The impact of Cr2O3 additive on nuclear radiation shielding properties of LiF–SrO–B2O3 glass system

Journal Pre-proof The impact of Cr2O3 additive on nuclear radiation shielding properties of LiF-SrO-B O glass system

2 3

G. Susoy, E.E. Altunsoy Guclu, Ozge Kilicoglu, M. Kamislioglu, M.S. Al-Buriahi, M.M. Abuzaid, H. O. Tekin PII:

S0254-0584(19)31293-3

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2019.122481

Reference:

MAC 122481

To appear in:

Materials Chemistry and Physics

Received Date:

01 October 2019

Accepted Date:

22 November 2019

Please cite this article as: G. Susoy, E.E. Altunsoy Guclu, Ozge Kilicoglu, M. Kamislioglu, M.S. AlBuriahi, M.M. Abuzaid, H.O. Tekin, The impact of Cr2O3 additive on nuclear radiation shielding properties of LiF-SrO-B2O3 glass system, Materials Chemistry and Physics (2019), https://doi.org /10.1016/j.matchemphys.2019.122481

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. © 2019 Published by Elsevier.

Journal Pre-proof

0,5

C0 C10 C15 C20 C25

0,456

MSP x 10 (MeV cm2/g)

0,4 0,452

0,3

0,06

0,08

0,10 0,0376

0,2

0,1

0,0374 8,00

8,01

8,02

8,03

8,04

Proton

0,0 0

2

4

6

Kinetic energy (MeV)

8

10

8,05

Journal Pre-proof The impact of Cr2O3 additive on nuclear radiation shielding properties of LiF-SrO-B2O3 glass system G. Susoy a, E.E. Altunsoy Guclu b,c, Ozge Kilicoglu c,d, M. Kamislioglu d, M.S. Al-Buriahi e, M.M. Abuzaid f , H. O. Tekin c,g* a Istanbul University, Faculty of Science, Department of Physics, Istanbul, Turkey b Uskudar University, Vocational School of Health Services, Medical Imaging Department, Istanbul, Turkey c Medical Radiation Research Center (USMERA), Uskudar University, Istanbul, Turkey d Uskudar University, Department of Nuclear Technology and Radiation Protection, Istanbul, Turkey e Sakarya University, Faculity of Science, Department of Physics, Sakarya, Turkey f Medical Diagnostic Imaging Department, College of Health Sciences, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, UAE g Department of Radiotherapy, Vocational School of Health Services, Uskudar University, Istanbul, Turkey

Corresponding author: [email protected] Abstract This study aimed to investigate the shielding performance of SrO-LiF-B2O3 glasses glass system for nuclear security applications. The MCNPX code (version 2.6.0) and GEANT4 are used to determine the shielding parameters and the dependence with the composition of each glass, as well as the influence of Cr2O3 additive. A wide-range of nuclear radiation shielding investigation for gamma-ray, proton particles, fast neutrons have been studied for five different types of glasses. The calculated values for mass attenuation coefficients (μm) were utilized to determine other vital shielding properties against gamma-ray radiation. Furthermore, 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 results showed that C25 glass with the highest Cr2O3 additive had a satisfactory capacity in nuclear radiation shielding.

Keywords: Cr2O3; Monte Carlo simulation; gamma shielding; neutron shielding; MCNPX

1

Journal Pre-proof 1. Introduction Radiation occurs from a certain source and then travels through an environment. The travel of radiation continues until its energy absorbed by matter. The term of absorber matter can be biological tissue or special shielding materials. On the other hand, ionizing radiation can have very dangerous consequences when interacting with living tissue. These damages cover a wide range of effects, from tissue necrosis to cell mutation. Hence, good quality protecting materials are needed to reduce the intensity of ionizing radiation to acceptable and safe level. The number of ionizing radiation facilities such as nuclear power plants, nuclear research laboratories, medical radiation facilities is rapidly increasing. This will cause to an increase in the amount of personnel exposed to radiation. When it comes to radiation protection, the ALARA (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) principle comes to mind, which means to guarantee the lowest possible dose is taken. Three basic principles can be applied to perform the ALARA principle. These principles can be listed as the shortest exposure time, the longest distance from the source and the optimum shielding material thickness [3,4]. Among the mentioned principles of ALARA, the term of shielding is the suitable protective barrier between the radiation source and the staff. The choice of the most suitable shielding material may vary depending on the type and energy of radiation. In this regards, materials made from high atomic number elements provide effective protection against X and gamma rays. [5]. Synthesis and structural investigations of different types of materials have been an important topic that scientists have focused on in recent years [6-11]. This materials should be able to absorb the radiation energy and prevent it from passing. The most traditional material used in diagnostic imaging facilites is lead (Pb) and lead-based composites. The heavy weight of these materials brings some negligence. In addition, the toxic effect of lead used in these materials and its fragile structure shortens the exposure time of the protective material. This bring along the cost and installation difficulties [12]. As an alternative to lead shielding 2

Journal Pre-proof materials used in many fields such as nuclear reactors, air industry and nuclear medicine, and to minimize all these disadvantages, studies are being carried out to produce another material that will make a sound in the world. The term of glass has been introduced as suitable shielding material against nuclear radiation. Unlike the lead based materials, glasses known as eco-friendly, durable and non-toxic materials. Among the different types of glasses, tellurite glasses have gained a significant attention due to their high density, high nonlinear optical properties, stable and durable structure which make them suitable glassy systems for various types of applications. The literature review showed that features of tellurite glasses have been investigated in terms of nuclear shielding applications [13,14]. The shielding performance of titanate-bismuth-borotellurite glasses studied by Lakshminarayana et al., by using energy region 0.015–10 MeV. According to their results, ability of the tellurite glass samples as shielding material is in the same efficiency level comparing to concretes [15]. Hopper et al., have introduced the use of Bismuth (Bi) shielding, and describe its efficiency in reducing the scatter radiation and protection of superficial organs [16,17]. Because it is suitable for bonding with oxygen, there are various combinations of boron-oxygen compounds. The general name of boron oxide compounds is borate. The value of boron mines is generally measured by the B2O3 (boron oxide) contained therein, and those with a high proportion of B2O3 compounds are considered more valuable. B2O3, the major oxide of boron, a perfect glass former that can be added as flux to different kinds of glass. Thus, materials with significant chemical and physical properties helpful for advanced technological and scientific practice can be obtained [18,19]. Borate glasses are the perfect glassy components for future applications in modern science and technology. On the other hand, alkaline and alkaline earth ions have an important role in affecting the boron chemistry. When the alkali fluorides and B2O3 are used together, the moisture resistance of the glasses increases. LiF, one of the most valuable stable compounds, is used in infrared spectrometers. It is the lowest

3

Journal Pre-proof compound with the refractive index among the commonly used infrared materials. It also has the highest ultraviolet transmission. They are used to record ionizing radiation using beta particles, gamma rays and neutrons in thermoluminescent type dosimeters. These LiF-B2O3 glasses are best used in solar exchangers, phosphors, laser materials and many other electronic components. Its natural occurrence increases its value one more time [20,21]. The desired modifications can be made by using borate glass samples with alkaline earth oxides inside them. The strontium is a good element for regulating the material. The durableness of the glass samples can be greatly increased by adding SrO with an appropriate ratio. SrO is an ideal regulator and saturates the glass by breaking the random matrix [22, 23]. Glasses combined with transition metal ions has attracted great attention due to their widespread use as memory, photoconductive tools and magnetic-cathode materials in batteries. Borate glass systems are the perfect sub-base supplies to combine with chromium ions. Chromium, one of the transition metals, behaves a paramagnetic structure. It makes them colorful when it enters the glasses. The application areas of glass containing chrome ions can be listed as high pressure calibrators, high-temperature sensors and solid-state lasers [24-26]. In the present investigation, the impact of Cr2O3 additive on nuclear radiation shielding properties of LiFSrO-B2O3 glass system was investigated. All the technical details and theoretical basis of present investigation will be explained in further sections of this paper. It is to be noted that the results of the present work may be practical for future applications of investigated glass types for nuclear radiation shielding purposes. Moreover, the results can help to understand more clearly the Cr2O3 role and the impact on the nuclear shielding performances of investigated C0, C10, C15, C20 and C25 glasses. Materials and Methods The chemical compositions as well as the densities of glass samples are shown in Table 1 [27]. Using these values, a broad-range of nuclear shielding parameters such as MAC (Mass 4

Journal Pre-proof Attenuation Coefficients), total electronic, atomic, molecular cross sections, Zeff (Effective Atomic Numbers), Nel-electron densities, alpha and proton (MSP) Mass Stopping Power, PR (Projected Range) of the stated glass samples were determined. In this work it is aimed to appoint the mass attenuation coefficients of glass samples by MCNPX code together with GEANT4 code. Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 shows the simulation setups of MCNPX and GEANT4 codes consisting of an isotropic radioactive source, a Pb collimator for the original radiation beams, a glass sample, Pb-blocks for protection from scattered photons, and a NaI (T1) [28] detector, respectively. The estimated values MCNPX and GEANT4 codes have compared with WinXCom data and good-agreement have found. In addition, EBF (Exposure Buildup Factors) and EABF (Energy Absorption Buildup Factors) have been determined with G-P fitting parameters. In this section, we shall explain the theoretical basis of investigated nuclear radiation shielding parameters. 2.1. Nuclear shielding parameters The μ/ρ (cm2/g), theoretical mass attenuation coefficients of SrO-LiF-B2O3 glasses were calculated by using the WinXCom, MCNPX and Geant4 codes (see Eq.1). [29]. 𝜇

() 𝜌

=

𝑔𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑠

𝜇

∑ 𝑤 (𝜌 )

(1)

𝑖

𝑖

𝑖

In Equation 1, 𝑤𝑖 and (𝜇/𝜌)𝑖 indicate the fraction by weight and mass attenuation coefficient of the elements which examined respectively. Effective atomic numbers can be calculated by using the next relation;

𝑍𝑒𝑓𝑓 =

𝜎𝑡,𝑎

(2)

𝜎𝑡,𝑒𝑙

𝜎𝑡,𝑎 is the total atomic cross-section of the individual elements indicated above can be given by;

5

Journal Pre-proof 𝜎𝑡,𝑚

1

𝜇 𝑓𝐴 ∑ (𝜌 ) = ∑ 𝑛 𝑁

𝜎𝑡,𝑎 =

(3)

𝑖 𝑖

𝐴 𝑖

𝑖 𝑖

𝑖

The total molecular interaction cross-section 𝜎𝑡,𝑚 =

𝜇 𝑀

(𝜌 ) 𝑁

𝐴

, where 𝑀 = ∑𝑖(𝑛𝑖𝐴𝑖) is the

molecular weight, NA is indicates the Avogadro’s constant, 𝑛𝑖 and 𝐴𝑖 are the number of element and atomic weight of the i th element of samples. The total electronic cross-section, 𝜎𝑡,𝑒𝑙 is;

𝜎𝑡,𝑒𝑙 =

1 𝑁𝐴

∑ 𝑖

𝑓𝑖𝐴𝑖 𝜇 𝜎𝑡,𝑎 = 𝑍𝑖 𝜌 𝑍𝑒𝑓𝑓 𝑖

()

(4)

where 𝑓𝑖 is fractional abundance of i th element 𝑓𝑖 = 𝑛𝑖/∑𝑛𝑗 and 𝑍𝑖 is atomic number of the i th element. The absorption and scattering of gamma radiations are relevant to the Zeff of the samples. The effective electron number (Ne) is used for similar purposes [30].

𝑁𝑒 =

(𝜇/𝜌)

𝜎𝑡,𝑒𝑙

=

𝑁𝐴 𝑀

∑𝑛 =

𝑍𝑒𝑓𝑓

𝑖

𝑖

𝑁𝐴𝑍𝑒𝑓𝑓

(5)

〈𝐴〉

The average atomic mass i.e. average atomic weight 〈𝐴〉 [31] can be given as follows;

〈𝐴〉 =

𝑀 ∑𝑖𝑛𝑖

(6)

Essential theoretical parameters for gamma-ray shielding are MFP (Mean free path), HVL (Half-value layer) and TVL (Tenth value layer) are the most frequently used theoretical parameters for radiation shielding efficiency for samples [32] can be examined by using the equations below and between them there is a correlation like (1 𝐻𝑉𝐿≅0,3 𝑇𝑉𝐿 ).

𝐻𝑉𝐿 = 𝑥1/2 =

0.693 𝜇

(7)

6

Journal Pre-proof 𝑇𝑉𝐿 = 𝑥1/10 =

𝑀𝐹𝑃 =

𝑙𝑛10 𝜇

(8)

1 𝜇

(9)

To estimate the transmission factor of gamma-ray (TF), defined as (I/Io), attenuation coefficient and density of sample glasses were used. Different thicknesses are selected to obtain a certain degree of attenuation of the welding energies to be used in the MCNP simulation program. Transmissivity interconnection with the primary energy of the photon and the material thickness. ΣR (cm2/g)-effective removal cross-section is a probability measure of the fast / fission energy neutron will pass through the first collision which removes ΣR from the penetrating uncollided neutron group [33]. The ΣR of homogenous mixtures or compounds can be examined using the value of ΣR (cm2/g). Σ𝑅 =

∑𝑊 (Σ𝑅/𝜌) 𝑖

(10)

𝑖

𝑖

Wi is the partial density in Equation 10 and equal to 𝑊𝑖 = 𝑤𝑖𝜌𝑠 , Σ𝑅/𝜌 is the mass removal cross-section of the i th constituent, 𝑤𝑖 is the weight fraction of the i th component and 𝜌𝑠 is the sample densities. Detailed calculation methods for ΣR can be found in various studies in the literatures for alloys [34], fly-ash brick materials [35], bismuth borosilicate glasses [36], oxide dispersion strengthened steels [37] and building materials [38]. The stopping power is a magnitude which is using to define the physical structure of the energy delivered toward the sample. In fact, this explains the loss of energy along the path in which the particle moves. In other words, it represents the rate at which energy is transferred 7

Journal Pre-proof to the sample. In order to examine and detect the properties of particles, they must interact with the substance. For heavy charged particle Bethe-Bloch achieved a beneficial formula considering the stopping power.

―

𝑑𝐸 𝑑𝑥

=

4𝜋𝑘20𝑍2𝑒4𝑛 𝑚𝑐2𝛽2

[𝑙𝑛

2𝑚𝑐2𝛽2 𝐼(1 ― 𝛽2)

― 𝛽2

]

(11)

The minus sign specifies the kinetic energy loss of charged particles. The -dE/dx term shows the Stopping Power. For alpha and proton of heavily charged particles, the term "Stopping Power" remarks that the particles are similar for their interaction to orbital electrons [39]. The mass stopping power of a material depends on the stopping power ratio and ρ density. The mass stopping power is not substantially different for materials having the same atomic composition. The “Stopping and Range of Ions in Materials” (SRIM) code is examined depending on the Monte Carlo simulation program. It is a cod written to evaluate the “ion deposition profiles” in samples subjected to energetic ion beam [40]. Projected range (PR), is the mean depth of penetration of measured particle throughout the initial direction of the particle. Since variations in average are about a few percent, it is useful to use the average range and is a precisely defined amount. This value takes into account the deviation of protons / ions owing to multiple scattering. The range expression of the electron at a given energy is a very important parameter in calculating the dose taken by a component. Similar to mass stopping power, range expression applied to materials in the same atomic composition given by [41, 42]: 𝑅(𝛽) =

(𝑀 𝑍 )𝑅 (𝛽) 2

(12)

𝑝

8

Journal Pre-proof where, 𝑅𝑝(𝛽) is the projected range, 𝛽 is speed of particle close to c. In this work 𝑅𝑝(𝛽) values were examined for (H1) and (He+2). Exposure build-up factor (EBF) is a significant value for correcting the attenuation calculation. The EBF value is used to calculate the photon scattering in irradiated samples and it is a suitable property for gamma radiation. EBF can be calculated with the help of Geometric Progress (G-P) fitting equations. This estimation is performed in three stages using the following formulas [43-45]. i) Zeq (Equivalent atomic number) is a value expressing the shielding properties of the glass samples examined in the sense of equivalent elements. Processes of interaction of a gammaray photon with matter are photoelectric absorption, Compton scattering, and pair-production. These three processes changes considering the energy of photon. In addition, the build-up of photons in the material is mostly according to the multi-scattering phenomena that result from Compton scattering,

𝑍𝑒𝑞 =

𝑍1(𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑅2 ― 𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑅) + 𝑍2(𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑅 ― 𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑅1) 𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑅2 ― 𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑅1

(13)

Here, Z1 and Z2 are the atomic numbers of the samples correspond to R1 and R2 ratios (𝜇𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝/ 𝜇𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙), respectively. ii) By using equation 6, Geometric-progress fitting parameters calculated by ANSI/ANS-6.4.3 database [46]

𝐶=

𝐶1(𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑍2 ― 𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑍𝑒𝑞) + 𝐶2(𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑍𝑒𝑞 ― 𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑍1) 𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑍2 ― 𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑍1

(14)

C1 and C2 shows the G-P fitting parameters. iii) The EBF values examined in an energy region of 0.02 MeV to 20 MeV with the help of the G-P fitting parameters in equation (7,8,9) 9

Journal Pre-proof 𝐵(𝐸, 𝑋) = 1 + (

𝑏―1 )(𝐾𝑥 ― 1) 𝐾―1

𝐵(𝐸, 𝑋) = 1 + (𝑏 ― 1)𝑥

𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝐾 ≠ 1

(15)

𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝐾 = 1

(16)

where,

𝑡𝑎𝑛ℎ 𝐾(𝐸, 𝑥) = 𝑐𝑥𝑎 + 𝑑

(

)

𝑥 ― 2 ― 𝑡𝑎𝑛ℎ( ― 2) 𝑋𝐾 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑥 ≤ 40 𝑚𝑓𝑝

1 ― tanh ( ― 2)

(17)

where x is the penetration depth, (a, b, c, d, XK) is the G-P fitting parameters and E is the photon energy. 2.2. Monte Carlo simulations with MCNPX and GEANT4 In the different fields of science, pre-decision methods such as simulations are highly needed to avoid time waste and provide the optimization of economic conditions. On the other hand, simulation methods can be utilized instead of special experimental studies that are highly complex or costly to perform. Among the different simulation methods, Monte Carlo method has been used for many years for different scientific applications from physics to materials science. We will explain the use of Monte Carlo simulations for nuclear protection applications of ionizing radiation required within the scope of nuclear physics studies. In the literature, different types of Monte Carlo codes have been used for various objectives of shielding performance analysis of certain materials for medical radiation fields, nuclear facilities as well as radiation applications in industry [47-49]. Among the different types of Monte Carlo codes in the literature, MCNPX [50] and GEANT4 have gained a great interest from researchers for the investigation of nuclear radiation of shielding materials [51-59]. The specification of the investigated glasses encoded C0, C10, C15, C20 and C25 glasses have been performed in the material definition section (Mn) of the input file. In the Table 1 the elemental compositions of C0, C10, C15, C20 and C25 glasses are presented, respectively. 10

Journal Pre-proof Further, a 3x3 inch NaI(Tl) scintillation detector has been defined [28] in the Pb shield to collect and record the attenuated secondary gamma-rays passing through the dedicated glass sample. The general view of the setup (2D and 3D) together with simulation devices can be demonstrated in Figure 1 (a-b). On the other hand, 3D appearance of simulation setup for gamma transmission factors (TF) optained from visual editor can be easily seen in Figure 1 (c). For detecting the attenuated gamma-rays from glass samples, F4 tally mesh of MCNPX has been handled in the designed detector. Further, another well-known Monte Carlo code namely GEANT4 has been handled for determination of MAC (Mass Attenuation Coefficients) of C0, C10, C15, C20 and C25 glasses. GEANT4 is an object-oriented Monte Carlo simulation toolkit. This advantage makes GEANT4 toolkit flexible to use in numerous fields including high energy physics, astroparticle applications, medical applications, radiation shielding applications. For the radiation shielding studies, GEANT4 offers a wide range of physical models to handle all electromagnetic and nuclear interactions that may occur between the radiation and the shield material. Figure 2 demonstrates the narrow beam geometry of the GEANT4 simulation, consisting of a point gamma source impinging on a slab of the glass. The gamma photon energies were defined in the region between 0.015 – 15 MeV. The thickness of the glass medium was ranging from 0.1 – 1 cm according to the gamma-ray energy. Two collimator, one is put after the gamm source and the other is kept before the detector, were also used to focus a beam and ensure that the gamma-rays travel parallel and don't disperse in different directions. Also, the glass samples were modeled with respect to their atomic number, mass number, elemental weight fractions, and their densities. In this work, one million photons were gunned from monoenergetic source to hit a target of the glass sample. Then, the transmitted photons have been recorded by using sodium iodide (NaI) detector. In both simulation studies, transmission values of the examined glasses were counted in the detection zone. The results of these counts are used to determine the linear

11

Journal Pre-proof attenuation coefficients of glasses according to the examination principles mentioned in Lambert-Beer law [54-58]. The obtained linear attenuation coefficients were then divided by the material density of each glass sample to obtain the mass attenuation coefficients. It should be noted that, this process was repeated at all energy values for each glass material. 3. Results and Discussion The MAC ( m ) values of the examined glass samples at photon energy range of 0.015 MeV20 MeV have presented in Figure 3. According to figure, it can be easily seen that the values of

𝜇𝑚 go down with increasing energy value. This is because the γ-ray attenuation

microscopic cross-sections (σ) are inversey proportional to the γ-ray energies. The mass attenuation coefficient values increase in low lying energy region for which photoelectric effect process is predominant. For an energy range between 0.5 Mev to 1 MeV, the Compton scattering is dominant. Hereby, for the energies of 0.511 MeV and 0.662 MeV, the main interaction is Compton scattering. For energies 1.17 Mev and 1.33 MeV, the main interaction is pair production. It is also found that the 𝜇𝑚 increase with increasing the Cr2O3 percentages for all gamma ray energies. The sample C25 has the largest 𝜇𝑚 value. To compare both the theoretical and simulation results of the 𝜇𝑚 values of the samples, MCNPX and GEANT4 simulations was used with the WinXCom program between the energy region 0.356 MeV- 1.33 MeV (see Table 2). According to results shown in Fig. 4 the simulated results (MCNPX and GEANT4) of 𝜇𝑚 values for both Cr2O3 ratios were quite consistent with WinXCom results. However, 𝜇𝑚 values calculated with the help of GEANT4 were a bit lower than MCNPX and WinXCom data at low energy of 0.356 MeV. The maximum deviation between Geant4 and WinXCom results was 0.0015 at 1.33 MeV energy. The HVL and TVL together with MFP values of the sample glasses have been computed to understand the photon attenuation capacity are shown in Figures 5 and 6 (a, b). The MFP 12

Journal Pre-proof values went down as the ration of Cr2O3 increased at all five energies and the density of the selected glasses is increasing. According to Figure 4, the low-energy photon loses its energy in a short time, while the high-energy photons requires long distance to lose its energy. In addition, the glass sample containing higher Cr2O3 than the others lose its energy in a short distance. Glass samples with low HVL, TVL and MFP values are a preferred gamma-ray protection material because the possibility of photon interaction with the material is higher. Since C25 glass sample has minimum HVL-TVL-MFP values and maksimum density, 𝜇𝑚 has better protection properties comparing the other glass samples. The scattering and absorption of gamma radiations are linked to the Zeff values of the samples. These values are calculated by using the equation 2 and the differences of the Cr2O3 doped LiF-SrO-B2O3 glasses are shown in Figure 7 between the energy of 0.02 MeV to 20 MeV. As seen from the figure sudden decline occurred up to 1.25 MeV energy range while the photon energy increase. If the energy of the photon increases further, the Zeff value becomes independent of the energy for glass samples. The superiority of the Compton scattering process can be the possible reason. Considering energies above 2.0 MeV, the Zeff value shows a gradual increase. This shows the pair production is dominant in this energy region. As can be seen from Figure 7, the Zeff is highest for sample C25. The alteration of effective electron number for examined sample glasses with photon energy shows the same action like Zeff (see Figure 8). The gamma ray transmission factors (TFs) measured as a function of thickness (x) are calculated by the MCNPX program for specific energies seen in Figure 9. As can be seen from the figure, with the increase in mass thickness, a sharp decrease is observed in TF values and better attenuation (lower TF values) is obtained with higher energies.

13

Journal Pre-proof ΣR - effective removal cross-section can be examined with the knowledge of (Σ𝑅/𝜌) Mass removal cross-section of the ith component, weight fraction of the ith constitute and samples partial densities shown in Table 3. As the amount of Cr2O3 increases in glass samples, ΣR values increase slightly, it is understood that there is not much difference between the ΣR values of samples. The slight differences observed are due to differences in density of glass samples, so density is an important factor in fast neutron protection. According to Figure 10, it is seen that the ΣR value of the sample C20 has the maximum value compared to the other glass samples. The EBF G-P fitting parameters have been examined at couple of energies and different penetration depths for the sample glasses by using the method of G-P fitting. MSP values of H1 and He+2 for the sample glasses remarked C0, C10, C15, C20 and C25 calculated with the help of the use of SRIM code up to 5 MeV. Figures 10 and 11 show proton and alpha MSP values of the samples. As kinetic energy increases, MSP values decrease. As can be seen from the Figures 11 and 12, the C0 glass sample has the maksimum MSP while C25 has the lowest. These results are consistent with the overall study. The projected range values were also computed with the help of the SRIM encode for (H1) and (He+2) and the results of PR are shown in Figures 13 and 14. Similar to MSP data C0 glass sample has the maximum PR value among other glasses same as the MSP value. Reducing the range is better for protecting the material from radiation. The equivalent atom numbers (Zeq) and the GP fitting parameters of the EBF and EABF of C0, C10, C15, C20 and C25 glasses are determined. The variation of equivalent atom numbers (Zeq) against to photon energy can be seen in Figure 15. One the other hand, Figure 16 displays the change of EBF values for C0, C10, C15, C20 and C25 glasses. These glasses are evaluated with the help of G-P fitting method along with the penetration depth in the energy range of 0.5-15 mfp and with maximum 15 MeV photon energy. EBF values of glass samples are minimum at low photon energies due to the effects of the photoelectric process. On the other hand, the EBF values of the glass samples increase

14

Journal Pre-proof with the photon energy level increases in mid-level energy region. This could be correlated with multiple scattering caused by the Compton Effect. For photons with high energies, the measured EBF values increase because of the pair production process. Besides, sharp peaks were also observed according to K-absorption edges of the elements with high Z number existing in glass samples. One can see in Figure 17, according to the penetration depth of C0, C10, C15, C20, and C25 glasses, the EABF values increase. Decrease in the values of EABF related to increasing of the Cr2O3 amount in glass sample. The results showed that the lowest value belongs to C25 sample in the energy zone of 0.1-15 MeV. Among all glass samples, C25 sample for the present glasses has superior attenuation effectiveness whereas C5 sample posses best neutron radiation shielding performance. Finally, to evaluate the gamma-ray attenuation performance of C25 glass sample, half value layers (HVL) have been compared with previous available studies [60-62]. It is to be noted that previous glass samples (C2, PCNK60, ICSW10) have been selected considering their chemical compositions as well as similar material densities. The obtained results for half value layers (HVL) and material densities of the compared glasses were presented in Table 4. In addition, variations of the half value layers (HVL) were presented in Fig. 18. Although there are significant differences between material densities, slight differences between half value layers (HVL) were obtained. Among the compared glasses, the sample encoded ICSW10 has showed better gamma-ray attenuation properties. This can be due to differences between material densities between ICSW10 and C25 samples. Conclusion As a conclusion, the qualifier role of Cr2O5 in LiF-SrO-B2O3 glass structures were examined by using the 𝜇𝑚 values with the help of WinXCom software together with MCNP5 and GEANT4 code. When all the calculation results were compared, all three methods were found to be compatible with each other. However, 𝜇𝑚 values calculated with the help of GEANT4 15

Journal Pre-proof were a bit lower than MCNPX and WinXCom data at low energy of 0.356 MeV. While the 𝜇𝑚, HVL, TVL, MFP for the prepared glasses were utilized in the energy region between 0,356–1,33 MeV, effective atomic number (Zeff) were utilized in the energy region between 0.02–20 MeV with the help of WinXCom program. According to results, since there is a slight increase in Cr2O5 contribution, there is also a small increase in 𝜇𝑚 and Zeff quantities. In these glass samples, C0 has the minimum value. As expected HVL, TVL and MFP quantities of glass samples subject to this study are increased as the photon energy increases and decreased as the contribution of Cr2O5 increases. The material densities of the investigated samples were increased linearly with increasing Cr2O5 concentration. Sample C25 has the smallest TF values, whereas Sample C20 has the biggest R values among the samples. The hypothesis of this study was that the increased Cr2O3 ratio could lead to an improvement in the radiation attenuation properties of the studied glass samples. The wide evaluation results obtained within the scope of this study proved the accuracy of the proposed hypothesis. It is to be noted that Cr2O5 additive increment amount was not too much. Therefore, it can be concluded that advanced investigations on recent glass structure and variations on additive amount can be performed for future studies. Acknowledgement: None Conflicat of Interest: None References [1] Abuzaid MM, Elshami W, Steelman C. Measurements of Radiation Exposure of Radiography Students During Their Clinical Training Using Thermoluminescent Dosimetry. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2018;179(3):1–4. [2] Trattner S, Pearson GDN, Chin C, Cody DD, Gupta R, Hess CP, et al. Standardization and Optimization of Computed Tomography Protocols to Achieve Low-Dose. J Am Coll Radiol [Internet]. 2014;11(3):271–8. Available from: http://www.imagewisely.org [3] ICRP. International Commission on Radiological Protection 2009 Annual Report. 2009. [4] Commission E. Technical Recommendations for Monitoring Individuals Occupationally Exposed to. Radiat Prot No 160. 2009;(160):128. [5] E. Kavaz, H.O. Tekin, O. Agar, E.E. Altunsoy, O. Kilicoglu, M. Kamislioglu, M.M. Abuzaid, M.I. Sayyed. The Mass stopping power / projected range and nuclear shielding behaviors of barium bismuth borate glasses and influence of cerium oxide. Ceramics International. 45 (2019) 15348-15357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.05.028.

16

Journal Pre-proof [6] S. Zinatloo-Ajabshir, M. Salavati-Niasari, Preparation of magnetically retrievable CoFe2O4@SiO2@Dy2Ce2O7 nanocomposites as novel photocatalyst for highly efficient degradation of organic contaminants, Composites Part B: Engineering, 174, ( 2019), 106930. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.106930. [7] S. Zinatloo-Ajabshir, M. Sadat Morassaei, M. Salavati-Niasari, Eco-friendly synthesis of Nd2Sn2O7–based nanostructure materials using grape juice as green fuel as photocatalyst for the degradation of erythrosine, Composites Part B: Engineering, 167, (2019), 643-653, doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.03.045. [8] S. Zinatloo-Ajabshir, M. Sadat Morassaei, M. Salavati-Niasari, Facile synthesis of Nd2Sn2O7-SnO2 nanostructures by novel and environment-friendly approach for the photodegradation and removal of organic pollutants in water, Journal of Environmental Management, 233, (2019), 107-119, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.12.011. [9] S. Mortazavi-Derazkola, S. Zinatloo-Ajabshir, M. Salavati-Niasari, Preparation and characterization of Nd2O3 nanostructures via a new facile solvent-less route, Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics, 26 (8), 5658-5667, (2015), doi: 10.1007/s10854-015-3116-y. [10] F. Beshkar, S. Zinatloo-Ajabshir, M. Salavati-Niasari, Preparation and characterization of the CuCr2O4 nanostructures via a new simple route, Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics, 26 (7), 5043–5051, (2015), doi: 10.1007/s10854-015-3024-1. [11] S. Zinatloo-Ajabshir, Z. Salehi, M. Salavati-Niasari, Green synthesis and characterization of Dy2Ce2O7 ceramic nanostructures with good photocatalytic properties under visible light for removal of organic dyes in water, Journal of Cleaner Production, 192, (2018), 678-687, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.042. [12] Ngaile JE, Uiso CBS, Msaki P, Kazema R. Use of lead shields for radiation protection of superficial organs in patients undergoing head CT examinations. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2008;130(4):490–8. [13] Çelikbilek Ersundu M, Ersundu AE, Sayyed MI, Lakshminarayana G, Aydin S. Evaluation of physical, structural properties and shielding parameters for K2O–WO3–TeO2 glasses for gamma ray shielding applications. J Alloys Compd [Internet]. 2017 Aug 15 [cited 2019 Jul 21];714:278–86. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925838817314330 [14] El-Mallawany R, Sayyed MI, Dong MG. Comparative shielding properties of some tellurite glasses: Part 2. J Non Cryst Solids [Internet]. 2017 Oct 15 [cited 2019 Jul 21];474:16–23. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002230931730399X [15] Lakshminarayana G, Kumar A, Dong MG, Sayyed MI, Long NV, Mahdi MA. Exploration of gamma radiation shielding features for titanate bismuth borotellurite glasses using relevant software program and Monte Carlo simulation code. J Non Cryst Solids [Internet]. 2018 Feb 1 [cited 2019 Jul 21];481:65–73. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022309317305537 [16] Hopper KD. Orbital, thyroid, and breast superficial radiation shielding for patients undergoing diagnostic CT. Semin Ultrasound CT MRI. 2002; [17] Hopper KD, King SH, Lobell ME, TenHave TR, Weaver JS. Radiology: The breast: in-plane x-ray protection during diagnostic thoracic CT--shielding with bismu. Radiol 205. 1997; [18] M.A.Hassan, F.Ahmad, Z.M. Abd El-Fattah, Novel identification of ultraviolet / visible Cr6+ / Cr3+ optical transitions in borateglasses, J.Alloys. Compd.750(2018) 320–327,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2018.03.351. [19]F.Ahmad, Study the effect of alkali / alkaline earth addition on the environment of boro chromate glasses by means of spectroscopic analysis. J. Alloys Compd. 586 (2014)605–610,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2013.10.105. [20] A. Ramesh Babu, Ch. RajyaSree, P.M. Vinaya Teja, S. Yusub, D. Krishna Rao, Influence of manganese ions on spectroscopic and dielectric properties of LiF-SrOB2O3 glasses, J. Non-Cryst. Solids 358 (2012) 1391–1398, https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jnoncrysol.2012.03.012. [21] C. Parthasaradhi Reddy, V. Naresh, K.T. Ramakrishna Reddy, Li2O-LiF-ZnF2-B2O3-P2O5: MnO glasses-thermal structural, optical and luminescence characteristics, Opt. Mat. 51 (2016) 154–161, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optmat.2015.11.035. [22] A.M. Abdelghany, M.A. Ouis, M.A. Azooz, H.A. ElBatal, G.T. El-Bassyouni, Role of SrO on the bioactivity behavior of some ternary borate glasses and their glass ceramic derivatives, Spe. Chim. Acta Part A: Mol. Bio. Spec. 152 (2016) 126– 133, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.saa.2015.07.072. [23] Hirokazu Masai, Go Okada, Toshiaki Ina, Noriaki Kawaguchi, Takayuki Yanagida, Temperature-dependent luminescence of Ce-doped SrO-B2O3 glasses, J. Lum. 207 (2019) 316–320, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlumin.2018.11.014. [24] Hanzhen Zhu, Qilong Liao, Fu Wang, Yunya Dai, Mingwei Lu, The effects of chromium oxide on the structure and properties of iron borophosphate glasses, J. Non-Cryst. Solids 437 (2016) 48–52, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2016. 01.013.

17

Journal Pre-proof [25] I. Kashif, A. Ratep, Safaa K. El-Mahy, Structural and optical properties of lithium tetraborate glasses containing chromium and neodymium oxide, Mat. Res. Bull. 89 (2017) 273–279, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.materresbull.2017.02.006. [26] P. SrinivasaRao, P. RameshBabu, R. Vijay, T. Narendrudu, N. Veeraiah, D. KrishnaRao, Spectroscopic and dielectric response of zinc bismuth phosphate glasses as a function of chromium content, Mater. Res. Bull. 57 (2014) 58–66, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.materresbull.2014.05.030. [27] A. Ramesh Babua, S. Yusubb, P.M. Vinaya Tejac, P. Srinivasa Raod, V. Arunaa, D. Krishna Rao, Effect of Cr2O3 on the structural, optical and dielectric studies of LiF-SrOB2O3 glasses, Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids, 520 (2019) 119428. [28] 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, Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations, Article ID 6547318, 7 pages. doi: https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/6547318, (2016) [29] Akman, F., Sayyed, M.I., Kaçal, M.R., Tekin, H.O.: Investigation of photon shielding performances of some selected alloys by experimental data, theoretical and MCNPX code in the energy range of 81 keV–1333 keV. J. Alloys Compd. (2019). [30] Tekin, H.O., Altunsoy, E.E., Kavaz, E., Sayyed, M.I., Agar, O., Kamislioglu, M.: Photon and neutron shielding performance of boron phosphate glasses for diagnostic radiology facilities. Results Phys. 12, 1457 (2019). [31] H.O. Tekin, L.R.P. Kassab, Ozge Kilicoglu, Evellyn Santos Magalhães, Shams A.M. Issa, Guilherme Rodrigues da Silva Mattos. Newly developed tellurium oxide glasses for nuclear shielding applications: An extended investigation. Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids. Available online 11 November 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2019.119763. [32] H.O. Tekin, Shams A.M. Issa, E. Kavaz, E.E. Altunsoy Guclu. The direct effect of Er2O3 on bismuth barium telluro borate glasses for nuclear security applications. Materials Research Express. 6 (2019) 115212. https://doi.org/10.1088/20531591/ab4cb5. [33] Kaplan, M.F. Concrete Radiation Shielding. John and Wiley, New York, USA 1989. [34] V. P. Singh and N. M. Badiger, “Gamma ray and neutron shielding properties of some soils samples: buildup factors and attenuation coefficients,” Indian Journal of Pure and Applied Physics . In press. [35] V. P. Singh and N. M. Badiger, “The Study on gamma-ray and neutron shielding factors of fly-ash bricks materials,” Journal Radiological Protection, vol. 34, pp. 89–101, 2014. View at Google Scholar [36] V. P. Singh, N. M. Badiger, N. Chanthima, and J. Kaewkhao, “Evaluation of gamma-ray exposure buildup factors and neutron shielding for bismuth borosilicate glasses,,” Radiation Physics and Chemistry, vol. 98, pp. 14–21, 2014. [37] V. P. Singh, N. M. Badiger, and M. E. Medhat, “Assessment of exposure build-up factors of some oxide dispersion strengthened steels applied in modern nuclear engineering and designs,” Nuclear Engineering and Design, vol. 270, pp. 90– 100, 2014. View at Google Scholar [38] V. P. Singh, N. M. Badiger, and A. M. El-Khayatt, “Study on gamma-ray exposure buildup factors of and fast neutron shielding of some building materials,” Radiation Effects and Defects in Solids. (2014) [39] J. Uher, et al., Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A 591 (2008) 71. [40] J.F. Ziegler, J.P. Biersack, M.D. Ziegler, SRIM—The Stopping and Range of Ions in Matter, Lulu Press Co., NC, USA, 2008, pp. 1–398.] [41] J. Ziegler, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section 219–220 (2004) 1027., [42] J. F. Ziegler, M. Ziegler, J. Biersack, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B 268 (11–12) (2010) 1818.] [43] Y. Harima, An approximation of gamma-ray buildup factors by modified geometrical progression, Nucl. Sci. Eng., 83 (1983), pp. 299-309, 10.13182/NSE83-A18222 [44] 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. Applied Physics A (2019) 125:640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00339-019-2941-x. [45] Shams A.M. Issa, H.O. Tekin. The multiple characterization of gamma, neutron and proton shielding performances of xPbO-(99-x)B2O3–Sm2O3 glass system. Ceramics International. 45 (2019) 23561-23571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.08.065. [46] ANSI/ANS-6.4.3, Gamma Ray Attenuation Coefficient and Buildup Factors for Engineering Materials, Am. Nucl. Soc. La Grange (1991).

18

Journal Pre-proof

[47] Asghar Mesbahi, Hosein Ghiasi. Shielding properties of the ordinary concrete loaded with micro- and nano-particles against neutron and gamma radiations. Applied Radiation and Isotopes. 136 (2018) 27-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2018.02.004 [48] Asghar Mesbahi, Ali-Asghar Azarpeyvand, Alireza Shirazi. Photoneutron production and backscattering in high density concretes used for radiation therapy shielding. Annals of Nuclear Energy 38 (2011) 2752-2756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2011.08.023 [49] Khatibeh Verdipoor, Abdolali Alemi, Asghar Mesbahi. Photon mass attenuation coefficients of a silicon resin loaded with WO3, PbO, and Bi2O3 Micro and Nano-particles for radiation shielding. Radiation Physics and Chemistry 147 (2018) 85-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2018.02.017 [50] 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) [51] 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. Ceramics International. Available Online: 22 August 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.08.204 [52] 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. Applied Physics A (2019) 125:640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00339-019-2941-x [53] Shams A.M. Issa, H.O. Tekin. The multiple characterization of gamma, neutron and proton shielding performances ofxPbO-(99-x)B2O3–Sm2O3 glass system. Ceramics International. Available Online: 7 August 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.08.065 [54] 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. Applied Radiation and Isotopes. Vol 121 (2017) pp. 122-125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2016.12.040 [55] 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. Radiation Physics and Chemistry 162 (2019) 187–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2019.05.019 [56] A.S. Abouhaswa, Y.S. Rammah, M.I. Sayyed, H.O. Tekin. Synthesis, structure, optical and gamma radiation shielding properties of B2O3-PbO2-Bi2O3 glasses. Composites Part B 172 (2019) 218–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.05.040. [57] 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 in Physics 14 (2019) 102424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2019.102424 [58] H.O. Tekin, E. Kavaz, Athanasia 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. Ceramics International. 45 (2019) 19206 - 19222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.06.168 [59] H.O. Tekin, T. Manici. Simulations of mass attenuation coefficients for shielding materials using the MCNP-X code. Nuclear Science and Techniques. NUCL SCI TECH (2017) 28:95. doi:10.1007/s41365-017-0253-4 [60] H.O. Tekin, E. Kavaz, E.E. Altunsoy, M. Kamislioglu, O. Kilicoglu, O. Agar, M.I. Sayyed, Nevzat Tarhan. Characterization of a broad range gamma-ray and neutron shielding properties of MgO-Al2O3-SiO2-B2O3 and Na2OAl2O3-SiO2 glass systems. Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids 518 (2019) 92-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2019.05.012 [61] Ozge Kilicoglu, H.O. Tekin. Bioactive glasses and direct effect of increased K2O additive for nuclear shielding performance: A comparative investigation. Ceramics International. Available Online: 11 September 2019 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.09.095 [62] 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-CaO-P2O5-SiO2 bioactive glasses using MCNPX code. Results in Physics 12 (2019) 1797-1804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2019.02.017

19

Journal Pre-proof Date: 01 October 2019

Declaration of Interest On behalf of authors, I hereby declare that this manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal. We have approved the manuscript and agree with submission to Materials Chemistry and Physics. There are no conflicts of interest to declare.

Sincerely yours,

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Huseyin Ozan Tekin (Corresponding Author) Uskudar University, Radiotherapy Department, Istanbul, TURKEY Phone No: +905455018843 Email Address: [email protected]

Journal Pre-proof

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figure 1. (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 (c) 3-D view of MCNPX simulation setup for calculations of transmission factors obtained from MCNPX Visual Editor

Figure 2. 3-D view of Geant4 simulation setup obtained from visual editor

MAC ( cm2/g)

Journal Pre-proof

0,10

MAC ( cm2/g)

0,09

C0 C10 C15 C20 C25

0,097100

0,097098 0,35599 0,35600 0,35601 0,35602 0,35603 0,35604 0,35605

Photon energy (MeV)

0,08

0,07

0,06

0,05 0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1,0

1,2

1,4

Photon energy (MeV) Figure 3. Variation of mass attenuation coefficients (  m ) for investigated glass samples

Figure 4. Mass attenuation coefficients (  m ) values compared with MCNPX, WinXCom and GEANT4 for investigated glass samples against photon energy.

Journal Pre-proof 8,0

C0 C10 C15 C20 C25

7,5 7,0

6,0

MFP

MFP

6,5

5,5

7,45

7,40 1,30

1,32

Photon energy (MeV)

5,0 4,5 4,0 3,5 0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1,0

1,2

1,4

Photon energy (MeV) Figure 5. Variation of MFP for investigated glass samples

5,5

C0 C10 C15 C20 C25

5,0

4,5

4,0

HVL

HVL

5,3

3,5

5,2

5,1

5,0 1,2951,3001,3051,3101,3151,3201,3251,330

Photon energy (MeV) 3,0

2,5 0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1,0

Photon energy (MeV) a)

1,2

1,4

Journal Pre-proof 18

C0 C10 C15 C20 C25

16

17,2

TVL

TVL

14

17,0

16,8

12

1,310

1,315

1,320

1,325

1,330

Photon energy (MeV) 10

8 0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1,0

1,2

1,4

Photon energy (MeV) b)

Figure 6. Variation of (a) Half (HVL) and (b) tenth value layer (TVL) for investigated glass samples.

C0 C10 C15 C20 C25

Effective atomic number (Zeff)

30 9.12

25

9.10 9.08 9.06

20

9.04 9.02 9.00 0.210 0.212 0.214 0.216 0.218 0.220

15

10

5 0

5

10

15

20

Photon energy (MeV) Figure 7. Variation of Effective atomic numbers (Zeff) for investigated glass samples.

Journal Pre-proof

Effective electron density (Nelx1023)

8

C0 C10 C15 C20 C25

7 2,2650

6 5

2,2625

4

0,160

0,162

0,164

3 2 1 0

5

10

15

20

Photon energy (MeV)

Figure 8. Variation of Effective electron density (Nel) for investigated glass samples

0,370

C0 C10 C15 C20 C25

Photon transmission

0,365

0,360

0,355

0,3535

0,3530

0,350

0,345

0,3525

0,3520 2,00

0,5

2,05

1,0

2,10

2,15

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

Thickness (cm) Figure 9. Variations of the photon transmission factors for investigated glass samples at 2 MeV.

Removal cross section for fast neutrons (∑R, cm-1)

Journal Pre-proof 0,12

0,10

0,08

0,06

0,04

0,02

0,00 C0

C10

C15

C20

C25

Figure 10. Variation of Effective removal cross-section for investigated glass samples.

0,5

C0 C10 C15 C20 C25

0,456

MSP x 10 (MeV cm2/g)

0,4 0,452

0,3

0,06

0,08

0,10 0,0376

0,2

0,1

0,0374 8,00

8,01

8,02

8,03

8,04

8,05

Proton

0,0 0

2

4

6

8

10

Kinetic energy (MeV)

Fig. 11. Variation of Mass stopping powers of proton for investigated glass samples.

Journal Pre-proof 1,4 C0 C10 C15 C20 C25

1,270 1,268

MSP x 10 (MeV cm2/g)

1,2

1,266 1,264 1,262

1,0

1,260

0,625

0,750 0,636

0,8 0,635

0,6 0,634 4,00

4,01

4,02

0,4

Alpha

0,2 0

2

4

6

8

10

Kinetic energy (MeV) Fig. 12. Variation of Mass stopping powers of alpha for investigated glass samples.

800 700

Projected range x 10 (μm)

0,160

600 500

0,159 0,158 0,157

400 300

0,156 0,155 0,0100

0,0101

0,0102

C0 C10 C15 C20 C25

200 100 0

Proton

-100 0

2

4

6

8

10

Kinetic energy (MeV) Fig. 13. Variation of Projected range of proton for investigated glass samples.

Journal Pre-proof 80 21,1

70

21,0

Projected range x 10 (μm)

60

20,9

50

20,8 20,7 4,50

40

4,51

30 20

C0 C10 C15 C20 C25

10 0

Alpha

-10 0

2

4

6

8

10

Kinetic energy (MeV) Fig. 14. Variation of Projected range of alpha for investigated glass samples.

24

C0 C10 C15 C20 C25

22 20

11,6

Zeq

Zeq

18 16

11,4

14

3,4

3,6

3,8

4,0

Photon Energy (MeV)

12 10 -2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Photon Energy (MeV)

Fig. 15. Variation of equivalent atomic numbers (Zeq) for investigated glass samples

Journal Pre-proof

Fig. 16. Variation of the exposure buildup factors (EBF) in the energy region of 0.015–15 MeV for glass samples up to 15 mfp.

Journal Pre-proof

Fig. 17. Variation of the energy absorption exposure buildup factors (EABF) in the energy region of 0.015– 15 MeV for glass samples up to 15 mfp.

Journal Pre-proof

Half Value Layer (cm)

5,5

Half Value Layer (cm)

5,0

4,5

3,6 3,5 3,4 3,3 3,2 3,1 3,0 0,50 0,52 0,54 0,56 0,58 0,60 0,62 0,64 0,66 Energy (MeV)

4,0 This study C2 [55] PCNK60 [56] ICSW10 [57]

3,5

3,0

2,5 0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1,0

1,2

1,4

Energy (MeV) Fig. 18. A Comparison between half value layers (HVL) of C25 sample and previous studies

Journal Pre-proof Highlights

 The effect of C2O5 additive in LiF-SrO-B2O3 glass structures were examined  MCNPX and GEANT4 codes were utilized for MAC calculation.  A broad range of nuclear radiation shielding parameters were determined.  C25 glass sample with highest Cr2O3 additive had a satisfactory performance against nuclear radiation

Journal Pre-proof

Table 1. Chemical properties of the investigated glasses Sample Code C0 C10 C15 C20 C25

LiF

SrO

B2O3

Cr2O3

30 30 30 30 30

10 10 10 10 10

60 59.90 59.85 59.80 59.75

0 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25

Density (g/cm3) 2.5400 2.5429 2.5483 2.5617 2.5628

Table 1. Mass attenuation coefficients for the chosen glass samples calculated by MCNPX code, WinXCom software and GEANT4 programme. C0 ENERGY(MeV) MCNPX(μ/ρ) 0.356 0.096084 0.511 0.082165 0.662 0.073560 1.173 0.055997 1.33 0.051653

C10

WinXCom(μ/ρ) GEANT4(μ/ρ) MCNPX(μ/ρ) WinXCom(μ/ρ) GEANT4(μ/ρ) 0.097099 0.083058 0.073960 0.056157 0.052658

0.092287 0.079766 0.071620 0.054438 0.050982

0.096848 0.080963 0.074225 0.054870 0.051966

0.097099 0.083057 0.073959 0.056155 0.052657

C15 ENERGY(MeV) MCNPX(μ/ρ) 0.356 0.096888 0.511 0.080776 0.662 0.073786 1.173 0.054375 1.33 0.052680

0.092291 0.079766 0.071621 0.054438 0.050982

C20

WinXCom(μ/ρ) GEANT4(μ/ρ) MCNPX(μ/ρ) WinXCom(μ/ρ) GEANT4(μ/ρ) 0.097099 0.083056 0.073958 0.056154 0.052656

0.092293 0.079766 0.071621 0.054438 0.050982

0.097106 0.080796 0.073948 0.054390 0.052484

0.097100 0.083056 0.073957 0.056154 0.052655

C25 ENERGY(MeV) MCNPX(μ/ρ) 0.356 0.511 0.662 1.173 1.33

0.097801 0.081072 0.073969 0.055436 0.052815

WinXCom(μ/ρ) GEANT4(μ/ρ) 0.097100 0.083055 0.073956 0.056153 0.052655

0.092297 0.079766 0.071622 0.054439 0.050982

0.092295 0.079766 0.071622 0.054439 0.050982

Journal Pre-proof

Table 3. Effective removal cross sections for the glass samples C0 (density = 2.54 g/cm3)

C10 (density = 2.5429 g/cm3)

C15 (density = 2.5483 g/cm3)

Element

∑R/ρ (cm2/g)

Fraction by weight (%)

Partial Density (g cm-3)

∑R

(cm-1)

Fraction by weight (%)

Partial Density (g cm-3)

∑R

(cm-1)

Fraction by weight (%)

Partial Density (g cm-3)

∑R (cm-1)

Li B O F Cr Sr

0.084 0.0575 0.0405 0.0361 0.0208 0.016

0.034754 0.216524 0.507359 0.095125 0 0.146238

0.088274 0.54997 1.288692 0.241618 0 0.371445

0.007415 0.031623 0.052192 0.008722 0 0.005943

0.034706 0.215866 0.506662 0.094995 0.001733 0.146038

0.088254 0.548925 1.288392 0.241562 0.004407 0.371359

0.007413 0.031563 0.05218 0.00872 9.17E-05 0.005942

0.034682 0.215538 0.506315 0.09493 0.002598 0.145937

0.088381 0.549255 1.290242 0.241909 0.006621 0.371892

0.007424 0.031582 0.052255 0.008733 0.000138 0.00595

0.105896

TOTAL

0.10591

C20 (density = 2.5617 g/cm3)

Element

∑R/ρ (cm2/g)

Fraction by weight (%)

Partial Density (g cm-3)

Li B O F Cr Sr

0.084 0.0575 0.0405 0.0361 0.0208 0.016

0.034658 0.21521 0.505968 0.094865 0.003462 0.145837

0.088784 0.551304 1.296138 0.243015 0.008868 0.373592

TOTAL

0.106082

C25 (density = 2.5628 g/cm3)

∑R (cm-1)

Fraction by weight (%)

Partial Density (g cm-3)

∑R (cm-1)

0.007458 0.0317 0.052494 0.008773 0.000184 0.005977

0.034635 0.214883 0.505621 0.0948 0.004324 0.145737

0.088762 0.550702 1.295806 0.242952 0.011082 0.373496

0.007456 0.031665 0.05248 0.008771 0.000231 0.005976

0.106586

0.106579

Journal Pre-proof

Table 4. A Comparison between half value layers (HVL) of C25 sample and previous studies Energy (MeV)

C25 [This Study]

C2 [55]

PCNK60 [56]

ICSW10 [57]

(density=2.5628 g/cm3)

(density=2.587 g/cm3)

(density=2.626 g/cm3)

(density=2.721 g/cm3)

0.356

2.785424

2.679347

2.641404

2.547399

0.511

3.256446

3.115520

3.076405

2.962091

0.662

3.657081

3.479672

3.451301

3.265896

1.173

4.816581

4.619565

4.540780

4.317625

1.33

5.136579

4.871541

4.840556

4.631634