational modeling programs are invaluable tools that allow us to understand systems, safely develop new processes, and make reliable predictions about future designs. However, the effectiveness of these codes is limited by the degree to which their parameters match the real world. In the field of nuclear engineering, cross section data is one of these vital parameters. Accurate cross section data on important fissile and fissionable isotopes promotes the design of safer and more efficient fabrication, transportation, storage, and stockpiling of nuclear fuel. Unfortunately, there are knowledge gaps in data on key isotopes. In 2011, a multinational meeting hosted by the US Department of Energy Nuclear Criticality Safety Program ranked the priority of certain cross section data needs. In response, Lawrence Livermore National Lab (LLNL) designed the Thermal and Epithermal eXperiment (TEX) series of benchmark experiments. Benchmark experiments are used to validate current cross section data. They validate data by comparing the results of an actual experiment to the predicted results from a computational model. The data a benchmark applies to depends on the isotope and energy range the experiment’s neutron multiplication factor ( k eff ) is most sensitive to. The development and testing of the TEX High 240 Plutonium Benchmark will help validate 240 Pu cross section data. The configuration and materials of this benchmark are designed to be most sensitive to 240 Pu's intermediate energy range (from 0.625 ev to 100 keV ). MCNP® models of the assembly have been developed by LLNL and the results have been written in the final design report. In order for the discrepancies between benchmark models and experiments to be attributed to cross section inaccuracies, the accuracy of the models needs to be verified. The goal of this project is to verify of the results of LLNL's modeling by creating a new set of MCNP models and comparing the results.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Improvements in MCNP6.3 (Rev. 1) [Slides]

This presentation outlines improvements in the Monte Carlo N-Particle Code (MCNP) version 6.3. MCNP is an internationally renowned Monte Carlo particle transport code developed by Los Alamos National Laboratory.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Parallel Programming in MCNP6

Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP)1 is a general-purpose Monte Carlo particle transport code developed by Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). To efficiently handle long simulations, MCNP version 6 (MCNP6) supports parallel execution using two primary programming models: • Shared-memory task-based threading using OpenMP (Open Multi-Processing), and • Distributed-memory calculations using MPI (Message Passing Interface). The OpenMP and MPI programming models enable MCNP6 to scale from desktop systems to high-performance computing (HPC) clusters, allowing users to run MCNP in one of three parallel modes: • OpenMP-only, • MPI-only, and • Hybrid (MPI + OpenMP). The choice of parallelization mode depends on the underlying computer architecture and the characteristics of the simulation problem.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗