Rad safety and activation

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Instrument Space Requirements Rob Connatser Chief Instrument Project Engineer November 2014.
Advertisements

MICE: Hall Infrastructure Chris Nelson CEng CM16 8 th Oct 2006.
1 Status of infrastructure MICE Video Conference, August 17, 2005 Yury Ivanyushenkov Applied Science Division, Engineering and Instrumentation Department.
UCN Phase 2 Design Status September 10, Design Components Bulk Shielding Target Crypt Cryogenic Insert Target Insert UCN Port Beam Window Cooling.
Preparation for May-2013 Review of UCN Beamline March 27, Date: May 2-3, 2013 Review Committee finalized Scope – Overall concept, focusing on 2014.
Mitglied der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft ZEA-1 | Technology for Excellent Science SKADI - Report FZJ Meeting Lund Romuald Hanslik FZJ/ZEA-1 1.
SHMS Optics and Background Studies Tanja Horn Hall C Summer Meeting 5 August 2008.
Highlights of RP activities in support of ISOLDE operation and projects Joachim Vollaire, Alexandre Dorsival and Christelle Saury with material from others.
The Status of ESS Accelerator Shielding and Accident Scenarios Lali Tchelidze May 26, 2014.
HPS Beamline: Background Rates, Sensitivity to Field Uncertainties M. Ungaro1HPS Collaboration Meeting, JLAB, May Concrete Wall thickness Study.
Design and construction of BNCT irradiation
HAPL Concrete Shielding Requirements Mohamed Sawan UW Fusion Technology Inst. HAPL Project Meeting UW-Madison October 22-23, 2008.
1 Target Station Design Dan Wilcox High Power Targets Group, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory EuroNu Annual Meeting 2012.
First radiological estimates for the HIRADMAT project H. Vincke and N. Conan 1.
Radiation Protection aspects for SHIP Doris Forkel-Wirth, Stefan Roesler, Helmut Vincke, Heinz Vincke CERN Radiation Protection Group 1 st SHIP workshop,
Activation around dump shielding, and design of beam line mask Mathieu Baudin, RP Genevieve Steele, EN-STI Helmut Vincke, RP.
EAR2 Beam Line Report on the Status C. Weiss EAR2 Beam Line - Report on the Status1.
Design optimization of Toroidal Fusion blanket/shield Basic Fusion Theory The basis for fusion energy production is to collide a deuterium and a tritium.
Recent Studies on ILC BDS and MERIT S. Striganov APD meeting, January 24.
Required Dimensions of HAPL Core System with Magnetic Intervention Mohamed Sawan Carol Aplin UW Fusion Technology Inst. Rene Raffray UCSD HAPL Project.
Risk Analysis P. Cennini AB-ATB on behalf of the n_TOF Team  Procedure  Documents in preparation  Conclusions Second n_TOF External Panel Review, CERN,
Radiopharmaceutical Production Radionuclidic identity STOP.
IKON ESS Flat moderators at ESS IKON6, Lund, Sweden Luca Zanini – 26 February 2014 ESS
Radiation protection and radiation safety issues for HIE-ISOLDE. FLUKA calculations Y. Romanets ISOLDE Workshop and Users meeting 2010 CERN, 8 December.
Technical Readiness Review of the n-3He Experiment Seppo Penttila ORNL P-div At SNS Jan
1 July 2004 Radiation Protection Issues 1 M.Brugger, D.Forkel-Wirth, S.Roesler, H.Vincke SC/RP Review of the LHC Collimation Project 30 June – 2 July 2004.
AQA A2 Physics A Nuclear Physics Section 15 Fission.
ESS Bunker A concept for a common beamline interface. ISIS Engineering Group, February 2015 For illustration purposes a conceptual CAD model of the VOR.
Update on the ESS monolith design Rikard Linander Monolith and Handling Group ESS Target Division TAC 10, Lund, Nov 5,
EURISOL DS Task meeting Orsay, 07 Janvier Preliminary shielding assessment of EURISOL Post Accelerator D. Ene, D. Ridikas. B. Rapp.
1 Implementation at RAL Iouri Ivaniouchenkov on behalf of Elwyn Baynham, Tom Bradshaw, Tony Jones, Jim Rochford Engineering Department, RAL MICE Collaboration.
Target Systems and Monolith Design Update Rikard Linander Group Leader Monolith and Handling April 2, 2014.
1 Radiation Environment at Final Optics of HAPL Mohamed Sawan Fusion Technology Institute University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI HAPL Meeting ORNL March.
DTU A VISION OF SUPPORTING NEUTRON CHOPPER ESS PT 1 - BUNKER SYSTEMS Discussion Document.
EURISOL, TASK#5, Bucuresti, November 1 Preliminary shielding assessment of EURISOL Post Accelerator D. Ene, D. Ridikas. B. Rapp.
The ESS Target Station Eric Pitcher Head of Target Division February 19, 2016.
Radiation protection studies for the ESS Activation issues AD seminar Michał Jarosz , Lund.
Dark Current and Radiation Shielding Studies for the ILC Main Linac
Heating and radiological
Induced-activity experiment:
Analyses to Support Waste Disposition of SNS Inner Reflector Plug
M. Calviani, A. Ferrari (EN/STI), P. Sala (INFN)
Neutronics Studies for the Nab Experiment
Preliminary Study – Radiation induced activity in a SB Target
ESS Freia Scope Setting ESS - Lund - 17/10/2016.
Secondary Spectrometer, Motion Control, Infrastructure
The Bunker Project Overview Zvonko Lazic
Monte Carlo simulations for the ODIN shielding at ESS
The Common Shielding Project
Roof PSS Bunker Project CDR
MAGiC Shielding Simulations
Primary Spectrometer & Sample Environment
Senad Kudumovic Design engineer
The Mechanical Engineering & Technology (MET)
IKON 15 Talal Osman & Iain Sutton
Preliminary Hazard Analysis of Bunker
Neutron guide Shielding Concept
Bunker Wall Design Wall
Bunker Wall Design Wall ESS
Technical Updates Gábor László NSS Lead Instrument Engineer
Bunker Project Operation aspects
Bunker Project Schedule/Budget
Bunker Project Integration/Interfaces
Test Beamline System Requirements and Charge to PDR Committee
BEER cave design and shielding
Shielding requirements for the baseline bunker shielding (current CATIA version ) Günter Muhrer
Radiation fields During 1st stage beam commissioning
Action Items from ARIES IFE Meeting, UW, April 22-23, 2002 (DRAFT)
Radiopharmaceutical Production
Overview of the TARGET Monolith Rough Vacuum
Presentation transcript:

Rad safety and activation L. Zanini Group Leader Neutronics ESS Bunker CDR 16 October 2018

Scope Calculations done by E. Klinkby and L. Zanini. MCNP+CINDER’90 The scope of the activation calculation is to determine the contribution of roof and wall to the dose rate in the bunker. The total dose rate in the bunker has contribution from beamline components, as well as from bunker floor and monolith structures. An assessment of the overall dose rate from all the contributions should be done separately. Dose rates from components inside the bunker were previously calculated [ESS-0087597]. The following new information has been calculated. Dose rate levels inside the bunker from roof and wall for possible access inside the bunker. Dose rate on the bunker floor from active roof blocks when the roof is opened for access.

Calculation of activation of wall and roof must consider the following aspects Both short and long sectors must be considered. Activation over long term irradiations is of interest. It is not realistic to consider a long-term irradiation of the wall without anything in the bunker. The presence of beamlines must be taken into account CSPEC: geometry with curved guide TBL: geometry with straight guide Calculations have been performed with and without a boron absorbing layer inside the vacuum pipe. A layer of 5 mm of mirrobor (a neutron shield material by Mirrotron containing 80% B4C) was used as example. Additional use of boron layers (in walls and roof) has not yet been investigated

Reference configuration choice (1) Neutron maps on short and long sector walls (no guide, no reflection card in MCNP) CSPEC TBL

Reference configuration choice (2) Neutron maps (all energies) on long sector walls without and with guide No guide Straight guide n/cm2/s Peak value 5 108 n/cm2/s

Dose rate from wall activation, without and with guide mSv/h No beamline Straight guide ~50 mSv/h at 1 m ~5 mSv/h at 1 m

Roof activation long sector from CSPEC beamline Gamma dose rate (10 years irradiation, 1 day cooling) Only activation of roof and wall has been calculated. Dose rate levels are at the level of 10s of mSv/h, which is acceptable as in most cases work is done remotely 1 day cooling

Roof activation long sector from CSPEC beamline Gamma dose rate (10 years irradiation, 3 day cooling) Only activation of roof and wall has been calculated. Dose rate levels are at the level of 10s of mSv/h, which is acceptable as in most cases work is done remotely 3 days cooling

Dose rate from extracted of roof block laying on bunker roof - 1 day cooling

Wall long sector: Comparison with and without mirrobor inside vacuum pipe (note different scale) 5 mm mirrobor in vacuum pipe, 3 days cooling With mirrobor

Wall short sector Test Beam Line, with mirrobor inside vacuum pipe. Dose rate after 3 days cooling.

Conclusions Dose rates from the roof are at the level of 10 mSv/h after 1 and 3 days decay. Dose rate from a roof block removed and placed on the bunker floor are at the level of 1 mSv/h or less at 1 m from the block, 1 day after shutdown Dose rates from a realistic irradiation condition of the wall, i.e., with a beamline in place, going through the bunker, are comparable to the dose rates for the roof, for the short sector wall, and lower for the long sector wall. Results are in ESS-0416081 Calculations should be repeated with added impurities from heavy concrete samples.

Addendum Dose rate at roof after removal of NBPI (K. Batkov ESS-0061869). Calculated 15 mSv/h on top of roof after 14 days cooling . 15 mSv/h