Abstract: To further test the prototype geometry differential framework, it is useful to examine the TPCe03 version of the TPC.  (Note that I refer to the "exe TPCe03" alias in geometry.g which executes the tpcegeo2.g geometry file). This is compared with Yuri's material balance for TPCe03 when he developed the TPCe04 version of the geometry.

 

Figure 1 -- Left: Yuri's material balance for TPCe03.  Right: My material balance for TPCe03.  I claim that the overall structure is well reproduced.  I have selected different sub volumes to plot, and ordered them differently.  But the overall sum should be the same.  (The difference in volume selection probably has to do with how Yuri and I account for mother/daughter relationships in a given volume.  Specifically, volume TPCW contains several volumes which subtract from the material of volume TPCW.   These volumes are double counted when I generate a plot for TPCW, but not when I go one volume deeper to TWSS.)

 

Conclusion:  Given the agreement with Yuri's accounting, and the reasonable results for the Geometry Differential Framework [first test on EEMC in y2009 vs y2009a], I conclude that the framework is producing an accurate accounting of the top-level volumes in the STAR model.  Accounting of material in daughter volumes is more tricky, as one must have some understanding of the mother-daughter relationships and how they effect the material balance sums.  But this level of understanding is not required for producing the top-level volume's material balance, used in producing differentials.