Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Residual Does Rate Analyses for the SNS Accelerator Facility I. Popova, J. Galambos HB2008 August 25-29,

Published byGwenda Cox Modified over 8 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Residual Does Rate Analyses for the SNS Accelerator Facility I. Popova, J. Galambos HB2008 August 25-29,"— Presentation transcript:

1 Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Residual Does Rate Analyses for the SNS Accelerator Facility I. Popova, J. Galambos HB2008 August 25-29, 2008, Loew’s Vanderbilt Hotel, Nashville, TN, USA

2 2Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Outline  Introduction  SNS layout  Methods for neutronics analyses  Instruments and uncertainties  Results from comparison measurements vs. calculations  Conclusions

3 3Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Introduction  SNS is an accelerator driven neutron scattering facility that recently started operations and in power rump-up process during cycles of operation, maintenance, and tuning  SNS accelerator is loss limited machine In order to limit the activation level  BLM are located along the beam line and measure prompt radiation and inhibit the beam when excessive losses occur  In order to plan maintenance work after each operations period, residual dose measurements are taken at 30 cm and on contact

4 4Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Scope of work  Analyses of residual dose rates due to accelerator component activation in order to understand nature of the radiation fields behavior inside the accelerator tunnel  Preliminary results, we started to perform these analyses recently  Analyses performed for two last operation cycles, fall 2007 and spring 2008 and compared with measurements

5 5Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name SNS Layout and parameters Linear accelerator system (LINAC) DTL CCLSCL Spare section Target building High-energy beam transport (HEBT) Accumulator ring Ring-to-target- beam transport (RTBT) Front- End Building Target Ion Source LINAC beam stop Injection beam stop Extraction beam stop 3 measurements location: After cryomodule 16 After cryomodule 24 After cryomodule 32 After stripping foil

6 6Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Methods 3 steps analyses  Monte Carlo transport code MCNPX to calculate reaction rates  Activation script to execute CINDER’90 to obtain the time dependence of the isotope buildup and decay including decay gamma spectra  Residual dose calculation

7 7Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Methods Residual dose calculation  For simple only beam tube model - by conversion gammas production spectra in the multi-group structure and gamma power for each time step to the dose rate  For model with beam tube and tunnel walls - by feeding back to MCNPX decay gamma spectra and gamma power for each time step to calculate dose rates

8 8Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Methods  Simplifications in geometry – Outside the accelerator structures the highest source of residual gammas is the steel beam tube, analyses were performed for a very simple model of beam pipe without adjacent beam structures – For second round of analyses surrounding concrete accelerator tunnel walls were added

9 9Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Methods  Sources for calculations – Proton losses in beam pipe – Losses modeled like continuous cylindrical proton source, forward directed inside the beam pipe – Operational scenario for activation and decay calculation is provided from BLM readings taken during operation cycle for each location LocationAfter cryomodule 16 After cryomodule 24 and 32 After stripping foil Beam lost monitor scl16bscl32bring_A11c Beam energy660845

10 10Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Instruments and uncertainties Instrument uncertainties  Precision  Location  Timing

11 11Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Instruments and uncertainties Beam loss monitors - ionization chambers – Precision is about 20% – Locates about 10 cm from the beam line in SCL and 60 cm from the beam line in Ring Injection, which gives especially for the SCL section about 40% – Data averaged over beam running period

12 12Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Instruments and uncertainties Hand-held ionization chambers – Precision is about 15% - 20% – Standard measurements are carried out by hand on 30 cm distance from the beam tube. This introduces at least 20% of geometry uncertainty in radial direction – The location for each measurement is not precise in the axial direction and vary relative to the corresponding BLM location up to 0.5 m. Uncertainty is 10-50% – Loss location relative to the BLM can vary during the run cycle. Measured residual dose rates could not exactly correspond to the loss recorded by BLM – Difference in time of measuring and recording

13 13Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Instruments and uncertainties Calculation uncertainties  Geometry representation in calculations  Uncertainties in material composition  Assumptions in source representations  Accuracy in physics model and cross sections data  Statistical errors in the code  Calculation accuracy for these analyses could be about 30%.

14 14Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Results, fall 2007  Calculation performed for one operation cycle with five running periods  Eight measurement campaigns during operational cycle  Calculated dose rate are scaled to the measurements

15 15Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Results, fall 2007

16 16Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Results, fall 2007

17 17Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Results, fall 2007

18 18Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Results, spring 2008  BLM monitors were set to measure decay gamma radiation in small time increments in the end of the cycle  Only decay calculations were compared vs. measurements  Sensitivity analyses were performed to estimate influence of:  Different types of steel: S304 vs. S316  Energy of beam intercepting the pipe: 200MeV, 400MeV, 600MeV, 800MeV, 1000MeV  Influence of surrounding concrete walls

19 19Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Results, spring 2008

20 20Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Results, spring 2008

21 21Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Results, spring 2008

22 22Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Results, second running cycle Additional contribution from gammas ray and positron emitters in the very first hours of decay are about the same like from photon dose S. Roesler, M. Brugger, Y. Donjoux, A. Mitaroff, “Simulation of Remanent dose Rates and Benchmark Measurements at the CERN-EU High Energy Reference Field Facility”, Sixth International Meeting on Nuclear Application of Accelerator Technology (AccApp/03), pp.655-662

23 23Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation_name Conclusions MCNPX in conjunction with a newly developed activation script with CINDER’90 was used for residual analyses Wide range of uncertainties Simulations data was compared to the performed measurements and it appears that measured decay is faster than calculated except for injection area After 2 days results are in a good agreement Steps to improve measurements precisions Steps to improve calculations

Download ppt "Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Residual Does Rate Analyses for the SNS Accelerator Facility I. Popova, J. Galambos HB2008 August 25-29,"

Similar presentations

SNS Spallation Neutrino Source 1 SNS layout 2 1.0 GeV proton linear accelerator Accumulator ring Main target Stripping foil.

SNS Spallation Neutrino Source 1 SNS layout GeV proton linear accelerator Accumulator ring Main target Stripping foil.
Stefan Roesler SC-RP/CERN on behalf of the CERN-SLAC RP Collaboration

Stefan Roesler SC-RP/CERN on behalf of the CERN-SLAC RP Collaboration
M3.1 JYFL fission model Department of Physics, University of Jyväskylä, FIN-40351, Finland V.G. Khlopin Radium Institute, 194021, St. Petersburg, Russia.

M3.1 JYFL fission model Department of Physics, University of Jyväskylä, FIN-40351, Finland V.G. Khlopin Radium Institute, , St. Petersburg, Russia.
The best collimator configuration (material, number of collimators, collimator shape) is determined by minimizing the ratio R, where N ae is the number.

The best collimator configuration (material, number of collimators, collimator shape) is determined by minimizing the ratio R, where N ae is the number.
1 Activation problems S.Agosteo (1), M.Magistris (1,2), Th.Otto (2), M.Silari (2) (1) Politecnico di Milano; (2) CERN.

1 Activation problems S.Agosteo (1), M.Magistris (1,2), Th.Otto (2), M.Silari (2) (1) Politecnico di Milano; (2) CERN.
Energy deposition and neutron background studies for a low energy proton therapy facility Roxana Rata*, Roger Barlow* * International Institute for Accelerator.

Energy deposition and neutron background studies for a low energy proton therapy facility Roxana Rata*, Roger Barlow* * International Institute for Accelerator.
Experience with Bunch Shape Monitors at SNS A. Aleksandrov Spallation Neutron Source, Oak Ridge, USA.

Experience with Bunch Shape Monitors at SNS A. Aleksandrov Spallation Neutron Source, Oak Ridge, USA.
K. Oishi, K. Kosako and T. Nakamura Institute of Technology, Shimizu Corporation, Japan id=17 SATIF-10.

K. Oishi, K. Kosako and T. Nakamura Institute of Technology, Shimizu Corporation, Japan id=17 SATIF-10.
Using FLUKA to study Radiation Fields in ERL Components Jason E. Andrews, University of Washington Vaclav Kostroun, Mentor.

Using FLUKA to study Radiation Fields in ERL Components Jason E. Andrews, University of Washington Vaclav Kostroun, Mentor.
Calculation of radiation produced by dark current in the Cornell ERL Lisa Nash, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Advisor: Val Kostroun.

Calculation of radiation produced by dark current in the Cornell ERL Lisa Nash, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Advisor: Val Kostroun.
Pion yield studies for proton drive beams of 2-8 GeV kinetic energy for stopped muon and low-energy muon decay experiments Sergei Striganov Fermilab Workshop.

Pion yield studies for proton drive beams of 2-8 GeV kinetic energy for stopped muon and low-energy muon decay experiments Sergei Striganov Fermilab Workshop.
Induced Activity Calculations in Support of D&D Activities at SLAC Joachim Vollaire, Radiation Protection Department.

Induced Activity Calculations in Support of D&D Activities at SLAC Joachim Vollaire, Radiation Protection Department.
C. Theis, D. Forkel-Wirth, S. Roesler, H. Vincke.

C. Theis, D. Forkel-Wirth, S. Roesler, H. Vincke.
1 Institute of High Energy Physics 13/09/2010 Comparison and Study in Measurement Accuracy of Height Difference between Laser Tracker and Level Men LingLing.

1 Institute of High Energy Physics 13/09/2010 Comparison and Study in Measurement Accuracy of Height Difference between Laser Tracker and Level Men LingLing.
Radiation Dosimetry Dose Calculations D, LET & H can frequently be obtained reliably by calculations: Alpha & low – Energy Beta Emitters Distributed in.

Radiation Dosimetry Dose Calculations D, LET & H can frequently be obtained reliably by calculations: Alpha & low – Energy Beta Emitters Distributed in.
1Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy Simulation of βn Emission From Fission Using Evaluated Nuclear Decay Data Ian Gauld Marco Pigni.

1Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy Simulation of βn Emission From Fission Using Evaluated Nuclear Decay Data Ian Gauld Marco Pigni.
1 Induced radioactivity in the target station and in the decay tunnel from a 4 MW proton beam S.Agosteo (1), M.Magistris (1,2), Th.Otto (2), M.Silari (2)

1 Induced radioactivity in the target station and in the decay tunnel from a 4 MW proton beam S.Agosteo (1), M.Magistris (1,2), Th.Otto (2), M.Silari (2)
Tuning an Accelerator for 1 MW C. Peters WAO 12 August 8 th, 2012.

Tuning an Accelerator for 1 MW C. Peters WAO 12 August 8 th, 2012.
GRAS Validation and GEANT4 Electromagnetic Physics Parameters R. Lindberg, G. Santin; Space Environment and Effects Section, ESTEC.

GRAS Validation and GEANT4 Electromagnetic Physics Parameters R. Lindberg, G. Santin; Space Environment and Effects Section, ESTEC.
G. Bartesaghi, 11° ICATPP, Como, 5-9 October 2009 MONTE CARLO SIMULATIONS ON NEUTRON TRANSPORT AND ABSORBED DOSE IN TISSUE-EQUIVALENT PHANTOMS EXPOSED.

G. Bartesaghi, 11° ICATPP, Como, 5-9 October 2009 MONTE CARLO SIMULATIONS ON NEUTRON TRANSPORT AND ABSORBED DOSE IN TISSUE-EQUIVALENT PHANTOMS EXPOSED.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google