Olivine mineral used in concrete for gamma-ray shielding

  • Hakan AkyildirimEmail author
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Geo-Resources-Earth-Environmental Sciences


The aim of this study is assessing the concretes containing olivine, which is an abundant and locally mined mineral in Turkey, in terms of several essential photon shielding parameters, which are total mass attenuation coefficients (μ/ρ), mean free paths (mfp), half and tenth value layer thicknesses (HVL and TVL, respectively), effective atomic numbers (Zeff), and electron densities (Nel). For this purpose, two types of concretes with and without olivine content have been produced and studied by photon transmission experiments, simulations and theoretical calculations. In the experimental part, photon transmission technique has been performed using a 16k 3″ × 3″ NaI(Tl) detector system and so, μ/ρ, mfp, HVL, and TVL values of concretes have been determined experimentally at 511 and 1275 keV photon energies. Aforesaid parameters have also been estimated by simulations at the same energies using Geant4 Monte Carlo code. For theoretical calculations, the web version of NIST XCOM photon cross-section library has been utilized. By this way, all parameters have been calculated at 1 keV–100 GeV energy region and compared with data from experiments and simulations. It has been observed that olivine addition affected the aforementioned radiation shielding parameters of concretes positively at 511 and 1275 keV energies. Also, results from each method have been found to be in a reasonably good agreement, especially for the ones from XCOM and Geant4. So, it has been concluded that Geant4 code is a powerful tool in such studies.


Olivine concrete Photon attenuation Effective atomic number Electron density Geant4 XCOM 


  1. Akkurt I (2009) Effective atomic and electron numbers of some steels at different energies. Ann Nucl Energy 36:1702–1705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akkurt I, Akyıldırım H (2012) Radiation transmission of concrete including pumice for 662, 1173 and 1332 keV gamma rays. Nucl Eng Des 252:163–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Akkurt I, Akyıldırım H, Mavi B, Kilincarslan S, Basyigit C (2010) Photon attenuation coefficients of concrete includes barite in different rate. Ann Nucl Energy 37:910–914CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Akman F, Durak R, Turhan MF, Kaçal MR (2015) Studies on effective atomic numbers, electron densities from mass attenuation coefficients near the K edge in some samarium compounds. Appl Radiat Isot 101:107–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Allison J, Amako K, Apostolakis J, Arce P, Asai M, Aso T, Bagli E, Bagulya A, Banerjee S, Barrand G, Beck BR, Bogdanov AG, Brandt D, Brown JMC, Burkhardt H, Canal PH, Cano-Ott D, Chauvie S et al (2016) Recent developments in Geant4. Nuclear instruments and methods in physics research section a: accelerators, spectrometers, detectors and associated equipment 835:186–225. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berger MJ, Hubbell JH, Seltzer SM, Chang J, Coursey JS, Sukumar R, Zucker DS, and Olsen K (2010) XCOM: photon cross section database (version 1.5). National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg. [Online] Available: [2018, March 20]
  7. Chilton AB, Shultis JK, Faw RE (1984) Principles of radiation shielding. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  8. El-Khayatt AM, Akkurt I (2013) Photon interaction, energy absorption and neutron removal cross section of concrete including marble. Ann Nucl Energy 60:8–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Elmahrough Y, Tellili B, Souga C (2015) Determination of total mass attenuation coefficients, effective atomic numbers and electron densities for different shielding materials. Ann Nucl Energy 75:268–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Garcia MC, Correcher V, Guinea JG, Barbero AH, Lopez JR, Gutierrez FO, Mendoza AN, Bernal SR (2013) Characterization and luminescent properties of thermally annealed olivines. Radiat Meas 56:262–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Geant4 A Simulation Toolkit. Accessed 14.02.2018
  12. Han I, Aygun M, Demir LP, Sahin Y (2012) Determination of effective atomic numbers for 3d transition metal alloys with a new semi-empirical approach. Ann Nucl Energy 39:56–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hine GJ (1952) The effective atomic numbers of materials for various gamma interactions. Phys Rev 85:725–737Google Scholar
  14. Hubbell JH (1982) Photon mass attenuation and energy-absorption coefficients from 1 keV to 20 MeV. Int J of Appl Radiat Isot 33:1269–1290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. İçelli O, Erzenoğlu S, Karahan İH, Çankaya G (2005) Effective atomic numbers for CoCuNi alloys using transmission experiments. J Quant Spectrosc Radiat Transf 91:485–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jaeger T (1965) Principles of radiation protection engineering. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Korkut T, Korkut H, Karabulut A, Budak G (2011) A new radiation shielding material: amethyst ore. Ann of Nucl Energy 38:56–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kumar TK, Reddy KV (1997) Effective atomic numbers for materials of dosimetric interest. Radiat Phys Chem 50:545–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kumar TK, Venkataratnam S, Reddy KV (1996) Effective atomic number studies in clay minerals for total photon interaction in the energy region 10 keV-10 MeV. Radiat Phys Chem 48:707–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kurudirek M, Büyükyıldız M, Özdemir Y (2010) Effective atomic number study of various alloys for total photon interaction in the energy region of 1 keV-100 GeV. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res A 613:251–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Manohara S, Hanogodimath SM, Thind KS, Gerward L (2008) On the effective atomic number and electron density: a comprehensive set of formulas for all types of materials and energies above 1 keV. Nucl Inst Methods Phys Res B 266:3906–3912CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Medhat ME, Demir N, Tarim UA, Gurler O (2014) Calculation of gamma-ray mass attenuation coefficients of some Egyptian soil samples using Monte Carlo methods. Radiat Eff Defect S 169:706–714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. More CV, Lokhande RM, Pawar PP (2016) Effective atomic number and electron density of amino acids within the energy range of 0.122-1.330 MeV. Radiat Phys Chem 125:14–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mudahar GS, Sahota HS (1988) Effective atomic number studies in different soils for total photon interaction in the energy region 10-5000 keV. Appl Radiat Isot 39:1251–1254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Murty VRK (2004) Effective atomic numbers for W/Cu alloy for total photon attenuation. Radiat Phys Chem 71:667–669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Murty VRK, Winkoun DP, Devan KRS (2000) Effective atomic numbers for W/Cu alloy using transmission experiments. Appl Radiat Isot 53:945–948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ozyurt O, Altinsoy N, Karaaslan Şİ, Bora A, Buyuk B, Erk İ (2018) Calculation of gamma ray attenuation coefficients of some granite samples using a Monte Carlo simulation code. Radiat Phys Chem 144:271–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Price BT, Horton CC, Spinney KT (1957) Radiation shielding. Pergamon Press Inc, LondonGoogle Scholar
  29. Rao KSS, Subrahmanyam VVV, Rao NK, Rao PVR, Rao TBV (1976) Studies on effective atomic numbers of monel metal and tungsten steel. Il Nuovo Cimento 33:613–618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shamsan SO, Sayyed MI, Gaikwad DK, Pawar PP (2018) Attenuation coefficients and exposure buildup factors of some rocks for gamma ray shielding applications. Radiat Phys Chem 148:86–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Singh VP, Badiger NM (2014) Effective atomic weight, effective atomic numbers and effective electron densities of hybride and borohydride metals for fusion reactor shielding. J Fusion Energ 33:386–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Singh T, Kaur P, Singh PS (2007) A study of photon interaction parameters in some commonly used solvents. J Radiol Prot 27:79–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Taqi AH, Khalil HJ (2017) An investigation on gamma attenuation of soil and oil-soil samples. J Radiat Res Appl Sci 10:252–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tekin HO, Cavlı B, Altunsoy EE, Manici T, Ozturk C, Karakas HM (2018) An investigation on radiation protection and shielding properties of 16 slice computed tomography (CT) facilities. IJCESEN 4(2):37–40Google Scholar
  35. Un A, Demir F (2013) Determination of mass attenuation coefficients, effective atomic numbers and effective electron numbers for heavy-weight and normal-weight concretes. Appl Radiat Isot 80:73–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wieser M, Holden N, Coplen TB, Böhlke JK, Berlung M, Brand WA, Bievre P, Gröning M, Loss RD, Meija J, Hirata T, Prohaska T, Schoenberg R, O’Connor G, Walczyk T, Yoneda S, Zhu X (2013) Atomic weights of the elements 2011 (IUPAC Technical Report). Pure Appl Chem 85:1047–1078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Woods J (1982) Computational methods in reactor shielding. Pergamon Press Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  38. Yaltay N, Ekinci CE, Çakır T, Oto B (2015) Photon attenuation properties of concrete with pumice aggregate and colemanite addition in different rates and the effect of curing ages to these properties. Prog Nucl Energy 78:25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Science and Arts Faculty, Physics DepartmentSüleyman Demirel UniversityIspartaTurkey

Personalised recommendations