International Reactor Dosimetry File 2002 - IAEA Publications

More documents

Recommendations

Info

10 2 Damage (MeV· mb) 10 1 10 0 10 –1 10 –2 10 –3 10 –10 10 –9 10 –8 10 –7 10 –6 10 –5 10 –4 10 –3 10 –2 10 –1 10 0 10 1 10 2 Neutron energy (MeV) FIG. 8.2. Energy dependence of silicon displacement damage response function. correlation depends on the assumption that displacement effects are the dominant radiation damage mechanism and that equal numbers of initially displaced atoms produce equal changes in device performance. Experimental evidence indicates that displacement kerma is not a valid measure of changes in the fundamental properties (carrier concentration, mobility and carrier lifetime) that determine device performance [8.9, 8.10]. The reason that the displacement kerma does not correlate with the property changes in GaAs over the entire range of neutron energies of interest is attributed to variations in the defect production efficiency for different sizes of displacement cascades. This effect is also known to occur in other types of material, including structural metals [8.11]. Despite these deficiencies (a lack of a strict proportionality between the observed GaAs semiconductor damage and the calculated displacement kerma), displacement kerma is still useful as an exposure parameter, and is analogous to the use of dpa for exposures of iron. Empirical efficiency factors that depend on the energies of the primary knock-on atoms (PKA) have been proposed in order to remove the discrepancies described above [8.9]. Figure 8.3 shows the shape of the empirical damage efficiency factor for GaAs, and can be described by an empirical function. As in Ref. [8.11], this PKA energy damage efficiency factor is used in conjunction with a normalization factor of 2.2 to preserve the equivalence of the GaAs damage function and the displacement kerma for 1 MeV neutrons. The results of the calculation of GaAs displacement kerma factors (displacement kerma per unit neutron fluence) are shown in Fig. 8.4 as a function of neutron energy. Figure 8.5 shows the complete energy dependence of the GaAs damage function. The unit of the kerma factor is megaelectronvolts times millibarns (MeV·mb). The kerma factor can be multiplied by 95
Damage efficiency (fraction) 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 D = a 0 + a 1 log(E) + a 2 E 2 log(E) + a 3 log(E) 2 for 0.1 < E < 500.0 a 0 = 0.872670 a 1 = –0.187469 a 2 = 1.237178E-7 a 3 = –0.060753 Used with a normalization factor of 2.2 0.00 10 –1 10 0 10 1 10 2 10 3 PKA energy (keV) FIG. 8.3. GaAs damage efficiency curve. 1.334 × 10 –13 to convert from units of MeV·mb to rad(GaAs)·cm 2 , and can be multiplied by 1.334 × 10 –19 to convert from MeV·mb to J·m 2 /kg or Gy(GaAs)·m 2 . An average value of the neutron displacement kerma factor near 1 MeV is 70 MeV·mb. As is the case for silicon [8.12], the actual value chosen for the designated 1 MeV reference damage is arbitrary. What is important is that the whole radiation hardness community uses the same value in setting hardness specifications and when testing electronic parts. Damage function Damage (MeV· mb) 10 2 10 1 Displacement kerma 10 0 10 –3 10 –2 10 –1 10 0 10 1 Neutron energy (MeV) FIG. 8.4. Energy dependence of the GaAs displacement and damage response functions. 96
Page 2 and 3:
INTERNATIONAL REACTOR DOSIMETRY FIL
Page 4 and 5:
TECHNICAL REPORTS SERIES No. 452 IN
Page 6 and 7:
FOREWORD An accurate and complete k
Page 9 and 10:
Contributing authors O. Bersillon C
Page 11 and 12:
5.1. Plots of experimental data and
Page 14 and 15:
1. INTRODUCTION R. Paviotti-Corcuer
Page 16 and 17:
(b) (c) Pointwise data: (i) All dos
Page 18 and 19:
REFERENCES TO SECTION 1 [1.1] ZIJP,
Page 20 and 21:
cross-sections, and as a consequenc
Page 22 and 23:
TABLE 2.1. MEASURED AND CALCULATED
Page 24 and 25:
TABLE 2.2. MEASURED AND CALCULATED
Page 26 and 27:
[2.24] KOBAYASHI, K., KIMURA, I., M
Page 28 and 29:
from ENDF/B-VI Release 8, JEFF-3.0
Page 30 and 31:
TABLE 3.1. REACTIONS FROM THE VARIO
Page 32 and 33:
Fluence rate per unit energy (m -2
Page 34 and 35:
TABLE 3.2. COMPARISON OF THE INTEGR
Page 36 and 37:
— 10 B(n,α) 7 Li and 6 Li(n,t) 4
Page 38 and 39:
TABLE 3.3. THERMAL NEUTRON CROSS-SE
Page 40 and 41:
TABLE 3.4. RELATIVE STANDARD DEVIAT
Page 42 and 43:
[3.14] HOLDEN, N.E., “Neutron sca
Page 44 and 45:
The rigorous inclusion of all uncer
Page 46 and 47:
TABLE 4.1. C/E VALUES IN THE CALIFO
Page 48 and 49:
TABLE 4.3. IRDF-90.2 ( DATA IN A CA
Page 50 and 51:
TABLE 4.3. IRDF-90.2 ( DATA IN A CA
Page 52 and 53:
TABLE 4.4. JENDL/D-99 ( DATA IN A C
Page 54 and 55:
TABLE 4.4. JENDL/D-99 ( DATA IN A C
Page 56 and 57:
TABLE 4.5. UPDATED RRDF-98 ( DATA I
Page 58 and 59: REFERENCES TO SECTION 4 [4.1] KOCHE
Page 60 and 61: neutron yield substantially. Furthe
Page 62 and 63: TABLE 5.1. CROSS-SECTION EVALUATION
Page 64 and 65: TABLE 5.1. CROSS-SECTION EVALUATION
Page 66 and 67: — 58 Ni(n,2n) 57 Ni: The IRDF, JE
Page 68 and 69: — 238 U(n,γ) 239 U(β - ) 239 Np
Page 70 and 71: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) Only diagon
Page 72 and 73: TABLE 6.1. INTEGRAL CHARACTERISTICS
Page 74 and 75: TABLE 6.1. INTEGRAL CHARACTERISTICS
Page 76 and 77: TABLE 6.2. CROSS-SECTIONS IN IRDF-2
Page 84 and 85: 7. CONSISTENCY TEST OF THE CROSS-SE
Page 86 and 87: TABLE 7.1. REFERENCE NEUTRON FIELDS
Page 88 and 89: Fluence, (E) (MeV -1 ) 10 7 10 6 10
Page 90 and 91: TABLE 7.2. SPECTRUM AVERAGED DOSIME
Page 92 and 93: testing of electronic components an
Page 94 and 95: Table 7.3 details the 34 dosimetry
Page 96 and 97: 7.2. RESULTS OF CONSISTENCY TESTING
Page 98 and 99: TABLE 7.4. RATIO OF SPECTRUM AVERAG
Page 104 and 105: [7.7] SEKINE, T., MAEDA, S., AOYAMA
Page 106 and 107: ecommendations found in ASTM practi
Page 110 and 111: 10 2 Damage (MeV· mb) 10 1 10 0 10
Page 112 and 113: 9. DECAY DATA AND ISOTOPIC ABUNDANC
Page 114 and 115: 9.1.4. Data processing The required
Page 116: Protactinium-231 is stated to have
Page 119 and 120: TABLE I.1. METROLOGY REACTIONS (ACT
Page 121 and 122: For the convenience of the metrolog
Page 123 and 124: Such approximate calculations are n
Page 125 and 126: of each neutron energy group. These
Page 127 and 128: activation rate for the product iso
Page 129 and 130: III.1. THERMAL CROSS-SECTIONS Gener
Page 131 and 132: TABLE III.1. COMPARISON OF THERMAL
Page 133 and 134: TABLE III.2. COMPARISON OF CAPTURE
Page 135 and 136: TABLE III.3. COMPARISON OF THE Q 0
Page 137 and 138: — 50 Cr: Compared with the Mughab
Page 139 and 140: REFERENCES TO APPENDIX III [III.1]
Page 141 and 142: 128
Page 143 and 144: 130
Page 145 and 146: 132
Page 147 and 148: 134
Page 149 and 150: 136
Page 151 and 152: 138
Page 153 and 154: 140
Page 155 and 156: 142
Page 157 and 158: 144
Page 160 and 161:
CONTRIBUTORS TO DRAFTING AND REVIEW
Page 162:
CONTRIBUTORS TO DRAFTING AND REVIEW
show all

International Reactor Dosimetry File 2002 - IAEA Publications

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?