不同中子场下热发光响应的比较与校正

Q3 Health Professions
S. Baradaran, M. Taheri, A. Moslehi
{"title":"不同中子场下热发光响应的比较与校正","authors":"S. Baradaran, M. Taheri, A. Moslehi","doi":"10.22038/IJMP.2020.44660.1689","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Neutron dosimetry is a challenging subject in radiation protection. Responses of neutron dosimeters mostly depend on the neutron energy spectrum. Dosimeter response corresponding to a dose-equivalent in the calibration field is different from responses in other neutron fields. Consequently, the dose estimated by neutron dosimeters may be associated with great uncertainty. Therefore, the present study aimed to modify the response in different neutron fields in order to reduce this uncertainty. \nMaterial and Methods: Thermo-luminescent dosimeters (TLDs) are widely used to determine neutron dose-equivalent. In the present study, a set of TLD-600 and TLD-700 dosimeters included in a TLD card was utilized to determine the response to “fast” neutrons of 241Am-Be,252Cf, and 239Pu-Be standard fields in four dose-equivalents of 5, 10, 15, and 20 mSv. Meanwhile, 241Am-Be was regarded as the calibration field.  \nResults: As evidenced by the obtained results, for equal dose-equivalents, the original responses in 252Cf and 239Pu-Be fields are smaller, compared to those in the 241Am-Be filed. The maximum discrepancies were obtained at 26.8% and 42.5% occurring at 20 and 5 mSv, respectively. After the application of a correction factor equal to the average of relative responses (i.e., in 241Am-Be to two other fields) corresponding to all dose-equivalents considered, these differences reduced to 12.4% and 21.7%. \nConclusion: It can be concluded that the correction method used in the present study could enhance the accuracy of dose estimated by TLDs in fast neutron fields.","PeriodicalId":14613,"journal":{"name":"Iranian Journal of Medical Physics","volume":"18 1","pages":"84-88"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison and Correction of Thermo-Luminescent Responses in Different Neutron Fields\",\"authors\":\"S. Baradaran, M. Taheri, A. Moslehi\",\"doi\":\"10.22038/IJMP.2020.44660.1689\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: Neutron dosimetry is a challenging subject in radiation protection. Responses of neutron dosimeters mostly depend on the neutron energy spectrum. Dosimeter response corresponding to a dose-equivalent in the calibration field is different from responses in other neutron fields. Consequently, the dose estimated by neutron dosimeters may be associated with great uncertainty. Therefore, the present study aimed to modify the response in different neutron fields in order to reduce this uncertainty. \\nMaterial and Methods: Thermo-luminescent dosimeters (TLDs) are widely used to determine neutron dose-equivalent. In the present study, a set of TLD-600 and TLD-700 dosimeters included in a TLD card was utilized to determine the response to “fast” neutrons of 241Am-Be,252Cf, and 239Pu-Be standard fields in four dose-equivalents of 5, 10, 15, and 20 mSv. Meanwhile, 241Am-Be was regarded as the calibration field.  \\nResults: As evidenced by the obtained results, for equal dose-equivalents, the original responses in 252Cf and 239Pu-Be fields are smaller, compared to those in the 241Am-Be filed. The maximum discrepancies were obtained at 26.8% and 42.5% occurring at 20 and 5 mSv, respectively. After the application of a correction factor equal to the average of relative responses (i.e., in 241Am-Be to two other fields) corresponding to all dose-equivalents considered, these differences reduced to 12.4% and 21.7%. \\nConclusion: It can be concluded that the correction method used in the present study could enhance the accuracy of dose estimated by TLDs in fast neutron fields.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14613,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Iranian Journal of Medical Physics\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"84-88\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Iranian Journal of Medical Physics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22038/IJMP.2020.44660.1689\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Health Professions\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Iranian Journal of Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22038/IJMP.2020.44660.1689","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

中子剂量学是辐射防护领域的一门具有挑战性的学科。中子剂量计的响应主要依赖于中子能谱。校准场中剂量当量对应的剂量计响应不同于其他中子场中的响应。因此,中子剂量计估计的剂量可能有很大的不确定性。因此,本研究旨在修改不同中子场的响应,以减少这种不确定性。材料和方法:热发光剂量计(TLDs)被广泛用于测定中子剂量当量。在本研究中,利用TLD卡中包含的一套TLD-600和TLD-700剂量计,测定了241Am-Be、252Cf和239Pu-Be标准场在5、10、15和20 mSv四个剂量当量下对“快”中子的响应。同时,将241Am-Be作为标定场。结果:所得结果表明,对于等剂量当量,252Cf和239Pu-Be场的原始响应小于241Am-Be场。最大差异分别为26.8%和42.5%,分别发生在20和5毫西弗。在应用与所考虑的所有剂量当量相对应的相对响应(即在241Am-Be与其他两个场)的平均值相等的校正因子后,这些差异减少到12.4%和21.7%。结论:本研究采用的校正方法可以提高快中子场中TLDs估算剂量的准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison and Correction of Thermo-Luminescent Responses in Different Neutron Fields
Introduction: Neutron dosimetry is a challenging subject in radiation protection. Responses of neutron dosimeters mostly depend on the neutron energy spectrum. Dosimeter response corresponding to a dose-equivalent in the calibration field is different from responses in other neutron fields. Consequently, the dose estimated by neutron dosimeters may be associated with great uncertainty. Therefore, the present study aimed to modify the response in different neutron fields in order to reduce this uncertainty. Material and Methods: Thermo-luminescent dosimeters (TLDs) are widely used to determine neutron dose-equivalent. In the present study, a set of TLD-600 and TLD-700 dosimeters included in a TLD card was utilized to determine the response to “fast” neutrons of 241Am-Be,252Cf, and 239Pu-Be standard fields in four dose-equivalents of 5, 10, 15, and 20 mSv. Meanwhile, 241Am-Be was regarded as the calibration field.  Results: As evidenced by the obtained results, for equal dose-equivalents, the original responses in 252Cf and 239Pu-Be fields are smaller, compared to those in the 241Am-Be filed. The maximum discrepancies were obtained at 26.8% and 42.5% occurring at 20 and 5 mSv, respectively. After the application of a correction factor equal to the average of relative responses (i.e., in 241Am-Be to two other fields) corresponding to all dose-equivalents considered, these differences reduced to 12.4% and 21.7%. Conclusion: It can be concluded that the correction method used in the present study could enhance the accuracy of dose estimated by TLDs in fast neutron fields.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Iranian Journal of Medical Physics
Iranian Journal of Medical Physics Health Professions-Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Iranian Journal of Medical Physics (IJMP) is the official scientific bimonthly publication of the Iranian Association of Medical Physicists. IJMP is an international and multidisciplinary journal, peer review, free of charge publication and open access. This journal devoted to publish Original Papers, Review Articles, Short Communications, Technical Notes, Editorial and Letters to the Editor in the field of “Medical Physics” involving both basic and clinical research. Submissions of manuscript from all countries are welcome and will be reviewed by at least two expert reviewers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信