Newly developed tellurium oxide glasses for nuclear shielding applications: An extended investigation

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids xxx (xxxx) xxxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jnoncrysol

Newly developed tellurium oxide glasses for nuclear shielding applications: An extended investigation H.O. Tekina,b, , L.R.P. Kassabc, Ozge Kilicoglub,d, Evellyn Santos Magalhãesc,e, Shams A.M. Issaf,g, Guilherme Rodrigues da Silva Mattosc ⁎

a

Uskudar University, Vocational School of Health Services, Radiotherapy Department, Istanbul 34672, Turkey Uskudar University, Medical Radiation Research Center (USMERA), Istanbul 34672, Turkey c Laboratório de Tecnologia em Materiais Fotônicos e Optoeletrônicos, Faculdade de Tecnologia de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil d Uskudar University, Vocational School of Health Services, Nuclear Technology and Radiation Safety Department, Istanbul 34672, Turkey e Departamento de Engenharia Elétrica, Escola Politécnica da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil f Physics Department, Faculty of Science, University of Tabuk, Saudi Arabia g Physics Department, Faculty of Science, Al-Azhar University, Assiut, 71452, Egypt b

ARTICLE INFO

ABSTRACT

Keywords: Tellurium oxide glasses Nuclear shielding MCNPX Radiation protection

Newly developed glasses were produced using different compositions as follows (in wt.%): (85TeO2-15ZnO, 85.00TeO212.95ZnO-2.05Al2O3, 85.40TeO2–3.20PbO-6.97ZnO-4.43Na2O, 83.5TeO2-16.5BaO, 82.77TeO2–17.23Nb2O5, 54.6TeO2-22.6WO3-22.8Bi2O3). The acquired mass attenuation coefficients (μ/ρ) were used to determine another vital parameters for gamma-ray shielding performance namely mean free path (MFP), half value layer (HVL), tenth value layer (TVL), energy absorption buildup factor (EABF), exposure buildup factor (EBF), effective atomic number (Zeff), respectively. Simultaneously, effective removal cross section (∑R) values for fast neutrons, proton projected range (PPR), alpha projected range (APR), proton mass stopping power (PMSP), alpha mass stopping power (AMSP), neutron absorption parameters (absorption neutron scattering cross section (σabs)), SAFE factors and relative dose distribution (RDD) have been investigated for fabricated glass samples. The results showed that the 54.6TeO2-22.6WO3-22.8Bi2O3 composition has the best performance in terms of nuclear shielding purposes. It is worth recommending the continuous investigations on chemical combinations and changes of TeO2 concentration for future applications.

1. Introduction Due to the increment of nuclear research laboratories, nuclear power plants, spread of radiation diagnosis and treatment methods such as diagnostic radiology and radiotherapy in the field of medicine, the number of personnel exposed to high energy radiation is increasing day-by-day. Therefore, the number of the studies related to the field of material sciences is increasing. This trend on increment can be related with the developments of the materials chemical composition as well as with the physical properties such as durability, corrosion and optical properties. Glasses, which are one of the new generation radiation shielding materials, are new groundbreaking materials and have a wide range of applications as shielding material in radiology, radiation oncology, nuclear medicine and imaging units, nuclear physics research laboratories, special goggles and in monitoring windows. On the other

⁎

hand, it is well known that the additive of certain type of oxides can change the performance of glass structure regarding the ionizing radiation. Therefore, it is worth investigating the relationship between the additive type and the nuclear shielding performance against to nuclear radiation. Among the different types of complex glassy systems, glasses based on tellurium oxide have been investigated for a large range of applications [1]. When doped with rare earth ions they exhibit interesting properties [1]. For example, tellurium oxide glasses prepared with large amount of TeO2 have demonstrated to be promising materials to operate as optical amplifiers [2]. Laser action at 1064 nm for different concentration of Nd3+ ions [3,4], memory device applications in the presence of gold nanoparticles [5], enhanced luminescence properties of rare earth ions in the presence of silver nanoparticles [6,7] were also shown using different compositions based on tellurium oxide. Moreover the possibility to increase the solar cell ef-

Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (H.O. Tekin).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2019.119763 Received 15 September 2019; Received in revised form 21 October 2019; Accepted 31 October 2019 0022-3093/ © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: H.O. Tekin, et al., Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2019.119763

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids xxx (xxxx) xxxx

H.O. Tekin, et al.

present work, the potential of these materials to be used as shielding for gamma and neutron radiation. The MCNPX code (version 2.6.0) [10] is used to determine the shielding parameters and the dependence with the composition of each glass, as well as the influence of the tellurium oxide. A broad-range of nuclear radiation shielding investigation for gamma-ray, proton particles, fast neutrons along have been studied for six different types of produced glasses. The obtained values for mass attenuation coefficients (μ/ρ) were utilized to determine some another important shielding properties against gamma-ray radiation. Moreover, some of the investigated parameters have been determined by using SRIM code and special calculation methods such as G-P fitting parameters for EBF and EABF calculation. The details of methodology and simulation process of the present investigation shall be explained in next sections. The studied nuclear radiation shielding parameters can be listed as in follow; i) ii) iii) iv) v) vi) vii) viii) ix)

Fig 1. The general appearance of produced glasses.

ficiency when used as cover layer tellurium oxide glasses doped with rare earth ions, with and without silver nanoparticles, was also reported recently [8,9]. Using different compositions of glasses based on tellurium oxide (85TeO2-15ZnO, 85.00TeO2-12.95ZnO-2.05Al2O3, 85.40TeO2–3.20PbO-6.97ZnO-4.43Na2O, 83.5TeO2-16.5BaO, 82.77 TeO2–17.23Nb2O5, 54.6TeO2-22.6WO3-22.8Bi2O3) we report, in the

MFP - mean free path HVL - half value layer TVL - tenth value layer EABF - energy absorption buildup factor BF - exposure buildup factor Zeff - effective atomic number ∑R - effective removal cross section for fast neutrons PPR/PMSP- proton projected range/proton mass stopping power APR/AMSP- alpha projected range/alpha mass stopping power

Table 1 Weight fractions (in wt%) and densities of the fabricated glasses. Code

O

Na

Al

Zn

Nb

Te

Ba

W

Pb

Bi

ρ (g/cm3)

TEO1 TEO2 TEO3 TEO4 TEO5 TEO6

0.19991 0.21781 0.20553 0.18463 0.19865 0.17974

– – – – 0.03286 –

– – 0.01085 – – –

0.12051 – 0.10404 – 0.05600 –

– 0.12045 – – – –

0.67958 0.66175 0.67958 0.66759 0.68278 0.43653

– – – 0.14778 – –

– – – – – 0.17921

– – – – 0.02971 –

– – – – – 0.20451

4.905 5.088 5.105 5.394 5.469 6.381

Fig 2. (a) 3-D view of MCNPX simulation setup obtained from MCNPX Visual Editor (b) 2-D view of simulation setup obtained from MCNPX Visual Editor.

2

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids xxx (xxxx) xxxx

H.O. Tekin, et al.

Table 2 Mass attenuation coefficients (μm) obtained from MCNPX and XCOM. E (MeV)

TEO1 MCNPX

XCOM

RD

TEO2 MCNPX

XCOM

RD

TEO3 MCNPX

XCOM

RD

0.015 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 1 1.5 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 15

46.569 21.639 6.925 14.826 8.215 5.123 2.369 1.326 0.500 0.283 0.151 0.111 0.094 0.080 0.069 0.059 0.048 0.043 0.038 0.034 0.034 0.033 0.034 0.035 0.037

43.320 19.620 6.350 14.380 7.927 4.852 2.234 1.239 0.460 0.256 0.139 0.104 0.087 0.077 0.065 0.057 0.046 0.041 0.036 0.034 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.034 0.037

7.0 9.3 8.3 3.0 3.5 5.3 5.7 6.5 8.1 9.8 7.7 6.4 7.2 3.9 5.6 2.7 2.3 3.9 4.3 1.4 2.4 0.5 0.7 2.2 0.0

38.599 25.256 8.612 15.210 8.532 5.196 2.507 1.370 0.514 0.290 0.160 0.120 0.094 0.082 0.068 0.059 0.048 0.042 0.037 0.035 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.035 0.038

35.850 24.000 7.961 14.840 8.172 4.999 2.299 1.273 0.470 0.260 0.140 0.104 0.088 0.077 0.065 0.057 0.046 0.041 0.036 0.034 0.033 0.033 0.034 0.034 0.037

7.1 5.0 7.6 2.4 4.2 3.8 8.3 7.1 8.5 10.4 12.5 13.3 6.6 5.1 3.7 3.2 2.3 3.1 1.6 1.9 1.2 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.2

44.563 20.897 6.716 14.723 8.146 5.126 2.356 1.313 0.500 0.280 0.150 0.111 0.093 0.080 0.067 0.059 0.047 0.042 0.038 0.034 0.034 0.033 0.034 0.035 0.037

42.090 19.060 6.170 14.310 7.886 4.828 2.224 1.234 0.459 0.255 0.139 0.104 0.087 0.077 0.065 0.058 0.047 0.041 0.036 0.034 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.034 0.037

5.5 8.8 8.1 2.8 3.2 5.8 5.6 6.0 8.2 8.9 7.3 6.1 6.1 3.6 3.3 2.6 1.1 2.4 4.3 0.5 3.0 0.9 1.1 2.3 0.8

E (MeV)

TEO4 MCNPX

XCOM

RD

TEO5 MCNPX

XCOM

RD

TEO6 MCNPX

XCOM

RD

0.015 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 1 1.5 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 15

44.771 21.523 6.826 17.796 9.856 6.127 2.815 1.564 0.586 0.317 0.160 0.120 0.095 0.084 0.068 0.060 0.047 0.043 0.037 0.036 0.035 0.035 0.036 0.036 0.039

42.000 19.010 6.175 17.030 9.418 5.771 2.655 1.465 0.531 0.286 0.148 0.107 0.089 0.078 0.065 0.057 0.046 0.041 0.036 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.036 0.039

6.2 11.7 9.5 4.3 4.4 5.8 5.7 6.3 9.4 9.7 7.6 10.4 6.2 6.9 3.8 4.4 3.0 5.2 3.8 4.7 2.7 3.1 3.6 2.3 0.7

44.855 21.754 7.126 14.986 8.366 5.156 2.433 1.476 0.551 0.313 0.160 0.116 0.096 0.082 0.069 0.060 0.048 0.042 0.037 0.035 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.035 0.038

41.640 19.880 6.496 14.520 8.012 4.908 2.262 1.378 0.509 0.279 0.147 0.108 0.089 0.079 0.066 0.058 0.047 0.041 0.036 0.034 0.033 0.033 0.034 0.034 0.037

7.2 8.6 8.8 3.1 4.2 4.8 7.0 6.7 7.7 11.0 8.0 7.0 6.6 4.6 4.2 3.1 2.7 2.2 1.6 2.6 1.0 1.4 0.8 0.5 1.0

72.652 41.570 15.699 14.126 7.966 4.964 3.399 2.801 1.141 0.537 0.246 0.161 0.122 0.100 0.076 0.064 0.050 0.044 0.039 0.037 0.037 0.038 0.038 0.041 0.044

69.100 39.040 13.200 13.490 7.432 4.556 3.187 2.660 0.957 0.488 0.219 0.142 0.109 0.091 0.072 0.061 0.048 0.043 0.038 0.037 0.036 0.037 0.038 0.039 0.043

4.9 6.1 15.9 4.5 6.7 8.2 6.2 5.0 16.1 9.1 11.2 11.9 10.8 9.1 6.1 3.8 3.8 2.3 3.6 2.2 1.9 2.6 0.5 2.9 1.3

RD =

(MCNPX XCOM) MCNPX

× 100 .

applications is increasing rapidly [11–16]. Therefore, evaluation of different chemical combinations would be very useful for the glass literature. It is to be noted that, outcomes of the present investigation can help to understand more clearly the tellurium oxide role and the impact on nuclear shielding performance of investigated glass systems. On the

x) σabs-neutron absorption parameters / absorption neutron scattering cross section xi) Safe factor and relative dose distribution (RDD) The importance of different glass materials in radiation shielding

3

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids xxx (xxxx) xxxx

H.O. Tekin, et al.

during the run time of MCNPX and the names of variance reduction techniques will be explained with their technical details. 2.1. Experimental procedure Samples prepared high purity reagents (99.999%) from Sigma Aldrich were synthesized with the well-known melt-quenching technique. The glasses were produced using different compositions as follows (in wt%): (85TeO2-15ZnO, 85.00TeO2-12.95ZnO-2.05Al2O3, 85.40TeO2–3.20PbO6.97ZnO-4.43Na2O, 83.5TeO2-16.5BaO, 82.77TeO2–17.23Nb2O5, 54.6TeO2-22.6WO3-22.8Bi2O3). The general appearance of produced glasses can be seen in Fig. 1. Using a high purity platinum crucible (99.99%), the melting of the reagents was performed at 750–1050 °C, for 1 h; then a preheated brass mold was used to quench the melt to perform the annealing, at 250–400 °C for 120 min. This procedure is relevant to reduce the internal stress in order to avoid the creation of internal stress. Finally the samples are cut and polished to be characterized. The density of the samples was measured using a pycnometer and the results are below i) ii) iii) iv) v) vi)

Fig 3. The variation of mass attenuation coefficients of produced glass samples.

other hand, outcomes of this extended research would be useful for future applications of similar glass compositions for shielding aims.

85TeO2-15ZnO ρ = 4905 g/cm3 85.00TeO2-12.95ZnO-2.05Al2O3 ρ = 5.105 g/cm3 85.40TeO2–3.20PbO-6.97ZnO-4.43Na2O ρ =5.469 g/cm3 83.5TeO2-16.5BaO ρ = 5.394 g/cm3 82.77TeO2–17.23Nb2O5 ρ =5.088 g/cm3 54.6TeO2-22.6WO3-22.8Bi2O3 ρ = 6.381 g/cm3

2. Materials and methods

2.2. Monte Carlo simulations

In the Materials and Methods section, we shall explain the considered simulation techniques as well as the methodology for the determination of the investigated shielding parameters of six different glasses based on tellurium oxide. The theoretical basis of radiation shielding parameters as well as technical particulars of MCNPX simulations will be discussed, asunder. Moreover, calculation methods

A numerical approach such as Monte Carlo method basically allows the researchers to simulate the radiation transport process through the matter for better understanding of input parameters and outcomes. The most important issue here is the potential utilities of Monte Carlo simulations. Pre-decision methods are needed to avoid time waste and provide the optimization of economic conditions mainly during the

Fig 4. The variation of mass attenuation coefficients of each glass sample. 4

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids xxx (xxxx) xxxx

H.O. Tekin, et al.

Fig. 5. The correlation between the obtained results from MCNPX and XCOM. Fig 7. The variation of TVL values of produced glasses.

Fig 6. The variation of HVL values of produced glasses. Fig 8. The variation of MFP values of produced glasses.

preparation of some special experimental studies that are highly difficult to perform. The Monte Carlo simulation technique is used for various types of scientific applications such as physics, material sciences and manufacturing. In particular, we shall explain the utilization of Monte Carlo simulation for nuclear shielding applications of ionizing radiation which should be considered as a sub-filed under the umbrella of nuclear physics. Several Monte Carlo codes have been used recently for different purposes in the literature viewing the shielding performance analysis of shielding materials for medical radiation fields, nuclear facilities as well as industrial radiation applications [17–21]. Among several Monte Carlo codes available in the literature, MCNPX

have gained the attention of researchers for the investigation of predecided materials of radiation facilities in the middle energy gammaray region [22–30]. The obtained outcomes from an MCNPX simulation highlights the possible outcomes yet the preparation of simulation environment in the input file requires a process considering the input hierarchy. We shall clarify the technical particulars of simulation setup of MCNPX and will present the 3 dimension (3D) display of modeled setup in the visualization editor of MCNPX entitled MCNPX Visual Editor Version X_22S. The specification of the investigated glasses

5

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids xxx (xxxx) xxxx

H.O. Tekin, et al.

detect the attenuated gamma-rays from glass specimen, F4 tally mesh of MCNPX has been utilized inside of the modeled detector. In the present study, D00205ALLCP03 MCNPXDATA package is comprised of DLC200/MCNPDATA have been considered as nuclear cross-section libraries. Finally, it is worth mentioning that some variance reduction techniques such as energy cut-off and optimum size of simulation mother volume have been defined in input file. In order to avoid the unnecessary particle tracking, we have specified the value of the energy cut-off as 1 keV. It means that no photon tracking has been done below 1 keV. The reason for applying these variance reduction methods is to minimize the amount of possible statistical errors as well as to maximize the efficiency of computer hardware features. 2.3. Nuclear radiation shielding properties This research paper has focused not only the fabrication of different types of tellurium oxide glasses but also on the characterization of their attenuation performances against nuclear radiation. In this section, we shall explain the chronological order and general information about investigated large-scale nuclear shielding parameters. The obtained values for mass attenuation coefficients (μ/ρ) of fabricated glasses were utilized to determine half value layer (HVL) and tenth value layer (TVL). Those two parameters are related to the thickness of the attenuator shielding material and determine the quality of the shielding properties of the given material [22]. On the other hand, another shielding parameter namely mean free path (MFP) can be obtained from linear attenuation coefficient (μ) of investigated shielding material MFP and show us the average distance between two consecutive collusion taken place in the interaction between energy and matter [24]. Another parameters whose results will be shown in the present study are Energy Absorption Build-up Factor (EABF) and Exposure Build-up Factor (EBF). They are identical parameters and determine uncollided/ unscattered photons ratio. G-P fitting approximation method is one of the methods used to calculate both EABF and EBF, which is an interpolation approach that uses the equivalent atomic number (Zeq) [32]. A parameter that refers to the composition of the material is the Effective atomic number (Zeff) that comes from the weight of the constituent atoms of the material and principally shows us the response of the material against the passing through energy particles [26]. Next parameter that has been considered as a shielding property for fast neutrons is effective removal cross-section, ΣR (cm2/g). This parameter is used to qualify the fast neutrons attenuation in glass samples and obtained by adding the individual mass removal cross-section of their components [27]. By using SRIM code, a Monte Carlo approach has been utilized for determination of proton projected range (PPR), proton mass stopping power (PMSP), Alpha projected range (APR), alpha mass stopping power (AMSP) of all the fabricated tellurium oxide glasses. The mass stopping power of a material is expressed by the rate of stopping power and its density (ρ). The mass stopping power is not substantially different for materials with an identical atomic composition. The expression “range” for charged particles means the distance at which particles move before resting. The “range” depends on the particle type, the structure of the material and the energy of the particle [29]. In addition to calculate effective removal cross section values of fabricated glasses,

Fig 9. Zeff values of produced glasses with various TeO2 concentration as function of the energy.

Fig 10. The variation of calculated effective removal cross-section (ΣR) values.

encoded TEO1, TEO2, TEO3, TEO4, TEO5 and TEO6 has been done in the material definition section (Mn) of MCNPX input file. Table 1. presents the chemical compositions of TEO1, TEO2, TEO3, TEO4, TEO5 and TEO6 glasses. Next, a-point-isotropic gamma-ray source has been determined on the −50 cm of z axis. Also, a (Pb) collimator was employed for prime gamma-rays from the defined isotropic point source. The defined glasses have been located at the origin (0,0,0) of simulation setup, respectively. This means that the distance between source and attenuator glass specimen has been set as 50 cm. At last, a 3 × 3 inch NaI(Tl) scintillation detection has been defined [31] in the Pb shield to record the attenuated secondary gamma-rays from the investigated glass sample. The general appearance of the simulation setup (2D and 3D) with used simulation equipment can be seen in Fig. 2a and b. To

6

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids xxx (xxxx) xxxx

H.O. Tekin, et al.

Fig 11. The variation of PMSP and AMSP values vis-a-vis kinetic energy.

neutron absorption parameters (absorption neutron scattering cross section (σabs)) are also investigated [30]. Finally, Safe factor and relative dose distribution (RDD) are determined for TEO1, TEO2, TEO3, TEO4, TEO5 and TEO6 glasses. At x (cm), the radioactive source emits a monoenergetic photon, the specific absorbed fraction of the energy (SAFE) can be computed as the following [33]:

SAFE =

3. Results and discussion Table 1. lists the weight fractions (in wt%) and densities of the six different produced glass samples. By using MCNPX simulation code and XCOM program, we have calculated μm values at the energy range between 0.015 to 15 MeV. Table 2. shows the data derived from XCOM and MCNPX simulation code and their relative deviations (RD). Fig. 3–4. plots the results that shows the change in the μm values as the applied energy varies and the composition of the material alters. From Fig. 4, it can be observed that the μm values decline as the energy rises to 15 Mev. At 0.04 MeV, a sudden peak is recorded owing to K X-ray absorption edge of tellurium (Te) element. From Fig. 4, we can also notice that the MCNPX and XCOM data are similar to each other, which indicates that MCNPX simulation is valid for calculating μm values of

µen exp(µx )(EABF ) 4 x2

where, μen and ρ are the linear absorption coefficient and density of glass sample, respectively.

7

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids xxx (xxxx) xxxx

H.O. Tekin, et al.

Fig 12. The change of EBF values for TEO1-TEO2-TEO3-TEO4-TEO5 and TEO6 glasses.

the studied glass. This situation can also be seen in Fig. 5, which clearly indicates the correlation between the obtained results from MCNPX and XCOM. Vis-à-vis energy, the μm values of the glasses fundamentally depend on the interaction between energy and matter. The interaction of the energy with the material can be divided in three steps depending on the energy level: at low energy photoelectric effect, at intermediate

energy region Compton scattering and at high energy pair production. The HVL-TVL and MFP parameters are often used to assess the shielding quality of any materials. The results of these parameters are shown in Figs. 6–8 for all the investigated glasses. As it is known, higher HVL-TVL and MFP values refers to thicker glass utilized to attenuate gamma ray photons. Therefore, lower values of the HVL-TVL and MFP

8

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids xxx (xxxx) xxxx

H.O. Tekin, et al.

affected the mass attenuation behaviour of the glass samples and increased the shielding performance against gamma-ray. In the another study, Sharma et al., [36] have focused on gamma shielding performance of TeO2-WO3-GeO2 glassy system. Their results also showed that TeWGe5 sample with the highest amount of TeO2 has a superior shielding performance against to gamma radiation. Fig. 9 shows the estimated Zeff values of the produced glasses with various TeO2 concentration as function of the energy. It can be argued that Zeff values rise as the energy changes from 0.015 MeV to 15 MeV. Considering the different chemical composition presented in Table 1. we notice that the Zeff of TEO6 is much higher than the rest of the other samples, while TEO1 possess the minimum Zeff value From this figure, it can be clearly seen that the TEO6 has the best performance in terms of shielding purposes when compared with the other glass samples. Similar relationship between the Zeff and TeO2 content has been investigated by Sayyed et.al., [37]. They found that Zeff values increase as the TeO2 concentration enhances. The results of the effective removal cross-section (ΣR) are presented in Fig. 10 and TeO6 glass is the one with the maximum ΣR value. So there exists almost a linear relationship between ΣR value and the TeO2 concentration increase Meanwhile, minor variations in the ΣR values stemming from densities of the glass samples are recorded. This can be due to variation of low Z elements in the fabricated glass samples. The proton and alpha mass stopping power (PMSP and AMSP) and projected range values of TEO1, TEO2, TEO3, TEO4, TEO5 and TEO6 glasses were computed via the SRIM code [37] and their results are presented in Fig. 12 as function of the kinetic energy. From the Fig. 11a–c, we observe that as the kinetic energy rises to its highest value of 0.1 MeV, PMSP and AMSP values surge, and if the kinetic energy values rise more, the PMSP and AMSP values decline. Moreover, Fig. 11a–c displays that PMSP and AMSP values decline while TeO2 concentration decreases and that the minimum values of PMSP and AMSP parameters are observed for TEO6 glass in the kinetic energy range of 0.015–15 MeV. This can be attributed to the fact that TEO6 glass exhibits the maximum density (6.381 g/cm3) and to the Bi element that has one of the highest atomic number (Bi=82) when compared to those of the other elements of the different glasses. Fig 12b–d also presents the results of the alpha projected range (APR) and the proton projected range (PPR) between the 0.015–15MeV energy region for TEO1, TEO2, TEO3, TEO4-TEO5 and TeO6 glasses are computed. It can clearly be seen that during deceleration to rest, a charged particle will permeate. The APR and PPR parameters refer to the mean value of the depth at which that deceleration occurs. The lowest values of the APR and PPR are considerable for having a better attenuator. Fig. 11b–d shows that the TEO6 has the lowest ARP and PPR values. Finally, these results suggest that the TEO6 glass is an appropriate material in terms of gamma-ray and proton attenuation purposes. The existing literature also confirms [28,29] the finding of the changes in the densities and material properties in the similar energy region. Energy absorption buildup factor (EABF) and exposure buildup factor (EBF) are both important parameters to determine the radiation shielding. They are also employed to compute the photon scattering in irradiation materials. Fig. 12 shows the change of EBF values for TEO1, TEO2, TEO3, TEO4, TEO5 and TeO6 glasses provided in the energy levels up to 15 MeV by using G-P fitting approach in the penetration

Fig 13. The EABF end EBF at 15 mfp for the investigated glass samples.

parameters means the better shielding properties. Various attenuation effects of photons with Na, Al, Zn, Nb, Te, Ba, W, Pb and Bi with high Z (11,13,30, 41, 52, 56, 74,82 and 83, respectively) reduce HVL, TVL and MFP values. As Te concentration in glass decline the HVLs for photon energy increases. Besides, the HVL-TVL and MFP are listed in the following descending order of TEO1, TEO2, TEO3, TEO4, TEO5 and TEO6. Divina et.al., [34] have found that radiation shielding properties such as HVL and TVL of the glass samples have been developed by replacing B2O3 with TeO2 content. Furthermore, Elmahroug et.al, [35] have investigated the influence of tellurium oxide in Bi2O3 - V2O5 - TeO2 glassy system. Their results also showed that TeO2 concentration has directly

9

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids xxx (xxxx) xxxx

H.O. Tekin, et al.

Table 3 Equivalent atomic number (Zeq) and G-P exposure (EBF) and energy absorption (EABF) buildup factor coefficients of TEO1 glass sample. Energy (MeV)

Zeq

EBF B

c

a

Xk

d

EABF b

c

a

Xk

d

0.015 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 1 1.5 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 15

24.94 25.06 25.28 43.69 44.13 44.43 44.82 45.06 45.43 45.64 45.86 46.01 46.09 46.14 46.17 46.25 45.37 43.31 40.88 39.83 39.36 39.01 38.62 38.45 38.31

1.00 1.01 1.03 3.86 3.22 2.58 1.72 1.25 1.23 1.37 1.50 1.62 1.69 1.71 1.74 1.73 1.60 1.59 1.56 1.51 1.51 1.48 1.49 1.45 1.48

1.41 0.17 0.37 0.53 0.17 0.08 0.03 0.20 0.42 0.51 0.69 0.84 0.92 0.98 1.03 1.06 1.14 1.12 1.06 1.02 0.95 0.94 0.90 0.96 1.08

−0.46 0.56 0.19 0.09 −0.15 0.74 0.78 0.45 0.22 0.17 0.09 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.00 −0.01 −0.03 −0.02 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.07 0.05 0.04

5.83 11.32 27.43 24.04 13.33 13.48 14.79 13.77 14.21 14.45 14.36 14.16 14.19 13.98 14.06 13.43 10.30 12.70 12.79 13.30 13.53 13.70 14.00 14.14 14.24

0.32 −0.54 −0.30 −0.05 −0.03 −0.12 −0.22 −0.22 −0.12 −0.10 −0.05 −0.04 −0.03 −0.02 −0.02 −0.01 0.00 −0.01 −0.03 −0.04 −0.06 −0.07 −0.09 −0.07 −0.06

1.00 1.01 1.03 1.53 1.46 1.40 1.33 1.25 1.44 1.97 2.15 2.46 2.52 2.51 2.42 2.31 1.93 1.85 1.72 1.59 1.55 1.49 1.44 1.37 1.34

1.41 0.27 0.32 0.53 0.18 0.10 0.06 0.18 0.26 0.30 0.51 0.65 0.76 0.83 0.91 0.95 1.07 1.04 0.96 0.92 0.86 0.85 0.83 0.90 1.00

−0.46 0.31 0.25 0.10 −0.03 0.52 0.63 0.46 0.35 0.32 0.18 0.13 0.09 0.07 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.06

6.25 17.24 18.23 20.97 10.67 16.93 14.11 13.64 13.99 13.98 13.94 13.89 13.88 13.74 13.64 13.52 13.55 13.08 13.14 13.60 13.84 14.06 14.24 14.35 14.41

0.31 −0.28 −0.19 −0.04 0.02 −0.11 −0.23 −0.25 −0.19 −0.19 −0.11 −0.10 −0.08 −0.06 −0.05 −0.04 −0.02 −0.03 −0.05 −0.07 −0.09 −0.10 −0.11 −0.09 −0.08

Table 4 Equivalent atomic number (Zeq) and G-P exposure (EBF) and energy absorption (EABF) buildup factor coefficients of TEO2 glass sample. Energy (MeV) 0.015 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 1 1.5 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 15

Zeq

EBF b

c

a

Xk

d

EABF b

c

a

Xk

d

23.45 26.79 27.23 44.23 44.64 44.93 45.31 45.53 45.87 46.08 46.27 46.38 46.47 46.54 46.57 46.62 45.75 43.78 41.36 40.42 39.91 39.53 39.16 38.95 38.83

1.01 1.01 1.02 3.83 3.24 2.62 1.72 1.27 1.23 1.36 1.49 1.61 1.68 1.71 1.73 1.72 1.60 1.59 1.56 1.51 1.51 1.49 1.50 1.46 1.49

1.18 0.12 0.37 0.59 0.20 0.09 0.03 0.19 0.41 0.51 0.69 0.83 0.92 0.97 1.03 1.05 1.14 1.12 1.06 1.02 0.95 0.93 0.89 0.96 1.09

−0.33 0.66 0.20 0.09 −0.11 0.67 0.79 0.47 0.23 0.17 0.09 0.05 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 −0.03 −0.02 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.07 0.06 0.04

6.16 11.22 22.01 24.25 13.66 12.68 14.86 13.77 14.18 14.47 14.35 14.16 14.17 13.99 14.06 13.43 10.64 12.73 12.81 13.31 13.54 13.72 14.03 14.15 14.23

0.26 −0.74 −0.20 −0.06 −0.05 −0.11 −0.21 −0.23 −0.12 −0.10 −0.05 −0.04 −0.03 −0.02 −0.02 −0.01 0.00 −0.01 −0.03 −0.04 −0.06 −0.07 −0.09 −0.07 −0.06

1.01 1.01 1.02 1.54 1.47 1.42 1.34 1.26 1.44 1.93 2.13 2.44 2.50 2.50 2.41 2.30 1.93 1.85 1.72 1.59 1.55 1.49 1.44 1.37 1.35

1.18 0.25 0.34 0.60 0.21 0.11 0.06 0.17 0.25 0.29 0.50 0.64 0.76 0.82 0.91 0.95 1.06 1.03 0.96 0.92 0.86 0.84 0.82 0.89 1.00

−0.32 0.35 0.25 0.10 0.00 0.46 0.64 0.48 0.36 0.32 0.18 0.13 0.09 0.07 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.10 0.08 0.06

7.22 16.68 15.66 20.28 11.23 17.33 14.13 13.61 13.98 13.97 13.93 13.89 13.88 13.74 13.64 13.52 13.56 13.08 13.17 13.58 13.83 14.05 14.24 14.35 14.39

0.26 −0.35 −0.19 −0.04 0.00 −0.10 −0.23 −0.26 −0.20 −0.19 −0.11 −0.10 −0.08 −0.06 −0.05 −0.04 −0.02 −0.03 −0.06 −0.07 −0.09 −0.10 −0.11 −0.09 −0.08

depth of 1–5–10–20–40 mfp. At the low energy region, EBF is the lowest due to the photoelectric effect process whereas for the intermediary energy region, the EBF rises with increasing energy. That stems from the multiple scattering process in the Compton scattering effect. At

the higher energy region, the EBF values rise under the pair production effect. Additionally, quick increases were also recorded owing to Kabsorption edges of the high atomic number elements existing in glass samples. As it can be seen in Fig. 12, the EBF rises with the increase of

10

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids xxx (xxxx) xxxx

H.O. Tekin, et al.

Table 5 Equivalent atomic number (Zeq) and G-P exposure (EBF) and energy absorption (EABF) buildup factor coefficients of TEO3 glass sample. Energy (MeV) 0.015 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 1 1.5 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 15

Zeq

EBF b

c

a

Xk

d

EABF b

c

a

Xk

d

24.65 24.78 25.02 43.57 44.00 44.31 44.71 44.97 45.36 45.57 45.82 45.94 46.02 46.09 46.13 46.13 45.26 43.11 40.49 39.55 39.03 38.66 38.22 38.03 37.92

1.00 1.01 1.03 3.86 3.21 2.57 1.71 1.25 1.23 1.37 1.50 1.62 1.69 1.72 1.74 1.73 1.60 1.59 1.56 1.51 1.51 1.48 1.49 1.44 1.47

1.37 0.19 0.37 0.51 0.16 0.07 0.03 0.20 0.42 0.51 0.69 0.84 0.92 0.98 1.03 1.06 1.14 1.12 1.06 1.02 0.96 0.94 0.90 0.96 1.08

−0.44 0.54 0.20 0.09 −0.16 0.76 0.78 0.45 0.22 0.17 0.09 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.00 −0.01 −0.03 −0.02 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.07 0.05 0.04

5.89 11.30 26.72 23.99 13.25 13.67 14.78 13.77 14.21 14.44 14.36 14.16 14.19 13.98 14.06 13.43 10.20 12.69 12.78 13.29 13.52 13.69 13.98 14.13 14.25

0.31 −0.52 −0.29 −0.05 −0.02 −0.12 −0.22 −0.22 −0.12 −0.10 −0.05 −0.04 −0.03 −0.02 −0.02 −0.01 0.00 −0.01 −0.03 −0.04 −0.06 −0.07 −0.09 −0.07 −0.06

1.00 1.01 1.03 1.52 1.45 1.40 1.33 1.25 1.44 1.97 2.15 2.46 2.52 2.52 2.42 2.31 1.93 1.85 1.72 1.59 1.55 1.48 1.43 1.36 1.33

1.36 0.28 0.32 0.52 0.17 0.09 0.06 0.18 0.26 0.30 0.51 0.65 0.76 0.83 0.91 0.95 1.07 1.04 0.96 0.92 0.86 0.85 0.83 0.90 1.00

−0.43 0.31 0.25 0.10 −0.04 0.53 0.63 0.46 0.35 0.32 0.18 0.13 0.09 0.07 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.05 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.07 0.06

6.44 16.94 17.99 21.14 10.54 16.84 14.11 13.64 13.99 13.98 13.94 13.89 13.88 13.74 13.64 13.52 13.55 13.08 13.12 13.61 13.85 14.07 14.23 14.34 14.43

0.30 −0.27 −0.18 −0.04 0.03 −0.12 −0.23 −0.24 −0.19 −0.19 −0.11 −0.10 −0.08 −0.06 −0.05 −0.04 −0.02 −0.03 −0.05 −0.07 −0.09 −0.10 −0.11 −0.09 −0.08

Table 6 Equivalent atomic number (Zeq) and G-P exposure (EBF) and energy absorption (EABF) buildup factor coefficients of TEO4 glass sample. Energy (MeV) 0.015 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 1 1.5 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 15

Zeq

EBF b

c

a

Xk

d

EABF b

c

a

Xk

d

25.05 25.14 25.36 47.01 47.41 47.70 48.02 48.25 48.56 48.74 48.94 49.01 49.11 49.14 49.15 49.18 48.50 46.88 44.76 43.82 43.24 42.96 42.53 42.33 42.20

1.00 1.01 1.03 3.70 3.37 2.80 1.77 1.35 1.22 1.29 1.43 1.55 1.63 1.66 1.69 1.69 1.58 1.57 1.54 1.50 1.51 1.49 1.53 1.50 1.57

1.42 0.17 0.37 0.90 0.35 0.17 0.02 0.11 0.35 0.50 0.66 0.80 0.88 0.94 1.01 1.03 1.13 1.12 1.06 1.03 0.94 0.92 0.88 0.97 1.12

−0.47 0.56 0.19 0.09 0.10 0.28 0.80 0.61 0.26 0.17 0.10 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.00 −0.02 −0.02 0.00 0.02 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.06 0.03

5.80 11.33 27.65 25.28 15.33 8.38 15.21 13.78 14.03 14.57 14.26 14.14 14.09 14.01 14.08 13.43 13.05 12.92 12.89 13.38 13.61 13.83 14.15 14.21 14.15

0.32 −0.55 −0.30 −0.09 −0.15 −0.08 −0.18 −0.29 −0.14 −0.09 −0.05 −0.04 −0.03 −0.02 −0.02 −0.02 0.00 −0.01 −0.03 −0.04 −0.07 −0.08 −0.10 −0.08 −0.06

1.00 1.01 1.03 1.60 1.56 1.50 1.37 1.31 1.44 1.72 1.97 2.31 2.40 2.42 2.36 2.27 1.92 1.85 1.72 1.60 1.57 1.51 1.48 1.41 1.41

1.42 0.27 0.32 0.93 0.36 0.19 0.04 0.11 0.20 0.29 0.47 0.60 0.72 0.79 0.87 0.92 1.05 1.01 0.94 0.90 0.83 0.81 0.79 0.88 1.02

−0.47 0.31 0.25 0.09 0.15 0.16 0.70 0.59 0.40 0.32 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.08 0.05 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.09 0.06

6.19 17.32 18.30 16.82 14.13 19.48 14.19 13.49 13.90 13.94 13.85 13.87 13.87 13.73 13.63 13.50 13.63 13.10 13.23 13.55 13.80 14.01 14.29 14.35 14.27

0.32 −0.28 −0.19 −0.03 −0.13 −0.01 −0.23 −0.32 −0.22 −0.19 −0.11 −0.11 −0.08 −0.07 −0.05 −0.04 −0.02 −0.03 −0.06 −0.08 −0.10 −0.11 −0.12 −0.10 −0.08

the penetration depth for TEO1, TEO2, TEO3, TEO4, TEO5 and TeO6 glasses. Fig. 13 demonstrates the EABF end EBF values, at 15 mfp, for the investigated glass samples. We observe that they decline as the TeO2

concentration decreases and that TEO6 glass has the minimum EABF and EBF values in the energy region between 0.1 and 3 MeV. Tables 3–8 show the equivalent atomic number (Zeq) and EBF-EABF G-P fitting

11

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids xxx (xxxx) xxxx

H.O. Tekin, et al.

Table 7 Equivalent atomic number (Zeq) and G-P exposure (EBF) and energy absorption (EABF) buildup factor coefficients of TEO5 glass sample. Energy (MeV 0.015 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 1 1.5 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 15

Zeq

EBF b

c

a

Xk

d

EABF b

c

a

Xk

d

24.62 25.19 25.49 43.90 44.36 44.67 45.08 46.87 47.40 47.70 48.08 48.30 48.42 48.51 48.57 48.64 47.70 45.31 42.22 40.92 40.28 39.81 39.36 39.11 38.94

1.00 1.01 1.03 3.85 3.23 2.60 1.72 1.31 1.23 1.32 1.45 1.57 1.64 1.67 1.70 1.70 1.58 1.58 1.56 1.51 1.51 1.49 1.50 1.46 1.49

1.36 0.17 0.37 0.55 0.18 0.09 0.03 0.15 0.38 0.50 0.67 0.81 0.89 0.95 1.01 1.04 1.13 1.12 1.06 1.02 0.95 0.93 0.89 0.96 1.09

−0.43 0.57 0.19 0.09 −0.13 0.70 0.78 0.54 0.25 0.17 0.10 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.00 −0.02 −0.02 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.07 0.06 0.04

5.90 11.33 28.01 24.12 13.48 13.09 14.83 13.78 14.09 14.53 14.29 14.15 14.11 14.01 14.08 13.43 12.36 12.83 12.84 13.33 13.55 13.73 14.04 14.15 14.23

0.31 −0.55 −0.30 −0.06 −0.04 −0.12 −0.21 −0.26 −0.14 −0.09 −0.05 −0.04 −0.03 −0.02 −0.02 −0.02 0.00 −0.01 −0.03 −0.04 −0.07 −0.07 −0.09 −0.07 −0.06

1.00 1.01 1.03 1.53 1.46 1.41 1.34 1.28 1.44 1.80 2.02 2.34 2.43 2.44 2.37 2.28 1.92 1.85 1.72 1.60 1.56 1.49 1.45 1.38 1.35

1.36 0.27 0.32 0.56 0.19 0.11 0.06 0.14 0.22 0.29 0.48 0.61 0.73 0.80 0.88 0.93 1.05 1.02 0.96 0.91 0.85 0.84 0.82 0.89 1.00

−0.43 0.31 0.25 0.10 −0.02 0.49 0.64 0.54 0.38 0.32 0.19 0.14 0.10 0.08 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.08 0.06

6.46 17.38 18.43 20.71 10.93 17.12 14.12 13.55 13.93 13.95 13.87 13.88 13.88 13.74 13.63 13.51 13.61 13.09 13.21 13.56 13.82 14.04 14.25 14.35 14.39

0.30 −0.28 −0.19 −0.04 0.01 −0.10 −0.23 −0.29 −0.21 −0.19 −0.11 −0.10 −0.08 −0.07 −0.05 −0.04 −0.02 −0.03 −0.06 −0.07 −0.10 −0.10 −0.11 −0.09 −0.08

Table 8 Equivalent atomic number (Zeq) and G-P exposure (EBF) and energy absorption (EABF) buildup factor coefficients of TEO6 glass sample. Energy (MeV) 0.015 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 1 1.5 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 15

Zeq

EBF B

c

A

Xk

d

EABF B

c

A

Xk

d

30.18 32.57 33.01 43.88 44.19 44.44 51.73 60.17 61.11 61.66 62.31 62.69 62.98 63.11 63.32 63.41 62.62 60.58 56.51 54.37 53.07 52.35 51.43 50.91 50.46

1.00 1.49 1.94 3.85 3.22 2.58 1.87 1.54 1.20 1.17 1.25 1.34 1.41 1.45 1.51 1.53 1.50 1.52 1.54 1.50 1.54 1.54 1.59 1.56 1.63

1.86 0.71 0.62 0.55 0.17 0.08 0.07 0.13 0.18 0.41 0.55 0.68 0.75 0.81 0.88 0.93 1.03 1.04 1.01 0.99 0.93 0.92 0.92 1.04 1.21

−0.25 0.53 0.17 0.09 −0.14 0.74 0.57 0.35 0.43 0.22 0.14 0.10 0.07 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.06 0.06 0.08 0.05 0.02

11.31 11.57 19.05 24.11 13.37 13.46 15.69 16.73 13.79 14.19 13.82 14.21 14.14 13.76 13.69 13.50 13.94 13.12 13.36 13.63 13.81 14.01 14.16 14.16 13.89

0.21 −0.73 −0.11 −0.06 −0.03 −0.12 −0.10 −0.06 −0.24 −0.12 −0.07 −0.05 −0.04 −0.04 −0.03 −0.02 −0.02 −0.02 −0.04 −0.06 −0.08 −0.09 −0.09 −0.07 −0.06

1.00 1.08 1.19 1.53 1.46 1.41 1.45 1.54 1.45 1.50 1.69 1.92 2.03 2.00 2.08 2.08 1.92 1.93 1.90 1.72 1.69 1.62 1.57 1.48 1.45

1.86 0.80 0.63 0.56 0.18 0.10 0.08 0.13 0.08 0.17 0.30 0.42 0.53 0.62 0.72 0.78 0.90 0.87 0.81 0.81 0.77 0.77 0.80 0.92 1.09

−0.25 0.31 0.20 0.10 −0.03 0.51 0.53 0.34 0.63 0.46 0.31 0.23 0.18 0.13 0.10 0.08 0.04 0.06 0.09 0.09 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.06

11.52 14.35 17.12 20.74 10.74 16.94 14.21 16.18 13.91 13.79 13.40 13.79 13.85 13.67 13.60 13.51 13.65 13.35 13.48 13.77 13.99 14.16 14.33 14.26 14.07

0.22 −0.35 −0.16 −0.04 0.02 −0.11 −0.15 −0.06 −0.30 −0.25 −0.17 −0.15 −0.12 −0.09 −0.07 −0.07 −0.05 −0.07 −0.11 −0.11 −0.13 −0.14 −0.13 −0.11 −0.09

coefficients for TEO1, TEO2, TEO3, TEO4, TEO5 and TEO6 glasses. Up to 40 mfp, the computed Safe (g−1) in glass samples is processed at selected energy range and interacting thickness of 0.001, 0.005, 0.01,

0.05, 0.1, 0.5 and 1 cm, respectively. The variation of Safe in TEO1 glass sample (an example) at 1, 5, 10, 20 and 40 (mfp) and x = 0.001 cm is given in Fig. 14 where we observe that the Safe values rise up to the

12

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids xxx (xxxx) xxxx

H.O. Tekin, et al.

Fig 15. The variation of Safe values with penetration depth. Fig 14. The variation of Safe in TEO1 glass sample (as an example).

highest level and then decline. The highest value of Safe is at the energy where the glass structure effect both the PE (photoelectric effect) interaction coefficients and the CS (compton scattering) interaction coefficients. The change in the Safe with respect to photon energy derives from the dominance of both PE and PP (pair production) at the low and high photon energy regions [38,39,40], respectively. The PP becomes the dominant process in the low energy region. Therefore, SAFE values are low. At medium energies, CS becomes the dominating processes surpassing the PE. It stems from the multiple CS events rising the Safe to its highest level. At the high energy region, PP grows into dominating yielding lower Safe values. Fig. 15 lists the variation of Safe values with penetration depth. The Safe values, for all glass samples, rise with increasing penetration depth. As the penetration depth increases, the scattering in the absorbing glass rises as well as the yielding for larger Safe values. The Fig 15. shows the change in the Safe values with the thickness of the glass samples (x) at 25 mfp and energy of 1 MeV. The SAFE values decline as the thickness of the interacting glasses increases. Fig. 16 demonstrates neutron absorption parameters (absorption neutron scattering cross section (σabs)) in the glass samples comparatively. As it can be seen in this figure, the values of σabs rise with the decrease of the TeO2 values. The materials with the maximum neutron absorption parameters (σabs) are known as suitable for neutron shielding. In this context it is the TEO6 sample that has the largest neutron absorption parameter Figs. 17 depicts the variance of the relative dose distribution (RDD) in TEO1 glass sample at penetration depth of 5, 6, 7 and 8 mfp for various incident energies up to 15 MeV and for various distances up to 2 cm. Then we notice that RDD rises up to its highest levels depending on the penetration depth and the chemical structure of the sample. The RDD values decline swiftly with the increasing energy up to 6 MeV. Moreover, the energy level rises cause a decline in RDD values. Fig. 18 records the variation of the relative dose distribution (RDD) as function of the distance (x), at 10 mfp and 0.4 MeV, for TeO1, TeO2,

Fig 16. Neutron absorption parameters (absorption neutron scattering cross section (σabs)) in the glass samples.

TeO3, TeO4, TeO5 and TEO6. The RDD values decline as the distance increase (up 2 cm). Evaluation of RDD around point gamma ray emitters is useful in clinical dosimetry. The variation of the relative dose distribution for TEO1 and TEO6 glasses for various incident energies up to 15 MeV and for various distances up to 0.1 cm can also be seen in Tables 9 and 10, respectively. 4. Conclusion In this study, we have developed new glasses using different compositions based on tellurium oxide in order to study their potential to be used as shielding for gamma and neutron radiation. The outcomes showed that, the use of TeO2 for the development of nuclear shielding performance provides a direct contribution. On the other hand, previous studies in the literature have showed that contribution of TeO2 is significant in different glassy systems. Therefore, it can be concluded that, the impact of the TeO2 additive for glassy systems is still an

13

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids xxx (xxxx) xxxx

H.O. Tekin, et al.

Fig 17. The variance of relative dose distribution in TEO1 glass sample at penetration depth of 5, 6, 7 and 8 mfp for various incident energies up to 15 MeV.

due to its highest density and composition with elements with high atomic number such as Bi and W. On the other hand, further investigations for determination of another vital parameter such as material characterization, elastic properties and durability could be done in the future for better understanding of the glasses applications.

important issue for material sciences and nuclear sciences. Thus, it is worth recommending the continuous investigations on chemical combinations and changes of TeO2 concentration for future applications of tellurium oxide glasses in industrial and medical radiation facilities. The present results shows that the TEO6 has the best performance in terms of nuclear shielding purposes among the fabricated glass sample

14

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids xxx (xxxx) xxxx

H.O. Tekin, et al.

Table 10 Relative dose distribution (Rdd) in TEO6 glass at penetration depth of 40 mfp for various incident energies up to 15 MeV and for various distances up to 0.1 cm.

Fig 18. The variations of the relative dose distribution (RDD) as a function of the distance (x), at 10 mfp and 0.4 MeV, for TEO1-TEO2-TEO3-TEO4-TEO5 and TEO6. Table 9 Relative dose distribution (Rdd) in TEO1 glass at penetration depth of 40 mfp for various incident energies up to 15 MeV and for various distances up to 0.1 cm. E (MeV)

Distance (cm) 0.001 0.005

0.01

0.05

0.1

0.015 0.020 0.030 0.040 0.050 0.060 0.080 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600 0.800 1.000 1.500 2.000 3.000 4.000 5.000 6.000 8.000 10.000 15.000

8.2E + 05 9.8E + 05 1.1E + 06 1.0E + 07 3.3E + 06 4.9E + 08 2.0E + 06 3.0E + 06 2.5E + 06 4.0E + 06 8.0E + 06 1.9E + 07 3.1E + 07 3.8E + 07 4.8E + 07 5.0E + 07 5.5E + 07 5.5E + 07 5.3E + 07 5.6E + 07 6.7E + 07 8.2E + 07 1.6E + 08 3.4E + 08 3.4E + 09

1.2E + 03 4.1E + 03 8.1E + 03 5.5E + 04 2.3E + 04 4.0E + 06 1.8E + 04 2.8E + 04 2.4E + 04 4.0E + 04 8.0E + 04 1.9E + 05 3.1E + 05 3.7E + 05 4.8E + 05 5.0E + 05 5.5E + 05 5.4E + 05 5.3E + 05 5.6E + 05 6.7E + 05 8.2E + 05 1.6E + 06 3.4E + 06 3.4E + 07

9.8E − 03 3.5E + 00 9.3E + 01 1.3E + 02 1.9E + 02 6.1E + 04 4.7E + 02 8.8E + 02 8.8E + 02 1.5E + 03 3.1E + 03 7.4E + 03 1.2E + 04 1.5E + 04 1.9E + 04 2.0E + 04 2.2E + 04 2.2E + 04 2.1E + 04 2.2E + 04 2.6E + 04 3.3E + 04 6.3E + 04 1.4E + 05 1.3E + 06

6.0E − 08 7.1E − 03 4.9E + 00 9.6E − 01 6.9E + 00 4.7E + 03 6.8E + 01 1.6E + 02 2.0E + 02 3.6E + 02 7.5E + 02 1.8E + 03 3.0E + 03 3.6E + 03 4.6E + 03 4.9E + 03 5.4E + 03 5.3E + 03 5.2E + 03 5.5E + 03 6.6E + 03 8.1E + 03 1.6E + 04 3.4E + 04 3.3E + 05

1.4E + 04 2.7E + 04 3.8E + 04 3.1E + 05 1.1E + 05 1.8E + 07 7.7E + 04 1.2E + 05 9.7E + 04 1.6E + 05 3.2E + 05 7.6E + 05 1.3E + 06 1.5E + 06 1.9E + 06 2.0E + 06 2.2E + 06 2.2E + 06 2.1E + 06 2.3E + 06 2.7E + 06 3.3E + 06 6.3E + 06 1.4E + 07 1.4E + 08

E (MeV)

Distance (cm) 0.001 0.005

0.01

0.05

0.1

0.015 0.020 0.030 0.040 0.050 0.060 0.080 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600 0.800 1.000 1.500 2.000 3.000 4.000 5.000 6.000 8.000 10.000 15.000

6.6E + 05 3.2E + 30 3.7E + 08 1.1E + 07 3.2E + 06 4.6E + 08 2.6E + 06 1.9E + 06 1.6E + 06 1.9E + 06 2.9E + 06 5.2E + 06 8.2E + 06 1.1E + 07 1.5E + 07 2.0E + 07 3.2E + 07 4.1E + 07 5.7E + 07 7.8E + 07 1.2E + 08 1.9E + 08 6.9E + 08 2.2E + 09 4.9E + 10

1.2E + 02 3.4E + 27 1.7E + 06 5.2E + 04 2.1E + 04 3.5E + 06 2.2E + 04 1.7E + 04 1.5E + 04 1.9E + 04 2.9E + 04 5.2E + 04 8.1E + 04 1.0E + 05 1.5E + 05 2.0E + 05 3.2E + 05 4.0E + 05 5.6E + 05 7.8E + 05 1.2E + 06 1.8E + 06 6.9E + 06 2.2E + 07 4.8E + 08

1.1E − 07 6.5E + 21 2.4E + 03 6.6E + 01 1.3E + 02 4.4E + 04 3.9E + 02 3.4E + 02 4.8E + 02 6.6E + 02 1.1E + 03 2.0E + 03 3.2E + 03 4.1E + 03 6.0E + 03 7.7E + 03 1.3E + 04 1.6E + 04 2.2E + 04 3.1E + 04 4.7E + 04 7.3E + 04 2.7E + 05 8.6E + 05 1.9E + 07

7.3E − 18 6.3E + 15 8.9E + 00 2.2E − 01 3.0E + 00 2.6E + 03 3.5E + 01 3.6E + 01 8.8E + 01 1.4E + 02 2.5E + 02 4.8E + 02 7.6E + 02 9.9E + 02 1.5E + 03 1.9E + 03 3.1E + 03 4.0E + 03 5.5E + 03 7.7E + 03 1.2E + 04 1.8E + 04 6.7E + 04 2.1E + 05 4.7E + 06

4.5E + 03 4.8E + 28 1.1E + 07 3.2E + 05 1.1E + 05 1.6E + 07 9.6E + 04 7.2E + 04 6.3E + 04 7.6E + 04 1.2E + 05 2.1E + 05 3.3E + 05 4.2E + 05 6.2E + 05 7.9E + 05 1.3E + 06 1.6E + 06 2.3E + 06 3.1E + 06 4.8E + 06 7.4E + 06 2.7E + 07 8.7E + 07 1.9E + 09

Acknowledgement This work was performed in the framework of the National Institute of Photonics (INCT de Fotônica, 465.763/2014) project supported by the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnológico (CNPq); we also thank the support from Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Ensino Superior(CAPES). References [1] L.R.P. Kassab, L.A. Gómez-Malagón, M.J. Valenzuela Bell, Tellurite glasses: solar cell, laser, and luminescent displays applications in: tellurite glass smart materials applications in optics and beyond, Edited By Raouf El-Mallawany (2018) 225–248 Chapter 10ISBN: 978-3-319-76567-9. [2] V.D. Del Cacho, D.M. da Silva, T.A.A. de Assumpção, L.R.P. Kassab, M.I. Alayo, E.G. Melo, Fabrication of Yb3+/Er3+ codoped Bi2O3–WO3–TeO2 pedestal type waveguide for optical amplifiers, Opt. Mater. (Amst) 38 (2014) 198–203, https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.optmat.2014.10.027. [3] L.M. Moreira, V. Anjos, M.J.V. Bell, C.A.R. Ramos, L.R.P. Kassab, D.J.L. Doualan, et al., The effects of Nd2 O3 concentration in the laser emission of TeO2 -ZnO glasses, Opt. Mater. 58 (2016) 84–88, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optmat.2016.05. 024. [4] M.J.V. Bell, V. Anjos, L.M. Moreira, R.F. Falci, L.R.P. Kassab, D.S. da Silva, et al., Laser emission of a Nd-doped mixed tellurite and zinc oxide glass, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B. 31 (2014) 1590, https://doi.org/10.1364/JOSAB.31.001590. [5] L. Bontempo, S.G. dos Santos Filho, L.R.P. Kassab, Conduction and reversible memory phenomena in Au-nanoparticles-incorporated TeO2–ZnO films, Thin. Solid Films 611 (2016) 21–26, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsf.2016.04.046. [6] T.A.A. de Assumpção, D.M. da Silva, M.E. Camilo, L.R.P. Kassab, A.S.L. Gomes, C.B. de Araújo, et al., Frequency upconversion properties of Tm3+ doped TeO2–ZnO glasses containing silver nanoparticles, J. Alloys Compd 536 (2012) S504–S506, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2011.12.078. [7] V.P.P. Campos, L.R.P. Kassab, T.A.A. Assumpção, D.S. da Silva, C.B. de Araujo, Infrared to visible emission in Er3+ doped TeO2-WO3–Bi2O3 glasses with silver nanoparticles, J. Appl. Phys. 112 (2012) 063519. [8] B.C. Lima, L.A. Gómez-Malagón, A.S.L. Gomes, J.A.M. Garcia, L.R.P. Kassab, Plasmon-Assisted efficiency enhancement of Eu3+-Doped tellurite glass-covered solar cells, J. Electron. Mater. 46 (2017) 6750–6755, https://doi.org/10.1007/

Declaration of Competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

15

Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids xxx (xxxx) xxxx

H.O. Tekin, et al. s11664-017-5744-x. [9] J.A.M. Garcia, L. Bontempo, L.A. Gomez-Malagon, L.R.P. Kassab, Efficiency boost in Si-based solar cells using tellurite glass cover layer doped with Eu 3+ and silver nanoparticles, Opt. Mater. (Amst) 88 (2019) 155–160 https://doi.org/10.1016/j. optmat.2018.11.028. [10] RSICC Computer Code Collection, MCNPX user's manual version 2.4.0. Monte Carlo N-Particle transport code system for multiple and high energy applications (2002). [11] V.V. Awasarmol, D.K. Gaikwad, S.D. Raut, P.P. Pawar, Gamma ray interaction studies of organic nonlinear optical materials in the energy range 122 keV–1330 keV, Results in Physics 7 (2017) 272–279 Pages https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp. 2016.12.017. [12] D.K. Gaikwad, M.I. Sayyed, S.N. Botewad, S.S. Obaid, Z.Y. Khattari, U.P. Gawai, F. Afaneh, M.D. Shirshat, P.P. Pawar, Physical, structural, optical investigation and shielding features of tungsten bismuth tellurite based glasses, J Non. Cryst. Solids 503–504 (2019) 158–168 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2018.09.038. [13] V.V. Awasarmol, D.K. Gaikwad, S.S. Obaid, P.P. Pawar, Gamma radiation studies on organic nonlinear optical materials in the energy range 122–1330 keV, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., India, Sect. A Phys. Sci. (2019), https://doi.org/10.1007/s40010-01900636-1. [14] I.S. Mahmoud, S.A.M. Issa, Y.B. Saddek, H.O. Tekin, O. Kilicoglu, T. Alharbi, M.I. Sayyed, T.T. Erguzel, R. Elsaman, Gamma, neutron shielding and mechanical parameters for vanadium lead vanadate glasses, Ceram Int 45 (1 August (Issue 11)) (2019) 14058–14072 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.04.105. [15] M. Almateri, O. Agar, E.E. Altunsoy, O. Kilicoglu, M.I. Sayyed, H.O. Tekin, Photon and neutron shielding characteristics of samarium doped lead alumino borate glasses containing barium, lithium and zinc oxides determined at medical diagnostic energies, Results in Phys. 12 (2019) 2123–2128 https://doi.org/10.1016/j. rinp.2019.01.094. [16] Shams A.M. Issa, H.O. Tekin, T.T. Erguzel, G. Susoy, The effective contribution of PbO on nuclear shielding properties of xPbO-(100 − x)P2O5 glass system: a broad range investigation, Appl. Phys. A 125 (2019) 640 https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00339-019-2941-x. [17] Asghar Mesbahi, Hosein Ghiasi, Shielding properties of the ordinary concrete loaded with micro- and nano-particles against neutron and gamma radiations, Appl. Radiat. Isot. 136 (2018) 27–31 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2018.02.004. [18] A. Mesbahi, A.-A. Azarpeyvand, A. Shirazi, Photoneutron production and backscattering in high density concretes used for radiation therapy shielding, Ann. Nucl. Energy 38 (2011) 2752–2756 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2011.08.023. [19] Khatibeh Verdipoor, Abdolali Alemi, Asghar Mesbahi, Photon mass attenuation coefficients of a silicon resin loaded with WO3, PbO, and Bi2O3 micro and nanoparticles for radiation shielding, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 147 (2018) 85–90 https://doi. org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2018.02.017. [20] Shamsan S. Obaid, M.I. Sayyed, D.K. Gaikwad, H.O. Tekin, Y. Elmahroug, P.P. Pawar, Photon attenuation coefficients of different rock samples using MCNPX, Geant4 simulation codes and experimental results: a comparison study, Radiat. Eff. Defects Solids 173 (Issue) (2018) 11–12 https://doi.org/10.1080/10420150.2018. 1505890. [21] Ashok Kumar, D.K. Gaikwad, Shamsan S. Obaid, H.O. Tekin, O. Agar, M.I. Sayyed, Experimental studies and Monte Carlo simulations on gamma ray shielding competence of (30+x)PbO10WO3 10Na2O − 10MgO – (40-x)B2O3 glasses, Progress. Nucl. Energy 2 (May) (2019) 103047Available online https://doi.org/10.1016/j. pnucene.2019.103047. [22] H.O. Tekin, L.R.P. Kassab, Shams, A.M. Issa, C.D.S. Bordon, E.E. Altunsoy Guclu, G.R. da Silva Mattos, Ozge Kilicoglu, Synthesis and nuclear radiation shielding characterization of newly developed germanium oxide and bismuth oxide glasses, Ceram. Int. 22 (August) (2019) Available Online https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ceramint.2019.08.204. [23] Shams A.M. Issa, H.O. Tekin, T.T. Erguzel, G. Susoy, The effective contribution of PbO on nuclear shielding properties of xPbO-(100 − x)P2O5 glass system: a broad range investigation, Appl. Phys. A 125 (2019) 640 https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00339-019-2941-x. [24] Shams A.M. Issa, H.O. Tekin, The multiple characterization of gamma, neutron and

[25] [26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30] [31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

[36] [37] [38] [39] [40]

16

proton shielding performances ofxPbO-(99-x)B2O3–Sm2O3 glass system, Ceram. Int. 7 (August) (2019) Available Online https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019. 08.065. H.O. Tekin, V.P. Singh, T. Manici, Effects of micro-sized and nano-sized WO3 on mass attenuation coefficients of concrete by using MCNPX code, Appl. Radiat. Isot. 121 (2017) 122–125 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2016.12.040. E. Kavaz, H.O. Tekin, N. Yildiz Yorgun, O.F. Ozdemir, M.I. Sayyed, Structural and nuclear radiation shielding properties of bauxite ore doped lithium borate glasses: experimental and Monte Carlo study, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 162 (2019) 187–193 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2019.05.019. H.O. Tekin, E. Kavaz, E.E. Altunsoy, M. Kamislioglu, O. Kilicoglu, O. Agar, M.I. Sayyed, N. Tarhan, Characterization of a broad range gamma-ray and neutron shielding properties of MgO-Al2O3-SIO2-B2O3 and Na2O-Al2O3-SiO2 glass systems, J. Non. Cryst. Solids 518 (2019) 92–102 https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jnoncrysol.2019.05.012. O. Kilicoglu, E.E. Altunsoy, O. Agar, M. Kamislioglu, M.I. Sayyed, H.O. Tekin, Nevzat Tarhan, Synergistic effect of La2O3 on mass stopping power (MSP)/projected range (PR) and nuclear radiation shielding abilities of silicate glasses, Results Phys. 14 (2019) 102424https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2019.102424. H.O. Tekin, E. Kavaz, A. Papachristodoulou, M. Kamislioglu, O. Agar, E.E. Altunsoy Guclu, O. Kilicoglu, M.I. Sayyed, Characterization of SiO2–PbO–CdO–Ga2O3 glasses for comprehensive nuclear shielding performance: alpha, proton, gamma, neutron radiation, Ceram Int 45 (2019) 19206–19222 https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ceramint.2019.06.168. H.O. Tekin, T. Manici, Simulations of mass attenuation coefficients for shielding materials using the MCNP-X code, Nucl. Sci. Tech. 28 (2017) 95, https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s41365-017-0253-4. H.O. Tekin, MCNP-X Monte Carlo code application for mass attenuation coefficients of concrete at different energies by modeling 3 × 3 inch NaI(Tl) detector and comparison with XCOM and Monte Carlo data, Sci. Technol. Nucl. Install. (2016) Article ID 6547318, 7 pages http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/6547318. H.O. Tekin, O. Kilicoglu, E. Kavaz, E.E. Altunsoy, M. Almatari, O. Agar, M.I. Sayyed, The investigation of gamma-ray and neutron shielding parameters of Na2O-CaOP2O5-SiO2 bioactive glasses using MCNPX code, Results Physi. 12 (2019) 1797–1804, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2019.02.017. H.C. Manjunatha, L. Seenappa, C. B.M, K.N. Sridhar, C. Hanumantharayappa, Gamma, X-ray and neutron shielding parameters for the Al-based glassy alloys, Appl. Radiat. Isot. 139 (2018) 187–194, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2018. 05.014. R. Divina, K. Marimuthu, M.I. Sayyed, H.O. Tekin, O. Agar, Physical, structural, and radiation shielding properties of B2O3–MgO–K2O–Sm2O3 glass network modified with TeO2, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 160 (2019) 75–82 https://doi.org/10.1016/j. radphyschem.2019.03.029. Y. Elmahroug, M. Almatari, M.I. Sayyed, M.G. Dong, H.O. Tekin, Investigation of radiation shielding properties for Bi2O3 - V2O5 - TeO2 glass system using MCNP5 code, J. Non. Cryst. Solids 499 (2018) 32–40 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnoncrysol. 2018.07.008. A. Sharma, M.I. Sayyed, O. Agar, H.O. Tekin, Simulation of shielding parameters for TeO2-WO3-GeO2 glasses using FLUKA code, Results Phys. 15 (March) (2019) Available Online https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2019.102199. H.O.T. Sayyed, O. Agar, Gamma photon and neutron attenuation properties of MgO–BaO–B2O3–TeO2–Cr2O3 glasses: the role of TeO2, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 163 (2019) 58–66 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2019.05.012. J.F. Ziegler, SRIM-2003, nuclear instruments and methods in physics research, Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms (2004), https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.nimb.2004.01.208. H.C. Manjunatha, B. Rudraswamy, Energy absorption build-up factors in teeth, J Radioanal Nucl. Chem. 294 (2012) 251–260, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-0111490-3. Shamsan S. Obaid, Dhammajyot K. Gaikwad, Pravina P. Pawar, Determination of gamma ray shielding parameters of rocks and concrete, Volume 144 (March 2018) 356–360 Pages https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2017.09.022.