4.4 Article

A relationship between the natural radioactivity and mineralogical composition of the Ponnaiyar river sediments, India

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY
卷 102, 期 4, 页码 370-377

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2011.02.003

关键词

River sediment; Natural radionuclides; Magnetic susceptibility; Minerals

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The natural radiation level has been determined for the sediment samples of Ponnaiyar River, India with an aim of evaluating the radiation hazard. The average activity concentrations are within the world and Indian average values although some extreme values have been determined. The magnetic susceptibility measurement has been carried out to know the magnetization nature of the sediments. More downstream (mouth) of the river has quite higher magnetic susceptibility values. The mineralogical characterizations of the sediments have been carried out using Fourier Transform Infrared (MR) spectroscopic and XRD technique. The minerals such as quartz, microcline feldspar, orthoclase feldspar, kaolinite, calcite, gibbsite, montmorillonite, smectite, palygorskite and organic carbon are identified from FTIR analysis. Few minerals like zircon, monazite and hornblende are identified only in XRD analysis. The relative distribution of major minerals is determined by calculating extinction coefficient. The calculated values show that the amount of quartz is greater than microcline feldspar and very much greater than kaolinite in all the sites. The content of quartz and microcline feldspar is decreases, and kaolinite gradually increases towards the river mouth. Multivariate Statistical analyses were carried out between the parameters obtained from radioactivity analysis and other analyses to know the existing relations. Obtained results are discussed and suggested that the natural radioactivity level of the present sediments is mainly controlled by clay content and lesser extent to magnetic susceptibility. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据