4.5 Article

Radiation Shielding Evaluation of Spacecraft Walls Against Heavy Ions Using Microdosimetry

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NUCLEAR SCIENCE
Volume 68, Issue 5, Pages 897-905

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TNS.2020.3032946

Keywords

Ions; Aluminum; Radiation protection; Extraterrestrial measurements; Aircraft manufacture; Australia; Radiation effects; Galactic cosmic rays (GCRs); heavy ions; International Space Station (ISS); silicon-on-insulator (SOI) microdosimeter

Funding

  1. Australian Research Council (ARC) [DP 170102273]
  2. European Space Agency (ESA) [4000112670/14/NL/HK]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Despite their low contribution to the total fluence in space radiation, heavy ions have a significant radiobiological effect on the human body. This study investigated the interaction of galactic cosmic rays with the shielding wall of the ISS Columbus module, presenting quality factors and normalized dose equivalents for C, Ne, and Si ions behind different spacecraft wall configurations and materials.
Despite the low contribution of heavy ions to the total fluence in the space radiation environment, their radiobiological effect on the human body is extremely high. In this article, we investigated the radiation field which resulted from the interaction of galactic cosmic rays (GCRs), specifically some heavy ions and energies, typically encountered in space with a realistic multilayer sample of the International Space Station (ISS) Columbus module's shielding wall. The quality factor, Q, and the normalized dose equivalent, H, derived from microdosimetric measurements for C, Ne, and Si ions behind different spacecraft wall configurations and materials are presented in this article. Particularly, carbon fiber, polyoxymethylene, and perspex with same areal density compared to currently used aluminum were investigated.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available