Advertisement

Neutron penetration in labyrinths under different beam losses

  • Yao Yang
  • Wu-Yuan Li
  • You-Wu SuEmail author
  • Wei-Wei Yan
  • Wang Mao
  • Yang Li
  • Bo Yang
  • Li-Jun Wang
Article
  • 5 Downloads

Abstract

Multiple analytical methods and Monte Carlo simulations were performed to evaluate neutron penetration in straight and curved labyrinths. Factors studied included variations in beam losses of off-axis point source, on-axis point source, and line source. For the straight labyrinth, it was found that the analytical expressions neglect the dose rate platform appearing at the bend of the labyrinth, and the agreement between analytical methods and Monte Carlo estimation was related to the type of neutron source term. For the curved labyrinth, the neutron attenuation length obtained under different conditions was nearly identical and appeared to be in quite good accord with the empirical formula calculation. Moreover, the neutron energy spectra along the centerline distance of the labyrinth were also analyzed. In the first leg, differences in beam loss led to variance in the distribution of spectra, while in the second and subsequent legs, the spectra were similar, where the main contributors were thermal neutrons. This work is valuable for practical design of the labyrinths in the accelerator facilities.

Keywords

Neutron penetration Labyrinth Beam loss Analytical method Monte Carlo code 

References

  1. 1.
    National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Radiation Protection for Particle Accelerator Facilities, NCRP report No 144 (Maryland, 2003), p. 255Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    E. Mauro, M. Silari, Attenuation of neutrons through ducts and labyrinths. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 608, 28–36 (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2009.06.045 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    P.J. Gollon, M. Awschalom, Design of penetrations in hadron shields. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. NS18, 741–745 (1971).  https://doi.org/10.1109/TNS.1971.4326169 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    P.K. Sarkar, Neutron dosimetry in the particle accelerator environment. Radiat. Meas. 45, 1476–1483 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radmeas.2010.07.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    G.R. Stevenson, A. Fassò, A Comparison of a Morse Calculation of Attenuation in a Concrete-Lined Duct with Experimental Data from the CERN SPS, CERN Divisional Report TIS-RP/185/CF (1987)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    K. Tesch, The attenuation of the neutron dose equivalent in a labyrinth through an accelerator shield. Part. Accel. 12, 169–175 (1982)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J.D. Cossairt, Approximate Technique for Estimating Labyrinth Attenuation of Accelerator-Produced Neutrons, Radiation Physics Note No. 118 (Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, 1995)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    T.T. Böhlen, F. Cerutti, M.P.W. Chin et al., The FLUKA code: developments and challenges for high energy and medical applications. Nucl. Data Sheets 120, 211–214 (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nds.2014.07.049 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. Ferrari, P.R. Sala, A. Fassò, et al., FLUKA: a multi-particle transport code, CERN-2005-10 (2005), INFN/TC\_05/11, SLAC-R-773Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    T. Nakamura, Y. Uwamino, Radioisotopes 35, 51–56 (1986). (in Japanese) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Y. Uwamino, T. Nakamura, T. Okhubo et al., Measurement and calculation of neutron leakage from a medical electron accelerator. Med. Phys. 13, 374–384 (1986).  https://doi.org/10.1118/1.595879 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    R.J. Sheu, J. Liu, Investigation of radiation streaming and labyrinth design for the Taiwan Photon Source. Health Phys. 98, 565–573 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1097/HP.0b013e3181c20e09 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    H.W. Patterson, R.H. Thomas, Accelerator Health Physics (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1973), p. 451.  https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-547150-3.X5001-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    J.D. Cossairt, Radiation Physics for Personnel and Environmental Protection, Fermilab Report TM-1834, Revision 15 (2016), pp. 139–140Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    International Commission on Radiological Protection, Conversion Coeffcients for Use in Radiological Protection Against External Radiation. ICRP Publication 74 (1997)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    M. Pelliccioni, Overview of fluence-to-effective dose and auence-to-ambient dose equivalent conversion coefacients for high energy radiation calculated using the FLUKA code. Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 88, 279–297 (2000).  https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a033046 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Q.B. Wu, Q.B. Wang, J.M. Wu et al., Study on induced radioactivity of China Spallation Neutron Source. Chin. Phys. C 35, 596–602 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/35/6/017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    C. Xu, Z.J. Ma, H.Y. Shi et al., The realization and verification of integrated modeling of the losing source items by using FLUKA for ERL-FEL. Nucl. Tech. 39, 070503 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.11889/j.0253-3219.2016.hjs.39.070503. (in Chinese) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Y. Yang, Y.W. Su, W.Y. Li et al., Evaluation of radiation environment in the target area of fragment separator HFRS at HIAF. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 29, 147 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s41365-018-0479-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    S. Ruan, J.C. Yang, J.Q. Zhang et al., Design of extraction system in BRing at HIAF. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 892, 53–58 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2018.02.052 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    D. Satoh, T. Kurosawa, T. Sato et al., Reevaluation of secondary neutron spectra from thick targets upon heavy-ion bombardment. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 583, 507–515 (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2007.09.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© China Science Publishing & Media Ltd. (Science Press), Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chinese Nuclear Society and Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yao Yang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Wu-Yuan Li
    • 1
  • You-Wu Su
    • 1
    Email author
  • Wei-Wei Yan
    • 1
  • Wang Mao
    • 1
  • Yang Li
    • 1
  • Bo Yang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Li-Jun Wang
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Modern PhysicsChinese Academy of SciencesLanzhouChina
  2. 2.University of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations