Attenuation and Build Up Factor

Attenuation coefficient & build up factor
Submitted by Sohail Imran Submitted to Dr. Asloob Ahmed Mudassar
Pakistan Institute of Engineering and Applied Sciences Nilore, Islamabad
Abstract:
In this experiment we determined the attenuation and build up factors for different materials. Thickness was varied by changing the number of plates of different materials between gamma ray source a(Cs-137) and detector. The counts were noted both for good geometry and for bad geometry. Attenuation coefficient for Cu was observed as 0.5662 per cm, for Al it was 0.1943 per cm and for lead it was 1.0613 per cm for good and bad geometry conditions respectively. The build-up factor showed an increase in magnitude with increase in thickness of shielding material for both Cu and Al.
Introduction:
A radiation source is extremely hazardous to personnel and the materials which are sensitive to nuclear radiations. These radiations emitted by the source must be properly contained. Containment of radiations may be accomplished by keeping a material or by constructing a shield which effectively absorbs the radiations before they penetrate the shield. Economy often requires that a combination of two methods be used.
Working of NaI (Tl) detectors:

Thallium activated sodium iodide detector is the first practical solid detector used for gamma rays and is still the most popular one for this purpose. The gamma rays interact in the detector and they produce electrons and some cases produces positrons as well. When these electrons move through the crustal they excite the atoms and while de-exciting, the atoms produce a flash of light called scintillation. When the scintillations fall on the photocathode of the photomultiplier, the electrons are produced. The initial pulse from photocathode is very small which is amplified in stages, in a series of dynodes known as photomultiplier tube.
Good geometry and bad geometry:

In order to find the buildup factor and linear attenuation coefficient to geometries were used. In good geometry case two lead collimators were placed, one in front of gamma ray source and the other in front of detector. Now only those gamma rays were detected which either have suffered non collusion on the path or deflected negligibly. These counts of the gamma rays are known as un-collided. While in bad geometry case the collimator placed in front of detector was removed. Now the collided gamma rays were also arriving at the
detector along with un-collided rays. These counts are sum of collided and un-collided gamma rays.
Apparatus:
Gamma ray source(Cs-137) Plates of different materials (iron, aluminum, lead etc.) Detector with necessary electronics. Collimators Power supply Amplifiers Pre amplifier Multi-channel analyzer
Procedure:
In order to perform this experiment I took following steps For good geometry, to lead collimators were used, one for source and other for detector. The whole system was in line and lead shielding around the source was sufficient. The detector was connected with necessary electronics. I switched on the apparatus at operating voltage with right EHT polarity. I noted the counts for zero thickness of shielding material and increase the thickness by changing the number of plates between source and detector. For each plate I noted the counts. For bad geometry I removed the lead collimator near the detector and noted the counts from max thickness to zeros thickness of shielding material between the source and detector. I recorded background counts both for good geometry and bad geometry without any source.
Observations and calculations:

The linear attenuation coefficient and build up factor of copper and aluminium is calculated.
For Copper:
The thickness is varied in steps of plate thickness and three readings were taken at each step.
Table: Good geometry s.no 1 2 3 4 5 6 Number of plates 0 1 2 3 4 5 Thickness ( cm ) 0 1.3 2.6 3.9 5.2 6.5 Counts C1 83387 38246 17911 8785 4129 2086 Counts C2 82613 38002 17944 8699 4307 2054 Counts C3 82892 38304 17913 8721 4259 2086 Avg. counts (C) 82964 38184 17923 8735 4232 2075 Ln( C ) 11.33 10.55 9.79 9.08 8.35 7.64
If these results are plotted on a graph, the graph is a straight line, as shown in the following figure.
12.00 y = -0.5662x + 11.296 10.00 8.00 Ln ( C ) 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 0 1 2 3 Thickness 4 5 6 7
Figure: Graph between thickness and ln(counts) The attenuation of copper is the slope of graph between thickness and ln (counts). Slope of the graph is 0.5662. Hence the attenuation coefficient of copper is 0.5662. Table: Bad geometry s.no 1 2 Number of plated 0 1 Thickness ( cm ) 0 1.3 Counts C1 92605 90759 Counts C2 93479 91487 Counts C3 94495 90868 Average counts( C ) 93526 91038
3 4 5 6 Build up factor:
2 3 4 5
2.6 3.9 5.2 6.5
227818 256142 168456 88160
228288 255965 168375 87746
225887 256134 168284 87835
227331 256080 168372 87914
Good geometry counts = Cg Bad geometry counts = Cb Table: For copper S.no 1 2 3 4 5 6 Thickness ( cm ) 0 1.3 2.6 3.9 5.2 6.5 Good geometry (Cg) 82964 38184 17923 8735 4232 2075 Bad geometry (Cb) 93526 91038 227331 256080 168372 87914 Build up factor
1.13 2.38 12.68 29.32 39.79 42.37
These results are plotted, as shown in the following figure.

45 40 35 Build up factor 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 1 2 3 Thickness 4 5 6 7
Figure: Graph between thickness and build up factor
For Aluminium:
Table: Good geometry s.no 1 2 Number of plates 0 1 Thickness (cm)
0 0.63
Counts C1 83387 77209
Counts C2 82613 76513
Counts C3 82982 76983
Average counts( C )
82994 76902
Ln ( C )
11.33 11.25
3 4 5 6
2 3 4 5
1.26 1.89 2.52 3.15
67329 59391 52013 45690
67472 58902 51603 46100
67365 59101 52155 45512
67389 59131 51924 45767
11.12 10.99 10.86 10.73
These results were then plotted. The graph is nearly straight line.
11.40 11.30 11.20 LN( C ) 11.10 11.00 10.90 10.80 10.70 0 0.5 1 1.5 Thickness 2 2.5 3 3.5 y = -0.1943x + 11.351
Figure: Graph between thickness and ln(counts) The slop of the graph is 0.1943. So the linear attenuation coefficient of aluminium is 0.1943. Table: Bad geometry s.no 1 2 3 4 5 6 Number of plates 0 1 2 3 4 5 Thickness (cm)
0 0.63 1.26 1.89 2.52 3.15
Counts C1
92605 80658 77287 78569 79834 82890
Counts C2
93479 80655 77221 78791 80388 82845
Counts C3
94495 81746 77090 79705 80719 82154
Average counts( C )
93526 81020 77199 79022 80314 82630
Build up factor: Good geometry counts = Cg Bad geometry counts = Cb Table: For Aluminium S.no 1 2 Thickness ( cm )
0 0.63
Good geometry (Cg)

82994 76902
Bad geometry (Cb) 93526 81020
Build up factor
1.13 1.05
3 4 5 6
1.26 1.89 2.52 3.15
67389 59131 51924 45767
77199 79022 80314 82630
1.15 1.34 1.55 1.81
The plot of these results looks like

2.00 1.80 1.60 Build up factor 1.40 1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 0.00 0 0.5 1 1.5 Thickness 2 2.5 3 3.5
For Lead:
Table: Good geometry s.no 1 2 3 4 5 6 Number of plates 0
1 2 3 4 5
Thickness (cm)
0 0.83 1.66 2.49 3.32 4.15
Counts C1 83387
19372 8075 3788 1786 844
Counts C2 82613
19448 8171 3640 1749 865
Counts C3 82982
19664 8191 3671 1704 894
Average counts( C )
82994 19495 8146 3700 1746 868
Ln ( C )
11.33 9.88 9.01 8.22 7.47 6.77
These results were then plotted. The graph is nearly straight line.
12.00 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 Thickness y = -1.0613x + 10.978
Ln( counts)
Figure: Graph between thickness and ln(counts)
The slop of the graph is 1.0613. So the linear attenuation coefficient of lead is 1.0613. Table: Bad geometry s.no 1 2 3 4 5 6 Number of plates
0 1 2 3 4 5
Thickness (cm)
0 0.83 1.66 2.49 3.32 4.15
Counts C1
92605 131058 234445 148498 69343 32163
Counts C2
93479 129865 235236 148836 68601 32283
Counts C3
94495 129866 234572 148611 69084 32159
Average counts( C )
93526 130263 234751 148648 69009 32202
Build up factor: Good geometry counts = Cg Bad geometry counts = Cb Table: For lead S.no 1 2 3 Thickness ( cm )
0 0.83 1.66
Good geometry (Cg)

82994 19495 8146
Bad geometry (Cb)

93526 130263 234751
Build up factor
1.126901 6.681981 28.81913
4 5 6
2.49 3.32 4.15
3700 1746 868
148648 69009 32202
40.17884 39.5167 37.11295
The plot of these results looks like

45 40 35 Build up factor 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 Thickness
Discussion:
The results showed that the attenuation coefficient is max for lead. So for shielding, lead is best. The buildup of factor for copper and aluminium varies linearly. But for lead the buildup factor varied dramatically. Initially it increased but then started to decrease.

Attenuation and Build Up Factor

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Attenuation and Build Up Factor

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Attenuation and Build Up Factor

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Attenuation coefficient & build up factor

Submitted by Sohail Imran Submitted to Dr. Asloob Ahmed Mudassar

Pakistan Institute of Engineering and Applied Sciences Nilore, Islamabad

Working of NaI (Tl) detectors:

Good geometry and bad geometry:

Observations and calculations:

2.6 3.9 5.2 6.5

227818 256142 168456 88160

228288 255965 168375 87746

225887 256134 168284 87835

227331 256080 168372 87914

These results are plotted, as shown in the following figure.

Figure: Graph between thickness and build up factor

Counts C1 83387 77209

Counts C2 82613 76513

Counts C3 82982 76983

1.26 1.89 2.52 3.15

67329 59391 52013 45690

67472 58902 51603 46100

67365 59101 52155 45512

67389 59131 51924 45767

11.12 10.99 10.86 10.73

Good geometry (Cg)

Bad geometry (Cb) 93526 81020

1.26 1.89 2.52 3.15

67389 59131 51924 45767

77199 79022 80314 82630

1.15 1.34 1.55 1.81

The plot of these results looks like

Figure: Graph between thickness and build up factor

Figure: Graph between thickness and ln(counts)

Good geometry (Cg)

Bad geometry (Cb)

2.49 3.32 4.15

3700 1746 868

148648 69009 32202

40.17884 39.5167 37.11295

The plot of these results looks like

Figure: Graph between thickness and build up factor

You might also like