atw 2018-02


atw Vol. 63 (2018) | Issue 2 ı February


adults are lower than children, since

DCF’s for radioisotopes considered in

case study for children are higher than

those for adults except caesium isotopes.

External doses are calculated

for infants and others (child, teen and

adult). Although DCF’s for infants are

1.5 times higher than the others, the

correction factor for shielding is lower

for infants than others, hence external

doses are lower for infants. External

ground doses are lower for infants

too, as far as the years passed after the

accident is concerned. In the case of

implementation of countermeasures

on food consumption restrictions in

the first year after the accident, the

ingestion and total doses for average

individuals for all age groups can be

predicted by KIANA Advance computational

Computer Code. . the most

dose contributing isotopes are Cs-134,

Cs-137 and I-131 in the first year after

the accident. In the long term, Cs-134

and Cs-137 (Table 1) remain in the

environment due to their long radioactive

half-lives. The dose consequence

of Xe-133 is the least amongst

others due to its very short half-life,

i.e. 5.25 days and its inertness. Lifetime

doses incurred from Cs-137,

Cs-134 and I-131 are more than 95%

of total doses. Ingestion doses are the

highest for the infant, child, adult and

teen; respectively in the first year after

the accident since the ingestion DCF

for I-131 for the infants is the highest.

Infant ingestion doses remain the

highest as years pass after the accident,

since infant's growing up is

taken into account and their food

consumption increases when they are



| | Abbott, M.L., Rood, A.S., COMIDA,

A Radionuclide Food Chain Model for

Acute Fallout Deposition, 1993.

| | Abbott, M.L., Rood A.S., Comida: A

radionuclide food chain model for acute

fallout 6825 PNNL-14321 deposition,

Health Phys 66: 17–29, 1994.

| | Absalom JP, Young SD, Crout NMJ,

Radiocaesium fixation dynamics:

Measurement in six Cumbrian soils.

European Journal of Soil Science



AGENCY. Generic Models for Use in

Assessing the Impact of Discharges of

Radioactive Substances to the

Environment. Safety Report Series

No 19, Vienna (2001).

| | ANL/EAD-4, User’s Manual for RESRAD

Version 6, 2001.Anspaugh, L.R., Shinn,

J.H., Phelps, P.L., Kennedy, N.C., Resuspension

and redistribution of plutonium

in soils, Health Phys. 29 (1975) 571–582.

| | Apsimon, H.M.; Goddard, A.J.H.;

Wrigley, J., Long-range atmospheric

dispersion of radioisotopes. The MESOS

model. Atmospheric Environment

(1967) vol. 19 issue 1 1985. p. 99-111.

| | ARGOS home page,

[last accessed on 1 st of August, 2014]

| | Baklanov A., Sorensen J.H.,

Parameterization of Radionuclide

Deposition in Atmospheric Long Range

Transport Modeling, 2000.

| | Bauer, L.R., and Hamby, D.M.: 1991,

Relative Sensitivities of Existing and

Novel Model Parameters in

Atmospheric Tritium Dose Estimates,

Rad. Prot. Dosimetry. 37, 253-260.

| | Bellman, R., and Astrom, K.J.: 1970,

On Structural Identifiability, Math.

Biosci. 7, 329-339.

| | Bergstroem, U., Nordlinder, S., Studsvik

Eco and Safety AB, Nykoeping, Sweden,


| | Box, G.E.P., Hunter, W.G., and Hunter,

J.S.: 1978, Statistics for Experimenters:

an Introduction to Design, Data

Analysis, and Model Building. John

Wiley & Sons. New York.

| | Breshears, D.D.: 1987, Uncertainty and

sensitivity analyses of simulated

concentrations of radionuclides in milk.

Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State

University, MS Thesis, pp. 1-69.149

| | Brown, J. and Simmonds, J., R.,

FARMLAND: A Dynamic Model for the

Transfer of Radionuclides through

Terrestrial Foodchains, 1995.

| | Ciffroy, P., Siclet, F., Damois, C., Luck, M.,

Duboudin, C., A dynamic model for

assessing radiological consequences of

routine releases in the Loire river:

Parameterisation and uncertainty/

sensitivity analysis, Journal of Environmental

Radioactivity 83 (2005) 9-48.

| | Christoudias, T. and Lelieveld, J.,

Modelling the global atmospheric

transport and deposition of radionuclides

from the Fukushima Daiichi

nuclear accident, Atmos. Chem. Phys.,

13, 1425–1438, 2013.

| | Conover, W.J.: 1980, Practical Nonparametric

Statistics. 2 nd edn. John

Wiley & Sons, New York.

| | Cox, N.D.: 1977, Comparison of Two

Uncertainty Analysis Methods, Nuc. Sci.

and Eng. 64, 258-265.

| | Crick, M.J., Hill, M.D. and Charles, D.:

1987, The Role of Sensitivity Analysis in

Assessing Uncertainty. In: Proceedings

of an NEA Workshop on Uncertainty

Analysis for Performance Assessments

of Radioactive Waste Disposal Systems,

Paris, OECD, pp. 1-258.

| | Cunningham, M.E., Hann, C.R., and

Olsen, A.R.: 1980, Uncertainty Analysis

and Thermal Stored Energy Calculations

in Nuclear Fuel Rods, Nuc. Technol. 47,


| | Cukier, R.I., Fortuin, C.M., Shuler, K.E.,

Petschek, A.G. and Schaibly, J.H.: 1973,

Study of the Sensitivity of Coupled

Reaction Systems to Uncertainties in

Rate Coefficients. I. Theory Z Chem.

Phys. 59, 3873-3878.

| | Demiralp, M., and Rabitz, H.: 1981,

Chemical Kinetic Functional Sensitivity

Analysis: Elementary Sensitivities,

J. Chem. Phys. 74, 3362-3375.

| | Downing, D.J., Gardner, R.H., and

Hoffman, EO.: 1985, An Examination of

Response-Surface Methodologies for

Uncertainty Analysis in Assessment

Models, Technometrics. 27, 151-163.

| | Draxler, R.R., and G.D. Hess, 1997:

Description of the HYSPLIT_4 modeling

system. NOAA Tech. Memo. ERL

ARL-224, NOAA Air Resources

Laboratory, Silver Spring, MD, 24 pp.

| | Draxler, R.R., Stunder, B., Rolph, G., and

Stein, A., Taylor, A., Hysplit4 Users

Guide, 2012.

| | Eckerman, K., F., Ryman, J., C., Federal

Guidance Report No. 12 External

Exposure to Radionuclides in Air, Water

and Soil, 1993.

| | Environmental Modelling for Radiation

Safety (EMRAS) Programme, The

Chernobyl I-131 Release: Model

Validation and Assessment of the

Countermeasure Effectiveness: Report

of the Chernobyl 131-I Release Working

Group of EMRAS Theme 1.

| | EUR-18825, FZKA-6311, ISBN 92-894-

2085-5, European Communities 2001

Probabilistic Accident Consequence

Uncertainty Assessment Using COSYMA:

Uncertainty from the Dose Module.

| | EUR-18826, FZKA-6312, ISBN- 92-894-

2088-X, European Communities 2001

Probabilistic Accident Consequence

Uncertainty Assessment Using COSYMA:

Overall Uncertainty Analysis.

| | Eyüpoğlu, F., Türkiye topraklarının

verimlilik durumları, 1999.

| | Gardner, R.H.: Huff, D.D., O'Neill, R.V.,

Mankin, J.B., Carney, J. and Jones, J.:

1980, Application of Error Analysis to a

Marsh Hydrology Model, Water

Resources Res. 16, 659-664.

| | Gardner, R.H., O'Neill, R.V., Mankin, J.B.

and Carney, J.H.: 1981, A Comparison

of Sensitivity Analysis and Error Analysis

Based on a Stream Ecosystem Model,

Ecol. Modelling. 12, 173- 190.

| | Garger, E.K., Hoffman, F.O., Thiessen,

K.M., Uncertainty of the long-term

resuspension factor, Atmos. Environ. 31

(1997) 1647–1656.

| | Health Canada, Recommendations on

Dose Coefficients for Assessing Doses

from Accidental Radionuclide Releases

to the Environment, 1999.

| | Health Protection Agency, Application

of the 2007 Recommendations of the

ICRP to the UK, 2009.

| | Helton, J.C., Garner, J.W., Marietta,

M.G., Rechard, R.E, Rudeen, D.K. and

Swift, EN.: 1993. Uncertainty and

Sensitivity Analysis Results Obtained in

a Preliminary Performance assessment

for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Nuc.

Sci. and Eng. 114, 286-331.

| | Helton, J.C., Garner, J.W., McCurley, R.D.

and Rudeen, D.K. Sensitivity analysis

techniques and results for performance

assessment at the waste isolation pilot

plant. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia

National Laboratory; Report No.

SAND90-7103, 1991.

Research and Innovation

Design and Development of a Radio eco logical Domestic User Friendly Code for Calculation of Radiation Doses and Concentration due to Airborn Radio nuclides Release

A. Haghighi Shad, D. Masti, M. Athari Allaf, K. Sepanloo, S.A.H. Feghhi and R. Khodadadi

More magazines by this user