Vol. 2, 2017

Original research papers

Radiation Measurements

DUST EFFECT ON OPTICALLY STIMULATED LUMINESCENCE DOSIMETRY

Şamil Osman Gürdal, S. Sinan Keskin, Mehmet Tombakoğlu

Pages: 55-58

DOI: 10.21175/RadProc.2017.12

Optically stimulated luminescence dosimetry (OSLD) has been used for dose measurements in many different radiation fields for personal monitoring and medical and industrial applications. One of the most important advantages of the OSLD compared to thermoluminescence dosimetry (TLD) is the light source used to stimulate the crystal. On the other hand, there is a discrimination problem between the light used in a stimulation and the luminescence light obtained as a result of stimulation. To measure the correct dose value, the stimulation and luminescence light have to be discriminated precisely by using different optic filters such as UV blocking, long and short band filters. In addition, the OSL readers are calibrated under fixed conditions (normal operating condition of optic filters, light source, photomultiplier tube, etc). The measured dose values are very sensitive to changes in normal operating conditions. In this work, the dust buildup factor on the optic filters is studied to analyse the response of BeO OSL dosimeter system. The elemental composition of suspended dust was determined by using the literature given for samples obtained from different indoor locations in Turkey and abroad. The light transport algorithm is used to simulate BeO OSL dosimeter system’s response with and without dust buildup by means of Monte Carlo photon transport technique. The Coherent and incoherent scattering of the light, as well as other photon interaction mechanisms, were explicitly modelled in Monte Carlo simulations. The dust buildup effects on OSL spectrum were investigated in detail as a function of dust thickness on the optic filters and elemental composition of the dust.
  1. E. G. Yukihara, S. W. S. McKeever, “Theory and Practical Aspects,” in Optically Stimulated Luminescence: Fundamentals and Applications, Chichester, UK: John Wiley-and Sons Inc., 2011, ch. 2, sec. 2.4.3, pp. 67–68.
    DOI: 10.1002/9780470977064.ch2
  2. OSL Personal Dosimetry System, Landauer Inc., Glenwood (IL), USA.
    Retrieved from: http://www.landauer.com/Industry/Products/Dosimeters/Dosimeters.aspx
    Retrieved on: Nov. 20, 2016
  3. BeOSL Personal Dosimetry System, Dosimetrics GmbH, Munich, Germany.
    Retrieved from: http://www.dosimetrics.de/productsservices/
    Retrieved on: Nov. 20, 2016
  4. J. Henniger et al., “The BeOMaxsystem- Dosimetry using OSL of BeO for several applications,” Radiation Measurements, vol. 56, pp. 324-327, Sep. 2013.
    DOI: 10.1016/j.radmeas.2013.01.069
  5. Microstar ii Medical dosimetry system, Landauer Inc., Glenwood (IL), USA.
    Retrieved from: http://landauer.com/uploadedFiles/special/microSTARiiBrochure.pdf
    Retrieved on: Nov. 20, 2016
  6. Guide to “The Risø TL/OSL reader”, DTU Nutech, Roskilde, Denmark, 2015.
    Retrieved from: http://www.usu.edu/geo/luminlab/Reader.pdf
    Retrieved on: Nov. 20, 2016
  7. “BeOSL Dosimetry System-QA Test Results,” RADKOR Personal Monitoring Lab., Ankara, Turkey, 2016.
  8. Ş. O. Gürdal, “Simulation of Optically Stimulated Luminescence Dosimetry Systems via Monte Carlo Method,” Ph.D. dissertation, Nuclear Eng. Dept., Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey, 2016.
  9. O. Schmid et al., “Derivation of the Density and Refractive Index of Organic Matter and Elemental Carbon from Closure between Physical and Chemical Aerosol Properties,” Environmental Science Technology, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 1166-1172, Feb. 2009.
    DOI: 10.1021/es800570p
    PMid: 19320175
  10. L. Tofful and C. Perrino, “Chemical Composition of Indoor and Outdoor PM2.5 in three Schools in the City of Rome,” Atmosphere, vol. 6, no. 10, pp. 1422-1443, Sep. 2015.
    DOI: 10.3390/atmos6101422
  11. K. Na and D. R. Cocker, “Organic and Elemental Carbon Concentrations in Fine Particulate Matter in Residences, Schoolrooms, and Outdoor Air in Mira Loma, California,” Atmospheric Environment, vol. 39, no. 18, pp. 3325-3333, Jan. 2005.
    DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.01.054
  12. J. L. Mauderly and J. C. Chow, “Health Effects of Organic Aerosols,” Inhalation Toxicology, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 257-288, Mar. 2008.
    DOI: 10.1080/08958370701866008
    PMid: 18300047
  13. M. Hu et all, “Estimation of Size-Resolved Ambient Particle Density Based on the Measurement of Aerosol Number, Mass and Chemical Size Distributions in the Winter in Beijing,” Environmental Science & Technology, vol. 46, no. 18, pp. 9941-9947, Sep. 2012.
    DOI: 10.1021/es204073t
    PMid: 22458861
  14. S. Kılıç, “Determination of Indoor Air Particulate Matter Mass and Elemental Concentrations in a Selected Hospital,” M.S. thesis, Environmental Eng. Dept., Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey, 2010.
  15. ENDF/B-VII Incident-Gamma Data, Los Alamos National Lab., Los Alamos (NM), USA.
    Retrieved from: https://t2.lanl.gov/nis/data/endf/endfvii-g.html
    Retrieved on: November. 25, 2016
  16. “BeO OSL Dosimetry System,” Helmholtz Zentrum, Munich, Germany, 2009.