4.6 Article

An experimental study measuring the photon attenuation features of the P2O5-CaO-K2O-Na2O-PbO glass system

期刊

RADIATION PHYSICS AND CHEMISTRY
卷 200, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.radphyschem.2022.110153

关键词

HPGe detector; XCOM software; Photon protection efficiency; Radiation shielding glasses

资金

  1. Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia [PNURSP 2022R28]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the photon attenuation properties of glasses with different chemical compositions were experimentally tested using an HPGe detector and multiradioactive point source. The practical findings matched the theoretical results well, showing that the linear attenuation coefficient can be used to assess photon protection efficacy and other related parameters. The PCNKPb20 glass was found to be highly effective in blocking low-energy radiation.
Using an HPGe detector and multiradioactive point source (60Co, 133Ba, 137Cs, and 241Am), the photon attenu-ation properties of 40P2O5-20CaO-10K2O-(30-x)Na2O-xPbO (x = 0, 5, 10, 15, and 20 mol%) glasses were experimentally tested. The practical findings matched the theoretical results from the online XCOM program extremely well. It was shown that the linear attenuation coefficient may be utilized to assess the efficacy of photon protection as well as the effective atomic number, half-value layer, mean free pass, transmission factor, and radiation protection efficiency parameters. The chemical compositions of the glass system and the incident energies of the radiation source influenced all these factors. At low energies, the photon protection efficiency of the PCNKPb20 and PCNKPb15 samples was approximately 100%. Thus, these samples could block nearly all the low-energy radiation directed at them. The shielding competence was also compared to other recently reported commercial glasses. This shows that the PCNKPb20 glass can be an effective barrier against X-ray or gamma-ray radiation.

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

4.6
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