Neutronics & RP Issues Neutronics & RP Issues nToF Review 14 th February 2008 CERN AB/ATB/EET n_TOF Team.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Stefan Roesler SC-RP/CERN on behalf of the CERN-SLAC RP Collaboration
Advertisements

Preliminary studies for T2 primary target for the NA61 fragmentation beam run 11 th October 2010 – NA61 Collaboration Meeting M. Calviani on behalf of.
P HI T S Exercise ( II ) : How to stop , ,  -rays and neutrons? Multi-Purpose Particle and Heavy Ion Transport code System title1 Feb revised.
Radiopharmaceutical Production Target Foil Characteristics STOP.
1 Activation problems S.Agosteo (1), M.Magistris (1,2), Th.Otto (2), M.Silari (2) (1) Politecnico di Milano; (2) CERN.
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.
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 Radiation Safety Aspects of the Linear Collider B. Racky, A. Leuschner, N. Tesch Radiation Protection Group TeV Superconducting Linear Accelerator.
Abstract A time resolved radial profile neutron diagnostic is being designed for the National Spherical Torus Experiment (NSTX). The design goal is to.
1 11/11/2003 NBI Decay Tube and Windows Presentation by Ans Pardons 1 Decay Tube & Windows Introduction (Location, Planning) Decay Tube Entrance.
ELI-NP: the way ahead, March Anna Ferrari An overview of the shielding problems around high energy laser-accelerated beams Anna Ferrari Institute.
16 th International Congress on Neutron Capture Therapy June 14-19, Helsinki, Finland Improvement of a PGNAA Facility for BNCT in THOR C. K. Huang 1, H.
What need to be done to restart n_TOF (in 2007?) 4 Short description of the Facility 4 Old Target removal in the provisional Storage place (Service Gallery).
Radiation Protection considerations concerning a future SPS dump design Helmut Vincke DGS-RP.
First AWAKE dump calculations Helmut Vincke. Beam on dump Muon axis inside and outside CERN Distances: Beam impact point to end of West hall: ~300 m Beam.
Tungsten Calorimeter Model Calculations and Radiation Issues Pavel Degtiarenko Radiation Control Group, Jefferson Lab.
Estimation of temperature increase in the dump through Monte – Carlo simulations and rough calculations N. Charitonidis (EN/MEF)
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.
JAERI nuclear analyses for IFMIF T. Umetsu, M. Yamauchi and M. Sugimoto Presented by Takeo NISHITANI Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) IAEA Technical Meeting.
F. Regis, LINAC4 – LBS & LBE LINES DUMP DESIGN.
Towards a modified n_TOF Facility and Increased Radiation Safety Towards a modified n_TOF Facility and Increased Radiation Safety ATC/ABOC Days, 21 st.
N_TOF Technical Report INTC, CERN 21 May 2007 P. Cennini AB-ATB n_TOF Technical Coordinator Status of the old Target Removal Status of the old Target Removal.
Authorization and Inspection of Cyclotron Facilities Design, Layout and Shielding.
Status of the new Target Design n_TOF Collaboration meeting, Paris 4-5 December 2006 P. Cennini AB-ATB Status of the old Target Removal Status of the old.
Status of Radiation Protection Studies for the Linac4 beam dumps Joachim Vollaire DGS/RP.
Beam loads & dump concepts T. Kramer, B. Goddard, M. Benedikt, Hel. Vincke.
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,
PSB dump replacement 17 th November 2011 LIU-PSB meeting Alba Sarrió.
Progress on Remote Handling Systems TAC 12 Magnus Göhran – WPM 15 th October 2015.
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.
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,
Status Report by the n_TOF Technical Coordinator P. Cennini AB-ATB on behalf of the n_TOF Team  The n_TOF Facility  Where are we standing  Resume of.
HTS Tl-based coatings for FCC beam screens - Radiation Protection Aspects - Markus WIDORSKI, DGS-RP Information on ActiWiz: Courtesy of Chris Theis, DGS-RP.
Radiation Protection in J-PARC neutrino beam line Sep Yuichi Oyama (KEK) for T2K neutrino beam line construction group Happy birthday.
Application of FLUKA to fixed- target programs at CERN: a short, not exhaustive selection M. Calviani (CERN) With contributions from: M. Brugger, F. Cerutti,
GRAN SASSO’S HADRON STOP Temperature’s behaviour under specified beam conditions Barbara Calcagno.
HL-LHC Standards and Best Practices Workshop CERN, June 13, 2014 Best Practices for ALARA C. Adorisio and S. Roesler on behalf of DGS-RP.
New SPS scraping system: preliminary RP remarks Helmut Vincke DGS-RP.
NToF - Radiation Protection M. Brugger, P. Cennini, A. Ferrari, E. Lebbos, V. Vlachoudis CERN AB/ATB/EET.
WP2 progress on safety E. Baussan EUROnu CB Meeting Monday 10th & Tuesday 11th June 2011 CERN, Geneva, Switzerland.
Radiation protection and radiation safety issues for HIE-ISOLDE. FLUKA calculations Y. Romanets ISOLDE Workshop and Users meeting 2010 CERN, 8 December.
Radiation Protection Considerations for the CDR Helmut Vincke DGS-RP.
Status of n_TOF Facility
AWAKE: D2E for Alexey beam properties Silvia Cipiccia, Eduard Feldbaumer, Helmut Vincke DGS/RP.
Characterization of the nTOF Radioactive Waste M. Brugger, P. Cennini, A. Ferrari, V. Vlachoudis CERN AB/ATB/EET.
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.
Ma zhongjian Ding yadong Wang qingbin Wu qingbiao Radiation Protection Group/IHEP.
EURISOL DS Task meeting Orsay, 07 Janvier Preliminary shielding assessment of EURISOL Post Accelerator D. Ene, D. Ridikas. B. Rapp.
N_TOF EAR-1 Simulations The “γ-flash” A. Tsinganis (CERN/NTUA), C. Guerrero (CERN), V. Vlachoudis (CERN) n_TOF Annual Collaboration Meeting Lisbon, December.
The target handling concept of the pbar- separator at FAIR M. Helmecke, V. Gostishchev, R. Hettinger, K. Knie 6th High Power Targetry Workshop Oxford.
Status of the FAIR pbar target: Target handling study (M. Helmecke)
Neutron double differential distributions, dose rates and specific activities from accelerator components irradiated by 50 – 400 MeV protons F. Cerutti.
1 Radiation Environment at Final Optics of HAPL Mohamed Sawan Fusion Technology Institute University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI HAPL Meeting ORNL March.
EURISOL, TASK#5, Bucuresti, November 1 Preliminary shielding assessment of EURISOL Post Accelerator D. Ene, D. Ridikas. B. Rapp.
Monte Carlo methods in spallation experiments Defense of the phD thesis Mitja Majerle “Phasotron” and “Energy Plus Transmutation” setups (schematic drawings)
Heating and radiological
Induced-activity experiment:
Analyses to Support Waste Disposition of SNS Inner Reflector Plug
The n_TOF Facility Today
Measurements and FLUKA Simulations of Bismuth and Aluminum Activation at the CERN Shielding Benchmark Facility(CSBF) E. Iliopoulou, R. Froeschl, M. Brugger,
Radiation protection of Linac4 M. Silari Radiation Protection Group
GAMOS tutorial Shielding Exercises
M. Calviani, A. Ferrari (EN/STI), P. Sala (INFN)
How to stop a, b, g-rays and neutrons?
Fassò, N. Nakao, H. Vincke Aug. 2, 2005
Monte Carlo simulations for the ODIN shielding at ESS
Presentation transcript:

Neutronics & RP Issues Neutronics & RP Issues nToF Review 14 th February 2008 CERN AB/ATB/EET n_TOF Team

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection2 February 14th 2008 Overview Experience from the Existing Target  Activation measurements  Comparison with FLUKA  Consequences for design choices New Target Design  Critical Design Questions concerning: Target support material Additional target alloy materials Target cooling Area ventilation  Impacts to be Studied for Neutronics Radio Protection Issues  activation and residual dose rates  handling  radioactive waste concerns  air activation and dose to the public

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection3 February 14th 2008 Geometry Implementation  the simulation includes a detailed layout and design, for both the target and the tunnel up to the experimental area New Design Options  quick flexibility to change design parameters and estimate respective influences Detailed Estimates concerning  neutron fluences (physics)  energy deposition (engineering design, cooling)  isotope production (radioactive waste, air activation)  residual dose rates (handling, waste) Accuracy  well benchmarked code in all required fields FLUKA Calculations

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection4 February 14th 2008 Geometry Details

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection5 February 14th 2008 Target in the Pit Target Earth Pit filled (concrete) Beam Pipe Concrete Marble Beam

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection6 February 14th 2008 X Z Y Beam Entrance Beam Exit n_ToF Experimental Area Target outside the Pit (arb. location) Important for 2-Step calculations e.g., used for inter- comparison with final activation measurements

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection7 February 14th 2008 Chemical Composition  accurately known for the used lead (e.g., 19ppm Bi)  for steel: first estimated based on preliminary dose rate measurement and finally evaluated during the target removal Irradiation History  beam intensity and irradiation time profile are accurately known Geometry  implemented in a very detailed way MC Calculation  extensive calculations (computer cluster) FLUKA Models – Activation/Residual DR  well benchmarked for low/medium-mass materials at CERF  recent comparison for high mass isotopes show a very good overall agreement Important Input Parameters

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection8 February 14th 2008 Neutron Fluence - Benchmark 20% difference between 1 and 1E5 eV ??? Performance Report CERN-INTC , January 2003 CERN-SL ECT

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection9 February 14th 2008 Preparing for Lead target dismount Discovery that the water layer is 6 cm thick instead of 5!!! New FLUKA simulations with + 6 cm water (red) compared with + 5 cm (black) Neutron Fluence - Benchmark -> Perfect Agreement

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection10 February 14th 2008 Experimental Area: Neutron Fluence The energy resolution is dominated by the 5cm of water with the resolution experiencing a peak and a tail at low energies  the peak being determined by the water moderation (width ~= 2cm)  the tail is due to the interface lead/water The resolution inside lead has delta-lambda of about 30cm with an absolute position lambda equal to 5.7m Anything more than 5cm of water produces the same resolution

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection11 February 14th 2008 Inspection & Measurements

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection12 February 14th 2008 First Dose Rate Survey Pit survey with dose rate meter attached to a cord and reading the maximum recorded value Target survey with manual reading and measurements for a predefined set of locations First comparison with FLUKA showed a significant disagreement 10.3 m Decay tube Rectangular section pool Circular section Square section

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection13 February 14th 2008 Important Findings & Changes Pit & Target  update of geometry (container, support, 30cm, steel faces) Pit  new survey with special dose rate meter and laser controlled distance  negligible contribution to residual dose rates coming from contamination Target  detailed survey with special dose rate meter  chemical composition stainless steel – cobalt content important influence on residual dose rate distribution (up to a factor of 25 in the possible concentration range) a cobalt content of 0.1% results a very good agreement (this concentration value is confirmed by existing steels at CERN)

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection14 February 14th 2008 Inside the pit: using a laser attached to the crane to control the position of the remote detector (attached to the hook) Around the target: same method, starting at 3 meters distance & going towards the target surface. (fully remote, thus possibility to wait & get enough statistics while performing continuous measurements) Detailed Dose Rate Survey

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection15 February 14th 2008 New FLUKA Comparison after Detailed Pit Survey Measurements Distance from the Top (Access Gallery) / mm Residual Dose Rate /  Sv/h Detailed Measurements FLUKA New Simulations First FLUKA Simulations First Measurements FLUKA Simulation Upper Shaft Lower Shaft Target Decay-Tube Container r Target Decay-Tube Lower Shaft Upper Shaft

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection16 February 14th 2008 Residual Dose Rates Comparison

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection17 February 14th 2008

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection18 February 14th 2008 Steels used at CERN Cast No E33408, Nippon Steel, Inspection Certificate (F.Bertinelli, used for LHC) Density g/cm 3 CERN store SCEM: , INOX RNDS.304L Density g/cm 3 EA: ICP-AES (AES=Atomic Emission Spectrometry) EMPA: WD-XRF (wavelength-dispersive X-ray fluoresence spectrometry) EIG: XRF In addition, direct measurements on the target steel support will be performed (measurement device is ordered and soon to arrive at CERN)

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection19 February 14th 2008 Dependency on Cobalt Content Using a stainless steel type with low Co 59 content will be important for the new target design

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection20 February 14th 2008 Impact on Design

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection21 February 14th 2008 Peak Energy Density - Dilution  Increase in beam size Target materials  Additional target alloy materials (Sb, Ag, PbO) influence in neutron production (Neutronics) impact on isotope production and residual dose rates Target support  choice of material (Al, SS, Special) impact on residual dose rates  additional means to reduce residual dose rates Cooling  Installation of cooling system residual dose rates and accessibility  Activation of water handling and radioactive waste Area ventilation  installation of ducts and influence on prompt dose rates upstairs prompt dose rates and area classification Critical Design Questions

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection22 February 14th 2008 Increasing the Beam Size Factor of ~10

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection23 February 14th 2008 Residual Dose Rates

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection24 February 14th 2008 Possible constraint during installation of the piping system Same constraint possibly also during target removal Lowest plug will remain in place Final technical solution might require short interventions to manipulate the connection flanges Very low dose rates for both short and long operation scenarios Connection of Cooling System 6m + 5m10y + 1y  Sv/h

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection25 February 14th 2008 Calculation Methods  “One-Step” simulation looking at residual dose rate distributions when the target is in its lower pit position  “Two-Step” calculations resulting in 3D residual dose rate maps around the target only (without surroundings)  For both: different operation and cooling times Support Materials  Aluminum  Stainless Steel with 0.1% / 0.03% / 0.01% Cobalt Target materials  Standard ‘very pure’ lead  Addition of Sb (3%) Additional “Shielding”  Borated polyethylene plates (10cm, side and entry face) with 6% natural boron, i.e., about 1% 10 B Target Support Material Choice

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection26 February 14th 2008 Target Support Material Aluminum ContainerSteel Container 6m + 5m  Sv/h

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection27 February 14th 2008 Target Support Material Aluminum ContainerSteel Container 10y + 1y  Sv/h

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection28 February 14th 2008 Target Support Material (Steel/0.1%Co) “Shielded” with Boron 6m + 5m Standard Container  Sv/h

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection29 February 14th y + 1y Standard Container Target Support Material (Steel/0.1%Co)  Sv/h “Shielded” with Boron

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection30 February 14th 2008 Target Material Lead with 3% Sb 6m + 5m Standard Lead  Sv/h

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection31 February 14th y + 1y Standard Lead Target Material Lead with 3% Sb  Sv/h

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection32 February 14th 2008 Comparison (20cm distance) x “Boron Shielding” “Sb Alloy”

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection33 February 14th 2008 Target Only – Two-Step Calculation Lateral Cut - CentreLongitudinal Cut - Centre 10y + 1y ~20 mSv/h ~2 mSv/h (Standard Lead + Stainless Steal Container with 0.1% Cobalt)  Sv/h

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection34 February 14th 2008 Target Only – Two-Step Calculation Std. Pb + SS with 0.1%Co 10y + 1y ~20 mSv/h ~2 mSv/h Pb + 3%Sb + SS with 0.01%Co  Sv/h

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection35 February 14th 2008 Base Material Choice  Aluminum would be best, however stringent constraints in terms of structural disadvantages corrosion issues poses problems for radioactive waste treatment  Stainless steel is favorable, especially in case special steels with low (~0.03%) cobalt content can be found Additional ‘Shielding’  The basic principle is to get into ‘competition’ with 59 Co in terms of low- energy neutron capture, by following one of the following approaches borated poly-ethylene (6% natural boron) -> studied in terms of “proof of principle” possibility to use borcarbid plates addition of boron in the cooling circuit Addition of Sb into the Lead  Augmentation of residual dose rates for short cooling times due to important production of 124 Sb Material Choice

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection36 February 14th 2008 Neutronics

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection37 February 14th 2008 Influence of Target Alloy Materials New Target: +3% Sb, 0.01% Ag

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection38 February 14th 2008 Influence of Target Alloy Materials New Target: +3% Sb, 0.01% Ag

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection39 February 14th 2008 Neutronics – Boron ‘Shielding’

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection40 February 14th 2008 Neutronics – Different Configurations

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection41 February 14th 2008 Neutronics – Different Configurations

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection42 February 14th 2008 Ventilation Issues

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection43 February 14th 2008 Critical Group: Border Guards Critical Groups Target Experimental Area Decay Tube

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection44 February 14th 2008 FLUKA simulations to calculate the isotope production yield (39 different isotopes considered) Exposure of personnel (access to nToF area)  Dose conversion coefficients based on the Swiss and French legislation Dose to the public (outside CERN)  Definition of critical groups (border guards)  Calculation of dose conversion coefficients (P. Vojtyla) based on environmental models Different ventilation scenarios  Existing situation  Continuous ventilation (laminar flow)  Enclosed area and flush before access (full mixing) Best solution  Enclosed area, continuous filtering during operation and flush before access, leading to annual doses below 0.1  Sv Annual Dose Calculation

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection45 February 14th 2008 A full 3D simulation being too time consuming we decided for a two-folded approach combining in a first step detailed simulation followed by a second analytical calculation  Calculating the prompt equivalent dose rate in the tunnel below the expected location of the ventilation duct (~40m downstream)  Using analytical ‘over the thumb’ formulas to calculate the attenuation for a given duct Considered parameters  position: 40m downstream  duct is 5m long  40cm diameter  straight line  dose reduction as ‘line of sight’ in front of the duct and directly behind Installation & Streaming through Ducts

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection46 February 14th 2008 Lateral to the ventilation duct a maximum prompt dose rate in the order of 100mSv/h can be expected Assuming a ventilation duct with 5m length and 40cm diameter one expects a reduction by about three orders of magnitude Resulting at the top in a prompt residual dose rate of about 100  Sv/h Streaming Calculation Sv/h X X

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection47 February 14th 2008 Radioactive Waste

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection48 February 14th 2008 Comparison between  the existing target (4 years of operation & three years of cooling)  with the new design (10 years of operation & one year of cooling) Total activity and specific activity increase, however in acceptable margins  increased operation, shorter cooling time  significant reduction in total mass (factor of ~4) Alpha emitters are largely below ATA levels Activation of Target, Support & Water

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection49 February 14th 2008 Conclusions

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection50 February 14th 2008 Conclusions Careful Evaluation of FLUKA Simulations  The detailed measurements performed during the target removal and inspection interventions allowed for a careful benchmark of the simulations Peak Energy Density - Dilution  The increase in beam size reduces the peak energy density by about a factor of 10 Target materials  Additional target alloy materials (Sb, Ag, PbO) No significant influence in neutron production No significant impact on isotope production in terms of waste disposal Significant increase in residual dose rates for short cooling times (< one year), however no “show-stopper” in terms of handling and possible advantage for long cooling times (competition reaction with 59 Co) Target support  choice of material (Al, SS, Special) and additional means to reduce residual dose rates Low-Cobalt stainless steel combined with a possible implementation of a “Boron-Shielding” (e.g., Borcabide plates) would be an optimum solution

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection51 February 14th 2008 Conclusions Neutronics  Neutron fluxes were verified for all studied design options and no ‘show-stopper’ was found  Ensuring an optimum water layer thickness of 5cm Cooling  Installation of cooling system Residual dose rates were checked and accessibility is guaranteed at all times Area ventilation  Acceptable levels of prompt dose rates are introduced at the location of the ventilation station  Envisaged ventilation system minimizes dose to the public to an absolute minimum Radioactive Waste  Target is optimized in terms of mass (reduction by a factor of 4) and the reduced amount of cooling water eases future disposal

nToF Review Neutronics & RadioProtection52 February 14th 2008 Thank You