4.5 Article

Sputter sample preparation for ion beam delivery of radium-223 at ATLAS

期刊

REVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS
卷 94, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

AIP Publishing
DOI: 10.1063/5.0137098

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this experiment, a radium-223 ion beam was generated using the electron cyclotron resonance ion source (ECR2) at the Argonne Tandem Linac Accelerator System (ATLAS). The radium-223 material was prepared as a sputter sample by dissolving radium nitrate into a solution and depositing it onto aluminum powder. The ion beam intensity and energy requirements were 1 x 10(6) particles/s and 1.07 GeV, respectively.
A radium-223 ion beam was delivered to an experiment from the electron cyclotron resonance ion source, ECR2, at the Argonne Tandem Linac Accelerator System (ATLAS). The radium-223 material was in a nitrate salt form within a vial, prior to being converted to a usable sputter sample. The sputter sample was produced using a new sample preparation method, where the radium nitrate was dissolved into a solution and pipetted onto pressed aluminum powder. This sample was then allowed to dry, distributing the radium-223 material throughout the sputter sample. Ion source operation using the radium sputter sample is described with the operating parameters listed. The intensity and energy requirements for this ion beam were 1 x 10(6) particles/s and 1.07 GeV, respectively. Because the intensity is relatively low compared to most experiments at ATLAS, previously developed accelerator mass spectrometry methods were used Scott et al. [Rev. Sci. Instrum. 87, 02A732 (2016)] to avoid the need for tuning of the low-intensity beam of interest. Handling of the radium material, as well as loading and unloading of the sputter sample from ECR2, required collaboration with Health Physics. Procedures were used and dry runs were carried out before, during, and after the experiment to ensure the safety of the workers. The processes used and lessons learned are described within.

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

4.5
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