1. D. Ene CEA-Saclay, IRFU/SPHN, F-91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, France

2. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 20091 The study will address the major technological problems which are expected to arise in the creation of a facility able to provide exotic ions in quantities which are orders of magnitude higher than those currently available anywhere else in the world EURISOL: next-generation ISOL facility

3. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 20092 Task#5 Shielding & Safety estimates along the facility Task#11 Beam Intensity Calculations

4. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 20093 Hg converter and secondary fission targets First version of design

5. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 20094  Developing an approach used to support waste analysis for 4 MW power target shielding;  Classification of the radioactive wastes based on IAEA clearance concept for bulk shielding of MMW power target.

6. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 20095 1. Radiation transport simulations - Model: (INCLL4 + ABLA) for Yn & (ISABEL-RAL) for 3 H production - Geometry model used in simulations: - Source: p 1GeV | Gauss (  =1.5cm) - Material: AISI304LN stainless steel,  g cm -3 ; Ordinary concrete,  =2.3 g cm -3 | with 0.4% H content. - Biasing method: Weight window mesh-based variance technique Calculations for forward and perpendicular directions Hg UCx p (1GeV; 4 MW) 2. Activation of target shielding -Materials description; -Irradiation scheme: 40 years irradiation at 2.28 MW; 0, 0.27, 3, 10, 25, 100, 300 and 1000 years decay times

7. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 20096 CI = A i = specific activity ( Bq g -1 ) of each component in the material; L i = Clearance limit (Bq g -1 ) derived to meet individual dose criterion of 10  Sv y -1 -Li taken from IAEA TECDOC 855 (1996) & Safety Guide Report RS-G-1.7 (2004) -Li calculated using: E , E  (keV) effective emission energy from FENDL D.2.0; e ing, inh (Sv/Bq) =committed effective dose equivalent from inh, ing from ICRP72 3. Clearance indexes determination CI= (IAEA TECDOC 855 recommendations) Ai= specific activity of each component in the material; Li= Clearance limit (Bq/g) derived to meet individual dose criterion of 10mSv/y -L i taken from IAEA Safety Guide Report RS-G-1.7 (2004) -L i calculated using: E , E  from FENDL D.2.0; ALI ing, inh from ICRP72 CI calculated in forward and perpendicular locations IAEA Safety Guide SS No.111-G1 (1994)

8. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 20097 4. Waste classification using clearance concept (IAEA Safety Guide SS No.111-G1 (1994)) 3. Clearance indexes determination CI= (IAEA TECDOC 855 recommendations) Ai= specific activity of each component in the material; Li= Clearance limit (Bq/g) derived to meet individual dose criterion of 10mSv/y -L i taken from IAEA Safety Guide Report RS-G-1.7 (2004) -L i calculated using: E , E  from FENDL D.2.0; ALI ing, inh from ICRP72 CI calculated in forward and perpendicular locations LL -LILW =Low and Intermediate Level Wastes –Long Lived; SL-LILW =Low and Intermediate Level Wastes –Short Lived; EW = Exempt Wastes -CI EW; -CI > 1 : 1. CI of nuclides with T 1/2 > 30 years >1 -> LL-LILW 2. CI of nuclides with T 1/2 >30 years SL-LILW Entire radioactivity map and corresponding CI deduced using total flux ratio scaling in: 1. 10 cm X 10 cm mesh grid 2. 1 m thick shield layer -Allocation to a waste category; -Summation of activities and masses in each waste category

9. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 20098 Neutron flux in i th cell ⇨ The neutron flux is assumed to be constant over the irradiation period and not being modified by the irradiated medium Geometry and materials description DCHAIN- SP-2001 MCNPX.2.5.0 Residues in i th cell Irradiation Scheme- Activities & masses waste categories Activation map Activation products & CI | CL Library (ANITA-2000*+update IAEA RS-G-1.7, 2004) Neutron flux map

10. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 20099 Representative locations| 0 degreeRepresentative locations| 90 degree Concrete layers > 770 cm below exemption limit Concrete layers> 560 cm below exemption limit

11. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200910 1 MBq g -1 < A < 5GBq g -1 1 kBq g -1 < A < 1MB g -1 1 Bq g -1 < A < 1kBq g -1 A < 1Bq g -1 Zone 1 | 0 deg. Zone 2 | 90 deg. 1. Thick layers -1m- 2. Fine meshes –Tmesh grid Activity within cutting plans: -activity at representative location – entrance -ratio of total flux –scaling factor After 100 days 10 years 100 years1000 years

12. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200911 ~204 t of steel LL-LILW; ~10528 t concrete: ~ (0.7->0.5)% m total_concrete LL-LILW. ~ (80 -> 99.5)% m total_concrete EW

13. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200912 ~204 t of steel LL-LILW; ~10528 t concrete: ~ 6.2% m total_concrete LL-LILW. ~ (42 -> 94)% m total_concrete EW

14. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200913  At shut-down of the facility for the bulk shielding of the 4MW target: ~ 204 tonnes of steel => ~ 73 tonnes of concrete => ~ 1823 tonnes of concrete => interim storage ~ 8632 tonnes of concrete => declassified (NAW)  Precision in activity estimates may have important consequences upon derived level of radioactivity of materials and their classifications as `wastes;`  Method developed here will be used for the shielding of MAFF-like target concept;  Air activation in the shielding gap;  Source term for contaminant transport Classification of wastes arising from the shielding of the MMW target has a strong impact on the decision and the strategy to be adopted for dismantling and final storage of the EURISOL facility; Accurate estimation of the activity inside the shielding is a very important issue having further consequences overall timescales and costs of the entire installation. disposed of as permanent radwastes

15. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200914 Tunnel shielding configuration –Thicknesses of shield blocks Induced radioactivity & dose rates for planning interventions inside the tunnel Radiation environment characterisation – Production of contaminants – Source term for airborn transportation

16. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200915 1 LINAC Without stripper 0.585 MeV/u 150 MeV/u 209 m 44 m 10 -5 - 10 -4 /m Nb + (Fe or Al) + Cu + He Experimental areas and beam dump 21.3 MeV/u With stripper Foil : C 3 mg/cm² Cu + Fe + slits (2mm W, 1cm Cu) Experimental areas and beam dump LINAC 10 m Stripper 0.585 MeV/u150 MeV/u 21.3 MeV/u 10 -5 - 10 -4 /m 60 % in the first 5 m Nb+(Fe or Al)+Cu+He Experimental areas and Beam dump Nb+(Fe or Al)+Cu+He 44 m 2 102 m Energy gradient for 132 Sn 25+ Experimental areas and beam dump Variant #1Variant #2

17. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200916 H*(10) [  Sv h -1 ] Total_H*(10) [mSv y -1 ] Public areas0.11 Controlled areas1020 / 2000 h Full beam loss: Total_H*(10) ≤ 50  Sv  Linac is placed in unerground concrete tunnel;  Beam fcailities are shielded with movable shielding blocks;  Beam dumps are locally shielded.

18. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200917 * A. Fasso, K. Göebel et all, Shielding against high energy radiation, Nuclear and Particle Physics, Vol 11, (1990) **S. Agosteo, M. Silari, CERN Note 088/ TIS-RP/TM/2001-028 A shield designed for a continous beam loss of 10 -4 m -1 (point loss of 6.25*10 9 ion s -1 ) during the routine operation is also adequate for an accident loss of the full beam at a localised point, providing that the linac cutoff time is less than 1s. A full beam loss at a localised point must not give rise to a H*(10) > 100 mSv/h outside the shielding and the beam has to be swithed off within a time short enough that the H*(10) from this accident condition remains negligible.

19. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200918 Staff Energy [MeV]21.345.576115150 Length [m]4440 45 Thickness (cm)70130175210225 V staff (m 3 ) 338.05*  7196.2 for a tunnel surface of 3 m x 4 m PublicThickness (cm)140195245320380 V public (m 3 ) 536.6*  13663.7 for a tunnel surface of 3 m x 4 m RFQ SIL(1) SIL(2 ) Experiment rooms 0.585 MeV/u 21.3 MeV/u 150 MeV/u Experiment rooms 44 m 165 m 2.8 W 10 -4 m -1 => 19.8 W15 W10 W 6 W beam dump Uncontrolled beam loss of 10 -4 m -1 *V 1, Unitary Volume (corresponding to a width = 1m) staff public Dump / 2.8kW | 165 | 230 Dump / 19.8kW | 385 | 500

20. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200919 Energy [MeV]21.3 Stripper 45.576115150 Length (m)441031213317 Staff Thickness (cm)70160110150180200 V staff (m 3 ) 205.8*  3697.2 for a tunnel surface of 3 m x 4 m Public Thickness (cm)140235185230295325 V public (m 3 ) 343.4*  7421.8 for a tunnel surface of 3 m x 4 m RFQ 0.585 MeV/u SIL(1) SIL(2 ) Experiment rooms 21.3 MeV/u150 MeV/u Experiment rooms 44 m 102 m 2.8 W 10 -4 m -1 => 7.92 W 6 W4 W2.4 W beam dump Stripper 1.68 kW Uncontrolled beam loss of 10 -4 m -1 * Correspond to a width = 1m

21. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200920  The proposed thicknesses of the shielding guarantee an integrated dose bellow the acceptable limit with sufficient margin both at normal operation and accidental situations assuming that the beam cut off 1 s is feasible  From the shielding safety point of view, SIL#2 is more advantageous variant since it requires nearly 2 times less of the shielding compared to SIL#1  Placing the LINAC in a designated controlled area (dose below 10 μSv h -1 ) might reduce the total shielding by another factor of 2  A safety operation domain (energy range & beam intensities) has to be established to account for other ion species.

22. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200921 Neutron flux in i th cell ⇨ The neutron flux is assumed to be constant over the irradiation period and not being modified by the irradiated medium Geometry and materials description DCHAIN- SP-2001 PHITS Residues in i th cell Irradiation Scheme- H*(10) MCNPX Activation products & Photon sources 12d irradiation

23. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200922 21MeV/u 150MeV/u Points -> contact Lines -> 1m distance

24. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200923  Residual activation field inside the tunnel are arising mainly from copper structure activation in the high energy zone of the accelerator, while in the accelerator low energy zone the ion implantation is the most significant contributor ;  In the high energy zone of the LINAC continuous accessibility inside the tunnel in the beam-off stage is possible only after five days cooling time. However, if the intervention is required earlier, an occupancy factor of minimum 570 hours/year allows to meet the constraint of 20 mSv y -1 ;  Contact dose rate values significantly higher than the limits show that a remote handling for the dismantling of certain components is necessary. The accelerator structure in the high energy zone even after one month cooling time would contribute to the contact dose higher than 1 mSv h -1 ;  Definition of the intervention procedure is required. To protect the personnel during the handling operations the access and transportation paths should be set-up and a hot cell might be necessary to be included in the facility lay-out;  The air activation results may be used to derive the air change rate inside the tunnel and released source term required for further assessment of the airborne radionuclide environmental impact.

25. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200924 IsotopeT 1/2 SoilGroundwater 3H3H12.33y 3.149*10 -5 3.299*10 -6 7 Be53.12d 3.662*10 -6 3.662*10 -7 22 Na2.6y 7.782*10 -6 7.784*10 -7 24 Na14.96h 7.551*10 -6 7.583*10 -7 32 P14.26d 1.047*10 -8 9.584*10 -9 35 S87.32d 2.262*10 -23 4.938*10-9 45 Ca162.61d 8.111*10 -6 7.800*10 -7 46 Sc83.79d 6.833*10 -7 2.540*10 -21 54 Mn312.3d 2.217*10 -7 3.674*10 -13 55 Fe2.73y2.679*10 -6 4.912*10 -12 65 Zn244.26d 3.867*10 -8 5.880*10 -12 Specific activity [Bq cm -3 ] in first 100 cm of soil/groundwater surrounding the concrete wall after 40 y of continous irradiation 1.301*10 4 Bq < 10 5 Bq --LIMIT* *IAEA TECDOC-1000, 1998, Clearance of materials resulting from the use of radionuclides in medicine, industry and research. 5.265*10 4 Bq < 10 12 Bq --LIMIT* Transport of radioactive species into the ground does not represent a hazard for the population Per year in a volume of soil of 1.672*10 9 cm 3

26. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200925  Analysis of the possibilities to reduce the shield thicknesses in compliance with ALARA principle has to be done;  Maintenance operations inside the tunnel have to be planned;  A ventilation system in the tunnel might be necessary;  Several equipments and material should to be disposed of as radioactive wastes;  Shielding design is adequate from the point of view of the environmental impact

27. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200926 Preliminary analysis of a beam dump model -neutronics; Induced radioactivity; Required shielding.

28. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200927 * Beam catcher FAIR Super-FRS | courtesy of H. WEICK (GSI) 132 Sn 25+ Beam power = 19.8 kW (150 MeV/u) Beam size σ = 2 mm Ti [K] ΔT max [K] 293.15765 Dump core under vacuum or inertial gas !!! At the limit of the safety operational conditions Beam 5o5o Iron shield Copper + 10% water Graphite (1.84g/cm 3 ) 100 cm40 cm 8 cm16 cm

29. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200928 Neutron flux in i th cell ⇨ The neutron flux is assumed to be constant over the irradiation period and not being modified by the irradiated medium Geometry and materials description DCHAIN- SP-2001 PHITS/ MCNPX2.6.e Residues in i th cell Irradiation Scheme- H*(10) MCNPX Activation products & Photon sources 3h irradiation

30. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200929 Copper | dominant radionuclides Steel | dominant radionuclides

31. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200930 material   [Sv m 2 ]  [g cm -2 ] H  [Sv m 2 ]  [g cm -2 ] SHIELD [cm] StaffPublic concrete1.747E+0323.71.338E+0260.36364480 steel--5.000E+04112.14254320 concrete concrete / steel soil void beam

32. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200931  A preliminary analysis shows that the beam dump wedge shape with 40 cm graphite core and 100 cm iron shield might be a solution for the specific case;  A kicker magnet 5 m long will be necessary to dilute the beam spot on the beam dump in order to assure safe operating conditions;  Direct human access for the beam dump maintenance is not allowable;  Two possible solutions for the beam dump lateral shielding were preliminary evaluated.

33. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200932  Sizing of the shield;  Management of the access to the controlled areas inside experimental halls.

34. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200933 Reference parameters of the target rooms in the experimental hall of EURISOL postaccelerator needed for shielding & safety estimates *- conservative simplified geometry Operation scenario: realistic = 12 days of irradiation conservative = 90 days of irradiation Beam characteristicsTarget characteristicsRoom characteristics Heavy ion Energy [MeVu -1 ] Intensity [ion s -1 ]  [mm] Physics targetDump Material Size [m x m x m] ContentEquipment MaterialThickness [mg cm -2 ] 132 Sn 25+ 21, 1506.25*10 12 2Be, C, Ni, Cu, Pb, CH 2 1-10C40 x 20 x 10airAGATA type* with subsequent cooling time of 120 days

35. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200934  Physics parameters used in PHITS simulations: JQMD model Source: 132 Sn; Gauss (  =2mm) Biasing method: IMPORTANCE  HALL wall: Geometry : Shielding Design @ beam dump load 19.8 kW (150 MeV u -1, 6.24*10 12 pps) Material: Ordinary concrete, density=2.3 g cm -3 | with 0.4% H content Iron (Iron + concrete) composite shielding

36. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200935 PHITS geometry model   Residual field ( PHITS & DCHAIN ) 132 Sn Ge  cm  cm  cm Air  cm Al

37. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200936 Neutron flux axial profile -on beam direction 10mg cm -2 target =>worst case for the residual activation 1mg cm -2 target => worst case energy depositon BD  Nuclear reactions (star density) 10 mg cm -2 1 mg cm -2 12 days irradiation model: 132 Sn + Pb target  AD* * Active Beam Dump

38. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200937 Dump core under vacuum or inertial gas AD C | (150 MeV u -1, 6. 2*10 12 pps) 132 Sn +Pb (1mg cm -2 ) PD W | 19.8 kW (150 MeV u -1,  2*10 12 pps) 132 Sn Design of the Active Dump to be optimised AD C = Active Beam Dump | conic opening PD W = Passive Beam Dump | wedge opening

39. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200938 concrete concrete / steel soil void forward air attenuation scaling factor ? beam PD shielding PHITS model Neutron H*(10) results AGATA equipement air Pb Ge BD 1 mg cm -2 forward forward ~ 60 cm from the hot spot H*(10) profiles in the forward plan

40. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200939 Experiment rooms 0.585 MeV/u 21.3 MeVu -1 RFQ 44 m 2.8 W to be defined. 150 MeV u -1 165 m 19. 8 W 15 W 10 W 6W6W Beam dump area 19.8 kW kicker magnet

41. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200940 In target yields estimates Direct target Fission targets

42. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200941 In-target yields for RIB production Direct target All configurations studied

43. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200942 In-target yields for RIB production Direct target

44. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200943 In-target yields for RIB production Direct target Example of Optimization

45. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200944  Parameters : Geometry : Last design variant (L. Tecchio) able to accommodate 30kW load heat Last design variant (L. Tecchio) able to accommodate 30kW load heat Volume = 181cm 3 Volume = 181cm 3 (R ext =1.75cm, R int =0.4cm, H=20cm) (R ext =1.75cm, R int =0.4cm, H=20cm)Material: graphite + U, density=1.16g/cm 3, graphite + U, density=1.16g/cm 3, mass U=10g | mase rate: U/C=1/20 (MKLN) mass U=10g | mase rate: U/C=1/20 (MKLN)  Physics parameters used in MCNPX simulations: Source: proton ; E=1GeV; Gauss (  =1.5cm) Source: proton ; E=1GeV; Gauss (  =1.5cm) Model: CEM2k Model: CEM2k Operational temperature: 293K Operational temperature: 293K Proton beam Mercury target Iron shielding Barite concrete shielding Reflector Fission target Moderator RIB extraction line

46. CEA Saclay, 30.01. 200945 232 Th 235 U (99.99%) Fission Yields | selected products Fission Rate –energy distribution H 2 O: moderator/BeO: reflector Fe: moderator/Fe: reflector Total Flux: 7.14*10 13 n cm -2 s -1 /1mA Total Fission Rate: 1.98*10 14 fiss s -1 /1mA Fission Yields | selected products Total Flux: 7.15*10 13 n cm -2 s -1 /1mA Total Fission Rate: 4.19*10 10 fiss s -1 /1mA