Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Radiological Source”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

293 records · Page 17

Model and Standard Operating Procedures Supporting Signal Variation Flow Graph Analysis

This document will describe the principles of the Signal Variation Flow Technique, and the uncertainty models generated using it. We focus on the capture of the variation between the ideal signal and the measured signal. The ideal signal is defined to represent the signal output of a system whose full state behavior is known, with no variation in environment or during operation, and whose photons trajectories are not modified by the object. A CT uncertainty analysis is the result of two main steps. First, the radiography regime extends from the source to the collected image, which is 2D in the case of standard CT. This maps all upstream uncertainties into the variation observed on the radiograph and captures all variation in the physical domain. Second, the reconstruction regime extends from the captured images to the reconstructed 3D image. This regime is purely in the mathematical domain and corrects reconstruction algorithm artifacts/anomalies. The present work focuses on building the model through the radiography regime. The reconstruction regime is expected to be largely a study of algorithmic sensitivity, requiring the definition of a range of standardized tests through which the algorithms would be run. Radiographic variation would then be mapped through reconstruction sensitivities to predict the signal variation in the final image. An incomplete list for the reconstructed image variation output basis includes voxel density, edge blur and length variation, in analogous fashion to the basis functions presented in this work. The signal variation occurs in several forms at the radiograph. These forms are gathered into a complete basis set of functions describing all variation on the radiograph. The scale of each basis function is calculated independently via a specific SVFG. This includes 0D pixel noise (0DI), 0D energy noise (0DE), 1D blur (1DB), 1D length (1DL) or 2D position (2DP). These models are orthogonal in that they each explore a space in the signal variation domain that cannot be reached by the other basis functions. The variation basis functions, and associated SVFG models are split by output dimensionality, a term loosely used for categorization, and explained further below.

42 ENGINEERING↗

Characterization of a Pixelated Cadmium Telluride Detector System Using a Polychromatic X-Ray Source and Gold Nanoparticle-Loaded Phantoms for Benchtop X-Ray Fluorescence Imaging

In this paper, the imaging dose and scan time have been considered as the two major constraints for routine benchtop x-ray fluorescence computed tomography (XFCT) imaging. One way to address this issue is to acquire x-ray fluorescence (XRF) signals in parallel through a 2D array of single-crystal detectors or a pixelated detector along with the cone-beam x-ray source. To identify a detector system suitable for this purpose, a commercially available, fully spectroscopic cadmium telluride (CdTe) pixelated detector, HEXITEC (High-Energy X-ray Imaging Technology), was tested under the experimental conditions optimized for benchtop XFCT imaging of gold nanoparticles (GNPs). Specifically, two different parallel-hole stainless steel collimators were fabricated and coupled with the detector for seamless integration into our existing benchtop cone-beam XFCT system. After the detector deployment, this benchtop XFCT system was used to detect XRF photons from GNP-loaded phantoms. A pixel-merging algorithm was introduced to enhance the sensitivity of XRF photon detection thereby minimizing the scan time. The effect of pixel-level charge sharing correction algorithms was investigated within the context of benchtop XFCT imaging. The detector energy resolution, in terms of the full width at half maximum (FWHM) values at different gold K-shell XRF energies, was also determined. Of the two charge sharing correction algorithms examined, the charge sharing addition gave better sensitivity than the charge sharing discrimination (csd). On the other hand, under the current experimental conditions, the energy resolution of the HEXITEC detector was the best with the csd and estimated to be 1.56 keV FWHM at 66-69 keV photon energy. Overall, despite some degradation of the detector energy resolution (compared with typical single crystal CdTe detectors), the HEXITEC detector enabled parallel data acquisition under the experimental conditions typical of benchtop XFCT imaging and operated well within our benchtop XFCT setup.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

2022 American Conference on Neutron Scattering (ACNS 2022)

The 11th American Conference on Neutron Scattering (ACNS 2022) will be held on June 5-9, 2022, in Boulder, CO. The Conference will provide essential information on the breadth and depth of current neutron-related research worldwide. Hosted by the Neutron Scattering Society of America, this year’s Conference will feature a combination of invited and contributed talks, poster sessions, and tutorials. Topics of the conference are: Advances in Neutron Facilities, Instrumentation and Software: Developments in sources, instrumentation, sample environments and control software. Hard Condensed Matter: Magnetism, correlated metals, quantum/topological materials, superconductors, ferroelectrics, multiferroics, glasses, and disorder phenomena. Submissions outlining examples of neutron scattering in industrial and engineering applications involving hard condensed matter systems are also encouraged. Soft Matter: Neutron studies of soft materials and related fields including in situ and in operando studies. Polymers, surfactants, emulsions, gels, nanoparticles, colloidal suspensions and more. Submissions of computational studies or applications of machine learning beneficial to neutron scattering experiments, as well as examples of neutron scattering in industrial and engineering applications are strongly encouraged. Biology, Biophysics and Biotechnology: Neutron studies of biological and biologically relevant systems. Proteins, bio membranes, biological assemblies, natural materials, nucleic acids, drug-delivery platforms and biomedical systems. Submissions of computational studies or applications of machine learning beneficial to biological neutron scattering experiments, as well as examples of neutron scattering in applied research involving biological systems, are strongly encouraged. Materials Chemistry and Energy: Neutron-based studies of functional materials and materials for energy applications. Examples include porous materials such as metal organic frameworks (MOFs), zeolites; phosphors; novel pigments; electrolytes; catalysts; ionic conductors/cathode materials; photovoltaic materials (hybrid perovskites); thermoelectrics; magnetocalorics/electrocalorics. Structural Materials and Engineering: Neutron scattering studies of materials and engineering processes including structural materials, concrete and metals, as well as engineering processes including combustion, corrosion, additive manufacturing, and others. Neutron Physics: Fundamental physical studies of the neutron and related areas. Emerging Applications in Neutron Scattering: Machine Learning and Data Science: Advances in computing power have contributed to rapidly evolving machine learning and data science fields that can be leveraged to the benefit of the neutron scattering community. The purpose of this session is to highlight recent advances in machine learning and data science and to serve as the foundation of a parallel data and computation track highlighting computation advances and applications in neutron scattering throughout the conference.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

Data Summary Report for Soil and Slab Sampling at Former Building 175

Lawrence Livermore National Security (LLNS) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) are in the process of returning the area where Building 175 existed to beneficial use for future site development. The completed assessment will help LLNS and DOE to outline project scope and costs associated with the removal, characterization, and disposal of materials generated when the concrete slab for the former building and any associated remaining subsurface structures are demolished. Slab removal under the Transition & Disposition process requires full screening for potential site contamination to determine appropriate future land use. Borehole locations and depths were designed to correctly assess DOE’s future liability for characterizing residual vadose zone contamination. If a residual source area is identified at depth, DOE will need to evaluate the additional cost of future subsurface cleanup (with limited access) due to planned development. This is necessary to leave the location in a “ready-to-build” status. As a result, Phase II sampling requirements may in some cases extend beyond the construction zone required for slab removal to ensure the necessary due diligence. To avoid the potential spread of contamination and/or the creation of an environmental release by impacting the integrity of known contamination areas (e.g., pit within room 102 and the east to west boundary seam), these locations were not sampled for this project. During demolition of the slab, these locations and their underlying soils should be further evaluated. The assessment was conducted in accord with the May 2022 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Former Building 175 Assessment Soil Sampling and Analysis Plan / Quality Assurance Plan. Thirty-six, direct-push borings were advanced, along with collecting concrete (where present) and soil samples for laboratory analyses. Thirty-two of the borings were advanced to a depth of 25 feet below ground (bgs), and four borings were advanced to a depth of 55 feet bgs. The concrete slab for former Building 175 ranged from approximately 8 inches to over two feet in thickness. Soils encountered during the investigation consisted primarily of clayey silt, with interbeds of sandy gravel and silty sand to the total depth explored of 55 feet bgs. Field photoionization detector readings – checking for volatile organic compound (VOC) vapors in soils, ranged from zero (0) to a peak of 33 parts per million at 25 feet bgs in boring PC-B175- 028. The cause for the peak reading is unknown, however, no visually discolored or odorous soils were encountered during the assessment and all VOC results were below Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s (LLNL’s) Soil Screening and Management Plan (SSMP) soil screening levels (SSL). Groundwater was not encountered during the assessment and is expected to occur at roughly 65 feet bgs in the project area. No metals were detected at concentrations of concern in the concrete core samples collected and analyzed. Low gross alpha and beta activity concentrations were detected in the concrete core samples collected and analyzed. The detected activity concentrations would appear to be from naturally occurring radioactive isotopes, i.e., potassium 40, present in the raw materials used to make concrete and not artificially added. Tritium was not detected above the testing laboratory's Method Detection Limit (MDL) in any of the concrete core samples collected and analyzed. The radioactive isotopes - actinium 228, bismuth 214, lead 212, lead 214, potassium 40, radium 226, radium 228, and thallium 208, were detected at low activity concentrations in the concrete core samples analyzed. Based on the detected activity concentrations, the isotopes would appear to be naturally occurring in the raw materials used to make concrete and not artificially added. Acetone – a common laboratory contaminant, was detected in nine of the soil samples collected and analyzed. Concentrations of two other volatile organic compounds (benzene and tetrachloroethene) were detected in five of the soil samples analyzed. All concentrations were below SSLs. Total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel range organics were detected at 43.9 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) in the 20-foot bgs duplicate sample from boring PC-B175-007. Total petroleum hydrocarbons as motor oil were detected at 7.20 mg/kg in the 15-foot bgs routine sample from boring PC-B175-001, and at 20.7 mg/kg in the 20-foot bgs duplicate sample from boring PC-B175-007. The SSL for diesel-range TPHs is 260 mg/kg. LLNL does not have an SSL for motor oil range TPHs. No indications of a release, e.g., visibly stained, or odorous soil, were present at the boring locations. No samples collected contained polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in concentrations above the laboratory reporting limit. Arsenic was detected above its SSL of 8.51 mg/kg in the 25-foot bgs routine sample collected from boring PC-B175-023. Nickel was detected above its SSL of 86.0 mg/kg in the 10-foot bgs routine sample from boing PC-B175-005, the 20-foot bgs routine sample from boring PC-B175-025, and the 25-foot bgs routine sample from boring PC-B175-034. The detected concentrations, however, were well below ten times (10x) their respective STLCs. Gross alpha and/or gross beta were detected above their respective SSL activity concentrations in three routine soil samples. Retesting (two per sample) of the samples showed that the initial reported activity concentrations were anomalous. Tritium was not detected in any of the routine or duplicate soil samples collected and analyzed during the investigation. The radioactive isotopes - actinium 228, bismuth 212 and 214, lead 212 and 214, potassium 40, radium 224, 226 and 228, thallium 208, thorium 234 and uranium, were detected at low activity concentrations in the soil samples analyzed for radioactive constituents. The detected isotopes and their associated activity concentrations are typical of those naturally occurring in the marine-type sedimentary deposits underlying the Livermore Valley. No radiological controls are necessary for the soil evaluated.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Results of a Geant4 benchmarking study for bio‐medical applications, performed with the G4‐Med system

Geant4, a Monte Carlo Simulation Toolkit extensively used in bio-medical physics, is in continuous evolution to include newest research findings to improve its accuracy and to respond to the evolving needs of a very diverse user community. In 2014, the G4-Med benchmarking system was born from the effort of the Geant4 Medical Simulation Benchmarking Group, to benchmark and monitor the evolution of Geant4 for medical physics applications. The G4-Med system was first described in our Medical Physics Special Report published in 2021. Results of the tests were reported for Geant4 10.5. Purpose In this work, we describe the evolution of the G4-Med benchmarking system. Methods The G4-Med benchmarking suite currently includes 23 tests, which benchmark Geant4 from the calculation of basic physical quantities to the simulation of more clinically relevant set-ups. New tests concern the benchmarking of Geant4-DNA physics and chemistry components for regression testing purposes, dosimetry for brachytherapy with a 125 I source, dosimetry for external x-ray and electron FLASH radiotherapy, experimental microdosimetry for proton therapy, and in vivo PET for carbon and oxygen beams. Regression testing has been performed between Geant4 10.5 and 11.1. Finally, a simple Geant4 simulation has been developed and used to compare Geant4 EM physics constructors and physics lists in terms of execution times. Results In summary, our EM tests show that the parameters of the multiple scattering in the Geant4 EM constructor G4EmStandardPhysics_option3 in Geant4 11.1, while improving the modeling of the electron backscattering in high atomic number targets, are not adequate for dosimetry for clinical x-ray and electron beams. Therefore, these parameters have been reverted back to those of Geant4 10.5 in Geant4 11.2.1. The x-ray radiotherapy test shows significant differences in the modeling of the bremsstrahlung process, especially between G4EmPenelopePhysics and the other constructors under study (G4EmLivermorePhysics, G4EmStandardPhysics_option3, and G4EmStandardPhysics_option4). These differences will be studied in an in-depth investigation within our Group. Improvement in Geant4 11.1 has been observed for the modeling of the proton and carbon ion Bragg peak with energies of clinical interest, thanks to the adoption of ICRU90 to calculate the low energy proton stopping powers in water and of the Linhard–Sorensen ion model, available in Geant4 since version 11.0. Nuclear fragmentation tests of interest for carbon ion therapy show differences between Geant4 10.5 and 11.1 in terms of fragment yields. In particular, a higher production of boron fragments is observed with Geant4 11.1, leading to a better agreement with reference data for this fragment. Conclusions Based on the overall results of our tests, we recommend to use G4EmStandardPhysics_option4 as EM constructor and QGSP_BIC_HP with G4EmStandardPhysics_option4, for hadrontherapy applications. The Geant4-DNA physics lists report differences in modeling electron interactions in water, however, the tests have a pure regression testing purpose so no recommendation can be formulated.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗