Advertisement

Using MCNP Simulation for Self-absorption Correction in HPGe Spectrometry of Soil Samples

  • M. Mohebian
  • R. PourimaniEmail author
  • S. M. Modarresi
Research Paper
  • 19 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Physics

Abstract

The self-attenuation correction coefficients (Csa) for 137Cs counting in twelve soil samples were determined by MCNP simulation of a high-purity germanium detector. The correction coefficients were defined as the simulation and experimental efficiency ratio for gamma radiation with 661.66 keV. The experimental efficiency of the detector for 661.66 keV of gamma energy in soil samples was obtained using the IAEA reference materials. The exact gamma radiation efficiency for soil samples was calculated on the correct height and soil density using the MCNPX simulation code. The result of the measurements, including the self-attenuation correction coefficient, was compared with the given value and indicates an increase in accuracy.

Keywords

Self-attenuation correction coefficient Gamma-ray spectrometry Reference material Efficiency Soil 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research was funded by the Research Council of Arak University, so the authors of this council are grateful.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

References

  1. AhmadSaat PG (1997) Self-absorption corrections of various sample-detector geometries in gamma ray spectrometry using simple Monte Carlo simulations. In: International nuclear Conf’97. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, pp 26–28Google Scholar
  2. Alshahri F, Alqahtani M (2015) Chemical fertilizers as a source of 238U, 40K, 226Ra, 222Rn and trace metal pollutant of the environment in Saudi Arabia. Environ Sci Pollut Res 22:8339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aziz A (1981) Methods of low-level counting and spectrometry symposium. BerlinGoogle Scholar
  4. Barros LF, Pecequilo BRS (2012) Self-attenuation factors in gamma ray spectrometry of select sand samples from Camburi Beach, Vitoria, Espirito Santo. Radiat Phys Chem 95:339–341.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2012.12.031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Briesmeister JF (2003) MCNP—a general Monte Carlo code for neutron and photon transport, version 5, Los Alamos National Laboratory, report LA-12625-MGoogle Scholar
  6. Cutshall N, Larsen IL, Olsen CR (1983) Direct analysis of Pb-210 in sediment samples a self-absorption corrections. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res 206:309–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eke C, Boztosun I (2014) Gamma-ray spectrometry for the self-attenuation correction factor of the sand samples from Antalya in Turkey. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 301:103–108.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-014-3145-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eke C, Agar O, Boztosun I, Aslan A, Emsen B (2017) Determination of self-attenuation correction factor for lichen samples by using gamma-ray spectrometry. Kerntechnik 82(1):136–139.  https://doi.org/10.3139/124.110614 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. IAEA (2003) International atomic energy agency, guide quantifying uncertainty in nuclear analytical measurements. IAEA-TECDOC-140, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  10. Jodłowski P, Wachniew P, Nowak J (2017) Determination of the self-attenuation based on the sample composition in gamma-ray spectrometry of 210Pb requirements for the scope of chemical analyses. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 311:1511–1516.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-016-5054-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Live chart of nuclides nuclear structure and decay data available from https://www-nds.iaea.org/relnsd/vcharthtml/VChartHTML.html
  12. Misiak R, Hajduk R, Stobiński M, Bartyzel M, Szarłowicz K, Kubica B (2011) Calibration for radioactivity measurement of environmental samples by gamma-ray spectrometry. Nukleonik 56(1):23–28Google Scholar
  13. Modarresi SM, Masoudi SF, Karimi M (2017) A method for considering the spatial variations of dead layer thickness in HPGe detectors to improve the FEPE calculation of bulky samples. Radiat Phys Chem 130:291–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mostajaboddavati M, Hassanzadeh S, Faghihian H, Abdi MR, Kamali M (2006) Efficiency calibration and measurement of self-absorption correction for environmental gamma-spectroscopy of soil samples using Marinelli beaker. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 268:539–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Nir-El Y (1998) Application of reference materials in the accurate calibration of the detection efficiency of a low-level gamma ray spectrometry assembly for environmental samples. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 227:67–74.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02386433 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Oddone M, Giordani L, Giacobbo F, Mariani M, Morandi S (2008) Practical considerations regarding high resolution gamma spectrometry measurements of naturally occurring radioactive samples. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 277:579–585.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-007-7113-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Park CS, Sun GM, Choi HD (2003) Experimental and simulate efficiency of a HPGe detector in the energy range of 0.06–11 MeV. J Korean Nucl Soc 35:234–242Google Scholar
  18. Pourimani R, Anoosheh F (2015) A study on transfer factors of environmental radionuclides: radionuclide transfer from soil to different varieties of rice in Gorgan, Iran. Iran J Med Phys 12(3):189–199Google Scholar
  19. Robu E (2009) Gamma-ray self-attenuation correction in environmental samples. Rom Rep Phys (Giov Rom Rep Phys) 61:295–300Google Scholar
  20. Ródenas J, Gallardo S, Ballester S, Primault V, Ortiz J (2007) Application of the Monte Carlo method to the analysis of measurement geometries for the calibration of a HPGe detector in an environmental radioactivity laboratory. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res B 263:144–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Shiraz University 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Physics, Faculty of ScienceArak UniversityArakIran
  2. 2.Department of PhysicsKhaje Nasir Toosi UniversityTehranIran

Personalised recommendations