DOE OSTI2015
The Enrichment Meter Principle (EMP) is the basis for a commonly used standard test method for the non-destructive assay of 235 U enrichment in bulk compounds [1]. The technique involves determining the net count rate in the direct 186 keV peak using medium or high energy gamma-ray spectrometry in a fixed geometry. With suitable correction for wall attenuation, compound type, rate loss (live time), and peaked background (if significant), the atom fraction of 235 U may be obtained from the counting rate from a linear relationship through the origin. The widespread use of this method for field verification of enrichment [2,3] together with the fact that the response function rests on fundamental physics considerations (i.e., is not represented by a convenient but arbitrary form) makes it an interesting example of uncertainty quantification, one in which one can expect a valid measurement model can be applied. When applied using NaI(Tl) and region of interest analysis, the technique is susceptible to both interference error and bias [2-4]. When implemented using high-resolution gamma-ray spectroscopy, the spectrum interpretation is considerable simplified and more robust [5]. However, a practical challenge to studying the uncertainty budget of the EMP method (for example, to test linearity, extract wall corrections and so forth using modern methods) is the availability of quality experimental data that can be referenced and shared. To fill this gap, the research team undertook an experimental campaign [6]. A measurement campaign was conducted to produce high-resolution gamma spectroscopy enrichment meter data comparable to UF 6 cylinder measurements. The purpose of this report is to provide both an introduction to and quality assurance (QA) of the raw data produced. This report is intended for the analyst or researcher who uses the raw data. Unfortunately, the raw data (i.e., the spectra files) are too voluminous to include in this report but can be requested from Steven Croft of the Safeguards & Security Technology Group (scroft@ornl.gov 865-241-2834). The complete processed data are tabulated in Appendix A. The analysis techniques used to produce the QA data presented in this report [e.g., three regions-ofinterest (ROI) peak extraction and batch analysis processes] are not the most sophisticated techniques available; analysts are encouraged to reanalyze the raw data using more sensitive techniques and to improve upon the results presented here. With that being said, the analysis techniques used here are more than adequate to present and inspect the quality of the data.
46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗