Study the influences of the radionuclide depth distributions on the FEPE for the measurements of the soil activity using in situ HPGe gamma spectrometry

Truong Thi Hong Loan1, Vu Ngoc Ba1, Le Hung Quoc Dan2, Truong Huu Ngan Thy1, Huynh Thi Yen Hong1
1 Nuclear Technique Laboratory, VNUHCM - University of Science, Viet Nam
2 Faculty of Physics and Engineering Physics, VNUHCM - University of Science, Viet Nam

Main Article Content

Abstract

In this work, the influences of the soil densities and the radionuclide depth distributions (RDD) on the Full Energy Peak Efficiency (FEPE) calculation of the in-situ gamma ray spectrometer using the In Situ Object Counting Systems (ISOCS) software were studied. The data of the RDDs at the sites were investigated by using laboratory HPGe gamma spectrometer. Six different RDDs of 40K, 226Ra and 232Th were found at four studied sites with radionuclide deposition moving from surface to deeper positions. The results show that FEPE values vary strongly for the different RDDs, especially for the low gamma ray energies. Use of the uniform model for calculating FEPEs can result in noticeable errors from 29% to 101% for the realistic RDD of the exponential form (surface
radionuclide deposition), negative variations from 14% to 30% for the realistic RDD of having a radionuclide deposition at the 30 cm depth, and negligible variations of less than 5 % for the realistic RDD of quasi uniform form in the range of gamma ray energies of interest.

Article Details

References

[1] Alvarez, A, Corea, E, Navarro, N, Sancho, C.“Uranium determination in samples from decommissioning of nuclear facilities, related to the first stage of the nuclear fuel cycle”,Applied Radiation and Isotopes, 53, 355 – 359, 2000.
[2] Tyler, A.N, Sanderson, D.C.W, Scott, E.M. “Estimating and accounting for 137Cs source burial through in situ gamma spectrometry in salt marsh environment”,Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 33, 195 – 212, 1996.
[3] Li J, Li Y, Wang Y, Wu J. “Applicability of using in situ gamma ray spectrometry technique for 137Cs and 210Pbex inventories measurement in grassland environments”, Applied Radiation and Isotopes, 68, 1143 – 1149, 2010.
[4] Lettner H, Andrasi A, Hubmer A.K, Lovranich E, Steger F, Zombori P. “In situ gamma spectrometry intercomparison exercise in Salzburg, Austria”,Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics, Research A 369, 547 – 551, 1996.
[5] Font S.H, Alvarez J.L. “Data quality objectives for surface soil cleanup operation using in situ gamma spectrometry for concentration measurements”,Health Physics 72 (2), 286 – 295, 1997.
[6] Canberra, Inc.“Nuclear Measurement Solutions for Safety, Security and the Environment – Technical Reference Manual V4.3, Model S573 ISOCS Calibration Software”, Canberra Industries Inc, 2012.
[7] Canberra, Inc. “Nuclear Measurement Solutions for Safety, Security and the Environment – Validation and Verification Manual, Model S573/S574 ISOCS/LabSOCS”, Canberra Industries Inc, 2002.
[8] Canberra, Inc. “Genie 2000 3.3. Customization Tools Manual”, Canberra Industries Inc, 2013.
[9] Thummerer S, Jacob P. “Determination of depth distributions of natural radionuclides with in situ gamma ray spectrometry”,Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 416, 161 – 178, 1998.
[10] Laedermann J.P, ByrdeF, Murith C. “In situ Gamma ray Spectrometry: the Influence of Topography on the Accuracy of Activity Determination”,Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 38 (1), 1 –16, 1998.