skip to main content

DOE PAGESDOE PAGES

This content will become publicly available on April 4, 2019

Title: Comparison of irradiated foil measurements with activation calculations and HPGe simulations

Theoretical activation calculations for Fe, Ni, and stainless steel foils were compared against irradiated foil measurements from a critical assembly. Calculated/experiment values spanning 0.62-1.31 showed that the restricted approach used here is insufficient for experiment planning, with the collapsed cross-section being the primary source of error. The effect of decay time on gamma-ray spectroscopy measurement reliability was investigated using a Monte Carlo HPGe detector model. Simulations showed no correlation with decay time, absent interferences. Specific interferences for Fe-59 (Ni) and Co-60 (stainless steel) activation product ratios suggested optimal measurement windows having respective decay times of 9-11 days and 4-7 days.
Authors:
 [1] ;  [2] ;  [2] ;  [3] ;  [3] ;  [2] ;  [2] ;  [2] ;  [1]
  1. Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD (United States)
  2. Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)
  3. Los Alamos National Lab. (LANL), Los Alamos, NM (United States)
Publication Date:
Report Number(s):
LLNL-JRNL-742958
Journal ID: ISSN 0236-5731; 897328
Grant/Contract Number:
AC52-07NA27344
Type:
Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 316; Journal Issue: 2; Journal ID: ISSN 0236-5731
Publisher:
Springer
Research Org:
Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)
Sponsoring Org:
USDOE National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
OSTI Identifier:
1458646

Goodell, John J., Egnatuk, Christine M., Padgett, Stephen W., Keith, Corey C., Bredeweg, Todd A., Harward, Norris K., Bandong, Bryan B., Roberts, Kevin E., and Mignerey, Alice C.. Comparison of irradiated foil measurements with activation calculations and HPGe simulations. United States: N. p., Web. doi:10.1007/s10967-018-5820-6.
Goodell, John J., Egnatuk, Christine M., Padgett, Stephen W., Keith, Corey C., Bredeweg, Todd A., Harward, Norris K., Bandong, Bryan B., Roberts, Kevin E., & Mignerey, Alice C.. Comparison of irradiated foil measurements with activation calculations and HPGe simulations. United States. doi:10.1007/s10967-018-5820-6.
Goodell, John J., Egnatuk, Christine M., Padgett, Stephen W., Keith, Corey C., Bredeweg, Todd A., Harward, Norris K., Bandong, Bryan B., Roberts, Kevin E., and Mignerey, Alice C.. 2018. "Comparison of irradiated foil measurements with activation calculations and HPGe simulations". United States. doi:10.1007/s10967-018-5820-6.
@article{osti_1458646,
title = {Comparison of irradiated foil measurements with activation calculations and HPGe simulations},
author = {Goodell, John J. and Egnatuk, Christine M. and Padgett, Stephen W. and Keith, Corey C. and Bredeweg, Todd A. and Harward, Norris K. and Bandong, Bryan B. and Roberts, Kevin E. and Mignerey, Alice C.},
abstractNote = {Theoretical activation calculations for Fe, Ni, and stainless steel foils were compared against irradiated foil measurements from a critical assembly. Calculated/experiment values spanning 0.62-1.31 showed that the restricted approach used here is insufficient for experiment planning, with the collapsed cross-section being the primary source of error. The effect of decay time on gamma-ray spectroscopy measurement reliability was investigated using a Monte Carlo HPGe detector model. Simulations showed no correlation with decay time, absent interferences. Specific interferences for Fe-59 (Ni) and Co-60 (stainless steel) activation product ratios suggested optimal measurement windows having respective decay times of 9-11 days and 4-7 days.},
doi = {10.1007/s10967-018-5820-6},
journal = {Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry},
number = 2,
volume = 316,
place = {United States},
year = {2018},
month = {4}
}