Upload
others
View
4
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Benchmarking Study for Shielding Analysis using
FLUKA, PHITS, MCNPX & MARS
SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden, 2016
2Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Summary
Outline
Introduction & Motivation
Benchmarking Studies with Code Comparisons
Benchmarking Objects
Source Term Evaluation
Shielding Effects
Activation Estimation
Application Example & Exp. Study of Unknown Regions
Comparison with general model of large accelerator tunnel
3Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Large Accelerator Facilities in Korea
Proton Therapy- KNCC (2006)- Samsung Medical
Center (2015)
Pohang Accelerator Laboratory (PAL)- PLS I (1994)→ PLS II (2011)
- PAL-XFEL (2016)
High Power Proton Linac- KOMAC/KAERI (2012)
Carbon Therapy- KHIMA/KIRAMS (2019)
Rare Isotope Accelerator- RAON/RISP (2021)
Needs of Standard Method, Technology, and Rule for Radiation Safety of Large Accelerator Facility
4Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Motivations - Details
Large accelerators operate high-energy, high-power particles including heavy ion
Analysis tools are improved very much in Monte Carlo codes
Shielding analysis including activity estimation is an important process in designing large particle accelerator facility ..…
PALXFEL, KOMAC, KHIMA, RISP….
Eventually can the existing Monte Carlo codes give credible results? for the specific accelerator. How much accurate?
Performing the code comparison using benchmarking studies
KoreanSafety Authority’s(NSSC)Interests
5Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Benchmark Studies
In the view of General Users, not Developers
6Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden 6
Objects & Tools
7Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Monte Carlo Codes
PHITS 2.52 & later FLUKA 2011.2b.6 & later MCNPX 2.7MARS15(2015) & later
FISPACT (in EASY2010)DChain-SP 2001
ENDF-VI LA150 JENDL4.0 + JENDL/HE-2007All Models in Codes
8Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Experimental Data - Examples
Source term evaluation(SINBAD)
Shielding evaluation(SINBAD)
O. Yordanov, et al. - 0.5 & 1 GeV/n Uranium induced reaction
D. Satoh, et al. - 290 MeV/n Oxygen induced reaction
T. Nakamura’s book
9Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden 9
Source Term Evaluation
10Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Source Term Evaluation - Proton
Nakamura & Meier’s Experiments❑ 52 MeV, 113 MeV, 256 MeV Proton❑ Thick Iron Target
11Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Source Term Evaluation - ProtonProjectile : 590 MeV protonTarget : 60cm thick Pb
12Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Source Term Evaluation - Proton
20 Combinations of Physics Models
물리모델만 적용, Intranuclear-cascade 옵션 변경에 따른0-5°, 30-45°각도에서의 2차 중성자 스펙트럼물리모델만 적용, Intranuclear-cascade 옵션 변경에 따른 90-120°, 150-165°각도에서의 2차 중성자 스펙트럼
믹스앤매치를 적용, Intranuclear-cascade 옵션 변경에 따른 2차 중성자 스펙트럼물리모델만 적용, evaporation(fission) 옵션 변경에 따른2차 중성자 스펙트럼물리모델만 적용, light ion 옵션 변경에 따른 2차 중성자스펙트럼
13Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Source Term Evaluation – Heavy Ion
Experiments at HIMAC❑ Projectile – Carbon Ion❑ Detector Type and Size
- NE102 : 15 cm × 15 cm × 0.5 cm- NE213 : 12.7 cm (Φ) × 12.7 cm (L)
Carbon Energy (MeV/n) Target Thickness (cm) Detection Angle (°) Diameter of
Beam (cm)100 C (2.0), Al (2.0) Cu (0.5), Pb (0.5)
0, 7.5, 15, 30, 60, 90 1.5 180 C (6.0), Al (4.0) Cu (1.5), Pb (1.5)
400 C (20.0), Al (15.0) Cu (5.0), Pb (5.0)
14Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Dependence of Incident Particle TypesLow energy tail is larger in the low-Z particle beamHigh energy peak is marked at the forward directionHigh energy peak is larger in the high-Z particle beam
Xenon BeamArgon BeamCarbon Beam
15Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Dependence of Incident Beam Energy At higher energy beam, the forward intensity is high clearly and energy
spectrum is biased to higher energy neutrons Except of MCNPX results, PHITS and FLUKA show good agreement with
experimental results But at wider angle, the discrepancy becomes smaller In the case of higher energy beam, the discrepancy also becomes smaller
at 0o
100 MeV/n C on 2 cm C
400 MeV/n C on 20 cm C180 MeV/n C on 6 cm C100 MeV/n C on 2 cm C
16Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Source Term Evaluation - MSU
Projectile : 155 MeV/n C-12Target : 13.34 cm-thick Al
17Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Source Term Evaluation – Heavy Ion Dependency of Physics Models - HIMAC Exp. (D.Satoh) : 290 MeV/n O on C
Model Only vs Mix&Match (MCNPX)No big difference ( only LAQGSM, thin target)
Code Comparison - PHITS
18Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Dependence of Target Materials
MCNPX Results ???
19Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Source Term Evaluation – GSI
Projectile: 1 GeV/u UraniumTarget: 10x10x20 cm(T) Fe (O. Yordanov )
(in 2005)
20Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden 20
Shielding Effects (Attenuation)
21Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Shielding Effect (Attenuation) - HIMAC
Shielding material
Beam : 400 MeV/n C-12, Target : 5 cm Cu Shielding material : concrete (50 - 200 cm)Detector size : 12.7(D)x12.7(L)
22Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Shielding Effect (Attenuation) - HIMAC ❑ Shield Material – Concrete (With floor)
BA
Source Spectrum from : Kurosawa’s Experiments
23Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Dependence of Cross-section Library LA150 results show larger neutron yields than JENDL-HE07 results . Large discrepancy with experimental data at A position is not sure, but the experimental data
seems to have large uncertainty.
A B
200 cm Concrete 200 cm Concrete
Model: CEM/LAQGSM
24Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Shielding Effect (Attenuation) - HIMAC
❑ Shield Material – Iron
❑ Geometry Effect of Floor
B
Source Spectrum from : Kurosawa’s Experiments
25Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden 25
Activation Estimation
26Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Activation – HIMAC (Yashima)
Experiments at HIMACProton & Heavy Ions
Experimental Geometray
Depth Profile by 100 MeV & 230 MeV proton
MCNPX + SP-FISPACT PHITS + DCHAIN-SP FLUKA
27Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Fragment of incident particle (Be-7)⇒ Decrease after the particle range
Nuclide from target (Na-22)⇒ At higher energy, higher Z number, good agreement
Heavier ions increase activities at target
400 MeV/n C on Cu @HIMAC
230 MeV/n C on Cu @HIMAC
100 MeV/n C on Cu @HIMAC
Be-7
Be-7
Be-7 Na-22
Na-22
Na-22
Be-7
Be-7 Na-22
Na-22
400 MeV/n Ar on Cu @HIMAC
230 MeV/n Ar on Cu @HIMAC
Activation – HIMAC (Yashima)
28Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
950 MeV/n U-238 on STS @ GSI
Mn-54
Co-58
500 MeV/n U-238 on Cu @ GSI
Activation – Uranium beam
29Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Limitation of Some Benchmarking
Eventually, we get some dose data
At forward angle, the tendency depending on target element was not shown, but at backward angle, dose generated from high-Z element is larger than from low-Z element.
At larger angle like higher than 60 degree, dose from high-Z element become independent of angle. That is more effective at higher energy of incident proton.
Big discrepancy at source term, activity, …
But SMALL discrepancy at Effective Dose
30Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden 30
Application Example &
Studies for Unknown Regions
31Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Activities & Fire, flooding Issues Estimation of Residual Activities
by Different Type of Particle Environmental Impact by fire &
flooding in accelerator tunnel
32Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Tested Materials in Activation Study• Material Selection Red color : used in tunnel and soil
Type (No.) Material Reference Location (Geo.) Info.
Metal(9)
Magnet steel(2)
DT4 PAL-XFEL U1, F4 iron fraction: ~82% (PAL dipole magnet)KS D3512 SCP1-S PAL-XFEL U2,F5 iron fraction: ~87% (PAL quadruple magnet)
Stainless steel(3)
ST-37 PSI U3 iron fraction: 98% (impurities: Cs,Ba, etc.)ST-304L CERN U5, F6 iron fraction: ~70% (vacuum chambers)ST-316L CERN U4, F1 iron fraction: ~65% (vacuum chambers)
Others(4)
μ-METAL CERN B3 vacuum chambers, girder, detectorNiobium - U6 Superconducting cavity
Aluminum PAL, CERN B1, F3 Vacuum chambers, electromagnet coil etc.Used in the study on PAL&CERN’s FLUKA BenchmarkingCopper PAL, CERN TARGET, B2, F2
Concrete(6)
Ordinary Concrete NIST R1Normally used in shielding calculationConcrete Portland NIST, FLUKA R2
Concrete ANSI-ANS R4
Concrete KOMAC R6
Domestic institutions’ characteristics,KOMAC, RISP: with impuritiesRISP R5
PAL-XFEL R3
Soil (3)Global average NCRP, Fermilab B4 General compositionPAL-XFEL Soil PAL-XFEL B5
Domestic institutions’ characteristicsWeathered Rock RISP B6
Etc.(9)
Carbon compounds (4)
Epoxy FLUKA L2
Carbon compoundsKapton FLUKA L1Teflon FLUKA L5
Polyvinylchloride FLUKA L3
Superconducting cable (3)
Ni-Cr bandage GSI Far from the target Superconducting cableNbTi+Cu GSI
Cooling Tube GSI
Etc. (2)Marble Jungsun Marble L4 Shielding material for gamma, less activated materialWater FLUKA L6 Cooling water, water dump etc.
33Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Activation in ST-304L< ST-304L, Carbon beam > < ST-304L, Uranium beam >
(Side disk) (Side disk)0 s 1 mon 0 s 1 mon
1) Major-radionuclides of steel (long half-life): 51Cr(27.7d), 52, 54Mn(5.6d, 312d), 48V(16d),
55Fe(2.73a), 56, 57, 58Co(77.3d, 272d, 70.9d),…2) Activity difference between the projectile
(proton): FISPACT > FLUKA > DCHAIN-SP(heavy ions): FLUKA > FISPACT or DCHAIN-SP⇒ Depend on secondary neutron spectrum
34Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
50 MeV/n Uranium beam Experiments
Side view of real experiment
Support for camera Dipole magnetBe stripper chamber
Beam
35Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Depth profile of production yields of natPb(p, xn) reactions
36Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Summary
FLUKA & PHITS showed good agreements in the most cases of our studies. MCNPX showed prominent discrepancy in the most cases. MARS … In most cases, the tested Monte Carlo codes give proper credible results except of a few limitation of each codes.
In the case of source term evaluation using proton, the discrepancy becomes smaller. MCNPX showed the improved agreement for the interaction of proton beam with high Z target
The degree of discrepancy between the experimental data and the calculated results were shown for many conditions. It will be the reference for safety inspection or safety analysis.
In the shielding analysis, the spectra itself of secondary particles like neutrons is significant factor. But the results or the decision standard of shielding analysis may be determined by the level of effective doses on the shield surface or in man-accessible region.
Therefore, the benchmarking results can be reviewed in the view of effective dose for shielding design.
37Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Thank you for your attention!
38Hee-Seock Lee, PAL SATIF13, HZDR, Dresden
Proving Dependence of Beam Energy
Trial using different target thickness
The same phenomena was found at the comparison with thinner (2 cm) target condition
The decrement of discrepancy within different codes results from the change of beam energy, not target thickness