i j~ y 3. at7 a ec i i i i i2nw -rpojt aec research and hw .../67531/metadc...the atomic energy...
TRANSCRIPT
I J~ Y 3. At7 A ECI I I I I2Nw -, R RESEARCH -RPOJT
AEC RESEARCH AND HW- 81964DEVELOPMENT REPORT
BETA-GAMMA DOSE RATES FROM U2 3 2 IN U2 3 3
F. E. OWEN
APRIL 1964
IRRADIATION PROCESSING
HANFORD ATOMIC PRODUCTS OPERATION
RICHLAND, WASHINGTON
GENERAL E LECTRIC
UNIVERSITY OFARIZONA LIBRARY
Docitments ClectionSEP 9 1964
metadc100648
LEGAL NOTICE
This report was prepared as an account of Government sponsored work. Neither the United States,
nor the Commission, nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission:
A. Makes any warranty or representation, expressed or implied, with respect to the accuracy, com-
pleteness, or usefulness of the information contained in this report, or that the use of any information,apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report may not infringe privately owned rights; or
B. Assumes any liabilities with respect to the use of, or for damages resulting from the use of
any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report.
As used in the above, "person acting on behalf of the Commission" includes any employee or
contractor of the Commission, or employee of such contractor, to the extent that such employee or con-
tractor of the Commission, or employee of such contractor prepares, disseminates, or provides access to,
any information pursuant to his employment or contract with the Commission, or his employment withsuch contractor.
AEC-GE RICHLAND. WASH.
HW -81964
UC -41, Health and Safety(TID-4500, 31st Ed. )
BETA-GAMMA DOSE RATES FROM U2 3 2 IN U2 3 3
By
F. E. Owen
Process and Reactor DevelopmentResearch and Engineering
Irradiation Processing Department
April 1964
HANFORD ATOMIC PRODUCTS OPERATIONRICHLAND, WASHINGTON
Work performed under Contract No. AT(45-1)-1350 betweenthe Atomic Energy Commission and General Electric Company
Printed by/for the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission
HW-81964
INTRODUCTION
The gamma and beta dose rates encountered with U233 are createdby the daughters of U2 3 2 which is invariably present as an impurity.
Large scale production of U2 3 3 with low concentrations of U2 3 2
(less than 10 ppm) will create a need for a simple method of predicting
dose rates to which personnel could be exposed. This report defines in
detail the source of the dose rate and describes a method by which they
may be predicted.
It would be impossible to predict all significant dose rates because
of the variety of shapes, sizes, and chemical compositions that U233 can
assume during production and use. However, the method is based on a
fully developed set of dose rates for a single finite mass of U2 3 3 that can
be easily adjusted to an actual situation. Since the exposure received by
personnel working with Pu239 is familiar to many who may be concerned.U 233 exouete 239*
with U exposures, the Pu dose rates for a comparable source are
included to be used as a comparison for assistance in predicting total
personnel exposures.
In contrast to Pu2 3 9 , the other items of radiological concern are
far less significant for U2 3 3 of low U232 concentration. Neutron dose rates
do not become significant. Its hazard value(1) for contamination control and
for internal emitters falls in the intermediate group whereas Pu2 3 9 is in the
very hazardous group.
Information calculated from Arnold's(2) work indicated that it would
not be necessary to develop fully the neutron dose rates. The spontaneous
fission neutron production in U233 contaminated with as much as 100 ppm
U232 is insignificant compared to Pu239. In the presence of most light
elements, the (a, n) reaction neutrons from U233 are less than 10% of the
neutrons from Pu2 3 9 U 2 3 2 contamination would have to exceed 10 ppm
and its age would have to be several years before it and its daughters could
Isotopic composition: 93. 5% Pu239, 6% Pu240, and 0. 5% Pu241
-2-
HW -81964
develop enough alpha activity to cause (a, n) neutrons equal to U233. Under
these conditions, the gamma dose rates would be intolerably high before the
neutron dose rate is high enough to be significant. Only if the source is
heavily shielded for gamma radiation are the neutrons likely to become
significant.
SUMMARY
The significant external dose rate from U2 3 3 comes from the daughters
of the U2 3 2 that is present as an impurity. For this reason, the dose rates
increase with time as the daughter activity increases. The rate of increase
is governed by the 1. 9-year half-life of Th228. The radiation consists pri-
marily of very penetrating gamma (2. 6 Mev) from T1208 and energetic beta
from both Bi212 (2. 26 Mev) and T1208 (1. 8 Mev). At 1 ppm U232, the dose
rate starts well below that of Pu2 3 9 * but is equal to it within a month or two
and reaches a level an order of magnitude higher within a year. The dose
rates will be in direct proportion to the amount of U232 present, increased
amounts of which will significantly reduce the age at which U2 3 3 can be
handled at a reasonable dose rate. For example, at 10 ppm U232, the U233
dose rate exceeds that of Pu239 in 10 days and is 2 orders of magnitude
higher in a year.
DISCUSSION OF CALCULATIONS
The calculations in this report are based on a thin disc of U233 metal
whose physical characteristics are:
Weight = 1. 0 kg 3Density = 18.7 g/cmThickness = 0. 7 cmDiameter = 10 cm2Projected Area = 78 cm 232 ( g kImpurity = 1 ppm U = (1 mg per kg of U2 3 3 )
If a Pu239 source is used for comparison, it also is a 1. 0-kg thin disc 10 cm
in diameter.
* Isotopic composition: 93. 5% Pu 2 3 9 , 6% Pu2 4 0, and 0. 5% Pu 2 4 1
-3-
HW-81964
Decay Activity
The U 2 3 2 decays by alpha disintegrations with a 74-year half-life. (3)
One mg has an activity of 20. 94 mc.
232The complete decay scheme for U and its daughters is shown in
Figure 1.(' The activity during a 10-year period was calculated for
each of the daughters from this decay scheme. For the first 380 days, the
activity of each individual nuclide was computed at 0. 5-day intervals for
20 days, and at 10-day intervals for 380 days through a computer program.
After this, only the Th2 2 8 (1. 9-year half-life) activity was computed. The
rest of the daughters which have a relatively short half-life are in equilibrium
with Th228 and were assumed to have equal activity. T12 0 8 and Po212 are
exceptions, being on branch chains and having activities of 36% and 64% of
Th228, respectively. The Th228 activity was calculated as follows:
( ) C -x t -x Th)CTh = T(e U - e
Th (ATh ~ U
CTh = Th2 2 8 activity (mc)
CU = Initial U232 activity (20. 94 mc)
T 0. 693 =0.363'Th 1. 9 yr
= 0. 693 = 0. 00942U 74yr
t = Total decay time for Th228 in years
' C = (21. 5) (e-0.009ret- d-0. 363t)''CThiona65)cet-d
Tl20 is on a 36% branch in the decay chain
.'' T1= (21. 5) (0. 36) (e-0. 00942t _ -0. 363t)
-4-
HW-81964
_ _ I __ __ I __ __ _ _
100
50
10
5
U Rad
Mode of Decay
U2 3 2
74 yr Alpha$
Th228
1. 9 yr Alpha
a224
3. 64 day Alpha
Rn2 2 0
54 sec Alpha
PO 216
0. 16 sec Alpha
Pb12
10. 6 hr Beta (0. 355)
Bi212
64% 36%60 min Beta (2. 26) 60 min Alpha
po 2120. 3 psec Alpha
Ti20 8
3. 1 min Beta (1. 8)
Pb2 08
K'
ioactive Decay Chain
Gamma Radiation
Photon Yield
Energy, Mev (Photon/Disintegration)
0.0580. 131
0.0840. 1370. 1690. 2080. 217
0.240.290.410.65
0.54
0.00210.00075
0.0160.00160.00130.00030.0030
0.037
0.0003
0.1150. 2390.30
0.040.730. 1241.622. 2
0. 2770.5100. 5820. 8592. 6
0.81
0.25
0.06
0. 10.250.80. 151.00
S I I I I 1 111
50 100 200 1 2
Age After Separation
FIGURE 1
Change in U233 Dose Rate Due to U232 Daughters
-5-
1 $ i
.0
.r,
0
0~
0
00
a
0. 5
0. 1
0.05
II I
2
I III5 10
Days
5 10
Years
AEC-GE RICHLAND. WASH.
-
_
" " " 1 1 1 1I 1 I,
2
I I
HW-81964
The computed activity for each of the U 2 3 2 daughters, which emit
a significant amount of gamma radiation, is tabulated at representative
time intervals in Table 1. The complete reference set of gamma photon
values given in Figure 1, used to compute dose rates in Table 1, were
consolidated for a single nuclide if the energies were about the same and
omitted if the yield was insignificant.
The total gamma radiation emitted by U233 and its daughters amounts
to 0. 2 mr/hr at 1 ft at 1 year and 2 mr/hr at 1 ft at 10 years; this is insig-
nificant compared to the gamma from even 1 ppm U232. Therefore, it has
been disregarded in the dose rate totals.
Gamma Dose Rates (Table 1)
The gamma dose rates were determined from each photon energy of
each gamma-emitting U232 daughter at the same representative time inter-
vals. The gamma activity (gamma curies) for each energy was determined
by multiplying the gamma photon yield(3' 4) in photons /disintegration by the
decay rate activity (curies) of each radionuclide. The gamma activity is
converted to dose rate at a finite distance (r/hr at 1 ft) by the dose rate
factor(3) for each particular gamma energy. Since all of the decay rate
activities were determined and tabulated (Table 1), the gamma photon yield
and the dose rate factor were combined into one multiplying factor, dose
rate conversion, which converts the decay rate activity in curies directly to
dose rate in r/hr at 1 ft.
Dose Rate Conversion(r/hr at 1 ft/curie)
Dose Rate _ Dose Rate Factor Gamma Photon Yield DecayRate(r/hr at 1 ft) (r/hr at 1 ft/curie gamma) X (Photon/disintegration) X Activity
(curie)
In Table 1, this operation is shown for the daughters of 1 mg of U2 3 2 .
(1 mg U232 = 1 ppm U232 in 1 kg U233) and the resulting individual dose rates
are given in mr/hr from millicurie values of the decay rate activities. The
total dose rate from 1 mg U232 and daughters is equal to the sum of the individ-
ual dose rates for the various energy levels of each of the radionuclides. In
Table 1 the dose rates have been individually totaled and recorded in five energy
groups to be available for use where shielding is introduced.
-6-
HW-81964
C
to
W-
C-4-
0W
Cd
rCdV
c
4-
4-' C(1
o
cd
Cd
d) -
Q--
C
U-
0)--
1I 41I_ _I_ _1_4 1
TABLE 1
ACTIVITY AND GAMMA DOSE RATE OF U232 AND DAUGHTERS
(Calculated for 1 mg U232)
Decay Rate Activity -(mc)
4 Days
me mr/hr
7 Days 14 Days
me mr/hr mc mr/hr
20 Days
m c mr/hr
40 Days
m c mr/hr
Gamma Dose Rate(mr/hr at 1 ft)
60 Days
me mr/hr
120 Days
me mr/hr
280 Days
mc mr/hr
2 Years 10 Years
mc mr /hr mc mr /hr
74 yr I
I
1.9 yr I
I
0.06
0. 13
0. 2
0.084
0. 002
0.00075
0.006
0.016
0.3
0.7
1.2
0.45
1 x 10
1. 4 x 10 2
20. 9 0.02 20.9
0.08 ---- 0.145
0.02 20.9
0.290
0.02 20.9 0.02 20.9
0.412 0.01
0.02 20.9 0.02 20.9
0.815 0.01 1.21 0.02 2.35
---- 2.08
5.0
20. 6 ---- 19.1
0.1 10.7 0.2 18.8 0.3
3.64 day II 0.24 0.037
10.6 hr
60
II 0.25 0.81
min I 0.04 0.25
IV 0.73 0.06
3.1 min II 0.3 0.10
III 0.57 1.05
IV 0.86 0.15
V 2.6 1.00
EnergyGroup
I
II
III
IV
V
1.3
1.5
0. 15
4. 7
1.8
3.7
5.5
12.5
0. 048
1.2
0. 027
0.28
0. 18
3.9
0. 83
12.5
0.025 ---- 0.066 ---- 0.191 0.01 0.312 0.01
0.018 0.02 0.057 0.07 0.176 0.21 0.294 0.35
0.018
0.0065
RepresentativeEnergy, Mev
0. 1
0. 25
0. 57
0.80
2.6
---- 0.055
0.01
---- 0.020
0.03
0.01
0.08
0.02
0.02
0.03
0. 02
0.08
0. 17
---- 0. 175
0.02 0.05
0.293 0.010.08
---- 0.063 0.01 0.105 0.02
0.08
0.02
0.25
0.02
0.07
0.08
0.04
0. 25
0.46
0.250.05
0. 79
0.02
0. 23
0. 25
0. 10
0. 79
1.39
0.40
0.09
1.31
0. 04
0. 39
0. 40
0. 17
1.31
2.31
0.721 0.03 1.12 0.05 2.29 0.1 5.0
0.698 0.84 1.09 1.31 2.25 2.7 5.0
0.697 0.03 1.09 0.04 2.25 0.1 5.0
0.20 0. 31 0.a6
0.2 10.7 0.5 18.8 0.9
6.0 10.7 12.8 18.8 22.6
0.2 10.7 0.4
1.4
0.250 0.05 0.394 0.07 0.807 0.2 1.79 0.3
0. 97
0.21
3. 13
0.06
0. 92
0. 97
0.41
3. 13
5.49
1.53
0. 33
4. 93
0.08
1.43
1.53
0. 64
4.93
8. 61
3.1
0. 7
10. 1
0. 1
3.0
3. 1
1.3
10. 1
17.6
7.0
1.5
22.4
0. 3
6.5
7.0
2.9
22.4
29. 1
3.0
3.85 0.6
15.0
3. 2
48. 1
0. 6
13.9
15.0
6. 3
48. 1
83.8
6.77 0.7
5.3
1.2
26.4
5. 6
84. 6
1.o
24. 7
26. 4
10. 9
84. 6
147. 6
Total Gamma Dose Rate at 1 ft (mr/hr)
AEC-GE RICHLAND, WASH
C)
z
Pb2 1 2
Ti2 0 8
-7-
Th2 28
HW-81964
Self-Shielding (Table 2)
The self-shielding of the gamma radiation created by the uranium is
quite significant and was calculated by the following formula:
D(p/) (1 - e~4X) bD = b
x xp
DX = Self-shielded dose rate (mr/hr)
Do = Calculated gamma dose rate of a finite energy with
no self-shielding (mr/hr) (Values from Table 1)
p/p = Mass attenuation coefficient for uranium (cm2Ig)
xp = Mass thickness of uranium slab (g/cm2)
b = Buildup factor
The contribution to the total dose rate from each successive layer of
a homogeneous slab source is reduced by self-shielding at a rate propor-
tional to e where p/p is the mass attenuation coefficient (cm2Ig).
Ultimately, the infinitely thick slab would have a dose rate equal to that
from an amount of source material, not self-shielded, contained in a layer
whose thickness is the reciprocal of the mass attenuation factor.
Although a buildup factor (b) is given in the equation, actually there
will be little buildup since the major contribution to the total dose rate
comes from the surface layers of the slab. An estimated buildup of 10%
(factor = 1. 1) was used for all cases.
-8-
HW-81964
Energy Group
Self-ShieldingReduction Factor
Age AfterSeparation, Days
4
7
14
20
40
60
120
280
2 years
10 years
TABLE 2
GAMMA DOSE RATE - SELF-SHIELDED
(at 1 ft from 1 mg U2 3 2 Contained in
1. 0-kg U2 3 3 Disc 0. 7 cm Thick)
Dose Rate at 1 ft
II III IV
0. 12
(mr /hr)
<0.01
0.01
0.03
0.05
0. 11
0. 17
0. 4
0. 8
1.7
3.0
0.48
(mr /hr)
0.02
0.04
0. 12
0. 19
0.47
0.73
1.5
3.4
7.2
12.7
0. 62
(mr/hr)
0.01
0.03
0.06
0. 11
0.25
0.40
0.8
1.8
3.9
6. 8
V Total
0.85
(mr/hr)
0.07
0.21
0.67
1. 11
2. 66
4. 19
8. 6
19. 0
40. 9
71.9
(mr /hr)
0. 10
0.29
0.88
1.46
3.49
5.49
11.3
25. 0
53. 7
94. 4
Example
From Table 1, Energy Group IV, at 10 years:
Dose rate Do = 10. 9 mr /hr
Gamma energy = 0. 8 Mev
Mass absorption coefficient - uranium (pip) = 0. 1 cm2Ig
Slab thickness (x) = (0. 7 cm) (18. 7 g/cm3) = 13 g/cm2
Dose buildup factor (b) = 1. 1
D = (10.9)(1. 1) (1 - e(0. 1)(13)x (0. 1)(13)
D = (10.9)(0. 62) = 6.8 mr/hr
-9-
HW -81964
The self-shielding factor for 0. 8 Mev gamma from the 0. 7-cm-thick
uranium source is 0. 62. The self-shielding dose rate reduction factors for
each energy group are shown in Table 2. The dose rates given in Table 2
are the results of the Table 1 values reduced by the self-shielding factors.
By totaling the resulting dose rates for the individual energy groups, the
total dose rate from the 1. 0-kg disc was determined.
Shielded Dose Rate, 1/4-in. Lead Filter (Table 3)
The low energy dose rates are significantly reduced when shielded
by a 1/4 in. of lead. The amount of reduction was calculated for each
shielding group. The reduction factor for each shielding group was calculated
from the following equation:
D
x
where
D = originating dose rate from Table 2,
b = dose buildup factor for lead,
4/p = mass absorption coefficient for lead (cm2/g),
xp = mass thickness of the lead, (1/4 in)(2. 54)(11. 34) = 7. 2 g/cm2, and
D -7.2 p/pRF = D beb/.x
The reduction factor for each energy group is shown in Table 3. The dose
rates given in Table 3 are the Table 2 self-shielded dose rate values reduced
by the 1/4-in. lead shield reduction factors.
-10 -
HW-81964
TABLE 3
GAMMA DOSE RATE AT 1 ft THROUGH 1/4-in. LEAD FILTER
(for1 mg U233 in1. Okg U233 0. 7cm thick)
Energy Group
1/4-in. Lead ShieldReduction Factor
Age AfterSeparation, Days
4
7
14
20
40
60
120
280
2
10
years
years
II
0. 025
mr /hr
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0. 1
<0. 1
<0. 1
0. 1
0. 1
Dose
III
0. 5
mr/hr
0.01
0.02
0.06
0. 10
0.24
0.37
0. 8
1. 7
3. 6
6. 4
Rate at 1
IV
0. 6
mr /hr
0.01
0.02
0.04
0.07
0. 15
0.24
0. 5
1. 1
2.4
4. 1
V Total
0.8
mr/hr
0.06
0. 17
0.54
0.89
2. 13
3.35
6. 9
15. 2
32. 7
57.5
mr /hr
0.08
0.21
0. 65
1.07
2. 53
3. 97
8. 3
18. 1
38. 8
68. 1
Beta Dose Rates and Total Dose Rates
In 1958, Heid and Keck(5) measured dose rates from a thin metal
disc of U 2 3 3 about 2 months after separation:
Weight
Density
Diameter
Area
Thickness
Impurity U 2 3 2
= 500to 600 g
= 18. 7 g/cm3 (assumed)
= 7 cm
= 39 cm 2
= 0. 7cm
= 60 ppm (~ 30 mg)
They used a HAPO extended CP (TCP), which has a chamber 3 in. in
diameter and 5-11/16 in. long with 7 mg/cm2 end window and 440 mg/cm 2
walls, to make the measurements. Their measurements are shown in Table 4.
-11-
TABLE 4
ABSORPTION STUDY(5)
233Mati: 'al Identification U CBM-8, MPM-2 15, 256
Chamb. Metal TCP MeterDiStanc t. mr/hr
00. 51. 01.52. 02. 53.03.5
41003150260021501850155013501200
D-1/2
0.01570. 01780. 01960. 02160. 02320. 02540. 02740. 0289
2Thick Lead, 2. 041 g/cm Per Layer
Layers mr/hr % Penetration
0 4100 1000-Lead + Acetate 3900 95.21-Lead + Acetate 1200 29.32 -Lead + Acetate 1050 25.63-Lead + Acetate 950 23.24-Lead + Acetate 900 22.05-Lead + Acetate 800 19.5
Thin Lead, 0. 136 g/cm2 Per Layer
Layers mr /hr
00 -Lead + Acetate1-Lead + Acetate2-Lead + Acetate3-Lead + Acetate4-Lead + Acetate5-Lead + Acetate
4100390022001650140013501300
By A. H. Keck Date 7-14-58
Dimensions 2-3/4-in. -Diameter ButtonWeight 500-600 g
Aluminum, 0. 02536 g/cm2
Per Layer
Layers
01
23456789
10152030405060
mr /hr % Penetration
41003800355033503200300028502700255025502300190016001450140014001400
100. 692. 686. 681. 878. 173.269. 565. 962. 262. 256. 246. 339. 135. 434. 234. 234. 2
Cellulose Acetate, 0. 00976 g/cm2
Per Layer
Layers
% Penetration 01
100 295.2 353.6 440.2 534.2 633 731.7 8
9
Thick Brass, 0. 1057 g/cm2 Per Layer
Layers mr/hr % Penetration
0 4100 1001 3000 73.22 2250 553 1800 43.94 1550 37.85 1400 34.2
Thin Brass, 0. 023 g/cm2 Per Layer
mr/hr
4100375035003300310029002700
mr/hr % Penetration
41003900380037003600350034503400330032003150285026002150180017001600
10152030405060
10095. 292. 790. 387. 885. 484. 082. 980. 578. 276. 869. 563.452. 543. 941. 539.0
% Penetration
10091.585. 580. 575. 670. 865.9
1S
Layers
0123456
Co
COaP
s
w
b
s
r
s
0
HW-81964
The distance was measured nominally from the surface of the disc to the
chamber end window, the maximum being 3. 5 in.
Figure 2 shows the calculation of the surface dose rate from their
measurements with a resulting dose rate of 72 rad/hr. The surface dose
rate of U2 3 3 metal depends on the thickness of the metal and the concentra-
tion of beta-gamma emitters (ppm U2 3 2 and age of the metal). The basic
1. 0-kg thin disc of U233 was purposely established to have the same thick-
ness as the one measured by Keck and Heid, so at the same age (60 days),
the dose will be in direct proportion to the ppm of U2 3 2 and have a dose rate
of (72 rad/hr)(1 ppm) = 1. 2 rad/hr at the surface, which is the dose rate(60 ppm) 233 232
of a thin metal disc of U containing 1 ppm U
Using the values from Table 4, Heid calculated the total dose rate
(beta plus gamma) at 1 ft to be 475 mrad/hr by the DR2 method. (4) Converting
this to a dose rate for the basic 1. 0-kg U233 thin disc with 1 ppm U232 yields
(475) (1) (78) 15. 8 mrad/hr at 1 ft. In this calculation, the dose rate was(60) (39)reduced by the ratio of U2 3 2 and increased by the ratio of the projected areas.
The thickness of both discs is the same. At 60 days, the difference between
this total dose rate 15. 8 rnrad /hr, and the calculated gamma dose rate, 5. 5
mr/hr (Table 2), amounts to 10. 3 mrad/hr. This is assumed to be the beta
contribution and it amounts to 65% of the total. This is in close agreement
with the value determined by Heid and Keck, which is slightly in excess of
60%.
Heid calculated a spectrum of effective energies from the measured
data in Table 4 by a method Helgeson documented. (6) The energy distribu-
tion measured and calculated by Heid for 60-day-old material compared
favorably with the theoretical distribution.
-13-
s
A
i1
n
S
r
s
v
s
N
Z
U2 3 3
Metal Button Diameter 2-3/4 in.
60 Days \60 ppm U
2 3 2 J
A =n 2.7)=5.9in. 2
(2 n) (l r) 2Ds ATlY D-1
D = (2r) (5.2)2
s(5. 9) (0. 02) (103)
D = 72 rad/hr Surfaces Dose Rate
0. 024
0. 020
0. 016
0.012
C. 008
0. 004
0
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
Relative Distance, in.
FIGURE 2
Surface Dose Rate Determination by DR2 Method(4 )
'I
5
0.032
0. 028
-r = 5. 2 in.
-4 6
Co
N
O
O
It
.- 4
I
1
I
HW-81964
Beta and Gamma Energy Distribution
A Comparison Between Measured and Calculated Values
(5) iFrom Ta.ble IIIFrom Heid-Keck Theoretical
Energy Range, Mev Measurements, % Calculations, %
1.5 to 2. 6 Gamma 30 26. 1
0.5 to 1.5Gamma <5 7
0. 15 to 0.5Gamma 6 1
<0. 15 Gamma 2 <0. 1
2. 0 - 3. OMev Beta 60+ 65
212Bi is a primary beta emitter in the decay chain and it is in equilib-
rium with the other beta emitters, so it was assumed that the beta dose rate
remains in proportion to the Bi212 activity. The calculated beta dose rate of
10. 3 mrad/hr at 1 ft and the total surface dose rate of 1. 2 rad/hr at 60 days
were used to determine the dose rates at the other decay ages, by proportion-
ing them to the Bi212 activity (millicuries) in.Table 5.
Pu 239*Dose Rates
The dose rates for Pu239 given in this document are from measure-
ments of production metal and represent not a single measurement but the
long term average. The measurements were adjusted to the 1. 0-kg thin
metal disc. These are 1. 2 r /hr at the surface, 13 mr/hr at 1 ft from the
bare metal, and, when the metal is shielded by'1/4 in. of lead, 2 mr /hr at 1 ft.
Although the bare metal dose rate will build up with time as the Am241 activity
increases, this has not been considered in the dose rates given here and
shown in Figures 3 and 4. The main contributors to the Pu239 dose rate are
Pu2 3 9 and U2 3 7 and fission products. The plutonium isotopes and daughters
all have energies less than 0. 4 Mev and because so much of it is below 0. 04 Mev,
the 1/4-in. lead shield reduces total dose rate to insignificance.
* Isotopic composition: 93. 5% Pu239 6% Pu240 and 0. 5% Pu241
-15-
HW -81964
TABLE 5
Age, Days
4
7
14
20
40
60*
120
280
2 years
10 years
TOTAL DOSE RATE FOR BARE U 2 3 3 METAL
Dose Rates*
Activity Beta Total Beat and Gamma
Bi212 at 1 ft, at 1. 0 ft, Surfacemc mrad/hr mrad/hr rad/hr
0.018 0.2 0.3 0.02
0.055 0.5 0.8 0.06
0.175 1.7 2.6 0.19
0.293 2.8 4.3 0.32
0.697 6.6 10.1 0.78
1.09 10. 3* 15.8 1. 2*
2.25 21.2 32.5 2.45
5.0 47 72 5.5
10.7 110 154 11.8
18.8 117 271 20.6
* Basis: Calculated beta dose rate at 60 days. Other dose rates
are in proportion to the Bi212 activity.
-16-
-17-
- U233
Bare Metal
239 F. P. Carryover .23U'Shielded byPu Bare Metal 1/4 in. Lead Filte
239-Pu Shielded by1/4 in. Lead Filter
-233 Thin Metal Disc
1 kg 1 ppm U2 3 2
0.7 cm Thick
78 cm Area
Dose Rate
F. P. Carryover Bare Metal 65% Beta35% Gamma
Shielded Metal 100% Gamma
- -- ii50 10.0 2.00 1 2 5 10
Years
5 10
Days
Age After Separation
FIGURE 3
U233 Dose Rate at 1 ft Due to U232 Daughters
AEC-GE RICHLAND. WASH.
HW -81964
100
50
10
5~0Q
1
0. 5
0. 1
-18- HW-81964
10
5
1
10 50 100 200
Days
1 2 5 10
Years
Age After Separation
FIGURE 4
U233 Surface Dose Rate Due to U232 Daughters
AEC-GE RICHLAND. WASH.
UP233 Bare Metal
Pu239 Bare Metal
U2 3 3
Thin Metal Disc
1 kg 1 ppm U2 3 2
0.7 cm Thick
78 cm2 Area
Dose Rate: 65% Beta35% Gamma
F. P. Carryover
0. 5a)
0
0.1
0.05
0.01
5
HW-81964
Fission Product Contribution
All of the gamma radiation greater than 0. 4 Mev comes from fission
products that have carried over from the irradiated fuel separations process.
The 2 mr/hr at 1 ft dose rate (1/4-in. lead filtered) shown in Figure 3 can
be attributed entirely to fission product carryover. This dose rate will
reduce with time as the fission products decay away.
In U233 production, some fission product carryover can be expected.
On the basis of Pu239* production experience, it might be expected to con-
tribute as much as the 2 mr/hr at 1 ft and 0. 1 to 0. 2 r/hr at surface. Since
there is no sound basis for this judgment, it has been depicted in Figures 3
and 4 as gray zones marked "F. P. Carryover. "
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
U233 metal increases in radioactivity with time because of the U232
impurity whose daughters emit both gamma and beta radiations in significant
quantity. The dose rate increases as the U2 3 2 daughters are produced as
decay products after chemical separation has taken place. The activity
buildup is determined by the 1. 9-year half-life Th228, the first daughter of
U232. The remaining daughters come into equilibrium with the Th228 veryquickly, because their total half-life amounts to only 4 days. By the end of
10 years, a maximum is reached as the Th228 reaches equlibrium with the
74-year half-life U2 3 2
Figure 1
The dose rate buildup calculated in Table 2 was converted to percent
buildup versus time growth and is presented in Figure 1. This is based on
100% for the maximum dose rate which will be reached at about 10 years,
when the Th228 comes into equilibrium with the U232 Time of growth
starts with the chemical separation step in the U233 production process.
The daughters of U232 are elementally different from uranium, so although
U 2 3 2 remains with the U233, the daughters can be removed by a chemical
separation process.
Isotopic composition: 93. 5%P239, 6% Pu240, and 0. 5% Pu241
-19-
HW-81964
The dose rates which build up 1 ft from the basic 1. 0 kg thin metal
disc are shown in Figure 3, both from the bare metal and from metal
shielded with 1/4 in. of lead. This is a graphical display of values obtained
from Tables 3 and 5.
Since there is a sizeable amount of beta and some lower energy
gamma radiations present as well as the very penetrating 2. 6 Mev gamma
from T1 2 0 8 , a 1/4-in. lead filter was used as a method for showing and
comparing the penetrating radiations with those more readily shielded.
Average dose rates encountered in handling Pu239* metal of the same size
and shape are included for comparison.
The shaded area in Figure 3 indicates the increased dose rate that
might result from fission product carryover from the separation process.
If anything, this estimate is high. With Pu239*, for example, the shielded
dose rate of 2 mr/hr at 1 ft comes entirely from fission products carried
over. It will be noted that the dose rate from bare metal U233 aged about
60 days equals that of Pu2 3 9 *. The penetrating dose rates, however, are
equal when the U233 is less than a month old because of the predominately
high energy gamma from U233 and low energy gammas from Pu239*
Figure 4
The U233 surface dose rate which builds up with time is shown in
Figure 4. These values are taken from Table 5. As a comparison, the
average surface dose rate found on Pu239* metal is shown on the chart.
It will be noted that the dose rates are about equal when the U2 3 3 has aged
about 60 days.
CONCLUSIONS
The information presented here may be used to determine or predict232 228 208 208the dose rates when U is present or whenever the Th--4j-T12 > Pb
chain occurs in a wide variety of situations for U233 processing and handling.
The information is also adaptable to situations other than those of U2 3 3
material.
Isotopic composition: 93.5% Pu2 3 9 , 6% Pu240 and 0. 5Pu241
-20-
HW-81964
1. ppm of U2 3 2
All beta and gamma dose rates from U233 are directly proportional
to the ppm of U.2 32
2. Dose Rate Buildup
The change in dose rate for a U232 created source can be deter-
mined over any time period from the curve in Figure 1.
3. Shielding
In Table 1, the dose rate from each energy of gamma radiation
has been determined at significant time intervals so the effect of
shielding can be accurately calculated.
4. Uranium Self-Shielding
An equation for determining the self-shielding for a homogeneous
source is given in the Calculations and values for the 1. 0-kg U2 3 3
disc are given in Table 3.
5. Beta Dose Rates
a. Beta radiation is a surface phenomenon so that changes in a
field beta dose rate are directly proportional to the projected
area of the source. Table 5 gives the field beta dose rates
from an area of 78 cm2
b. The beta radiations are so energetic (1. 8 to 2. 26 Mev) that
the beta-to-gamma ratio remains constant out to distances of
a foot or more from the source.
c. The surface beta dose rate is independent of the area and mass
and depends only on the concentration of U232
6. Approximations
a. If the mass of metal is larger or smaller than 1 kg, the field
dose rates from the higher energy gammas, those filtered
by 1/4 in. of lead (Table 3 and Figure 3), can be assumed to
change in direct proportion to the mass.
-21-
HW-81964
b. If the area (78 cm2) of the disc is changed, the total dose
rate 1 ft from bare metal (Table 5 and Figure 3) will
change in direct proportion to the area.
c. The beta-to-gamma ratio is about 2:1 for the 1. 0-kg thin
disc considered; this will reduce to about 1:1 for a 1-kg
sphere.
7. Th228
If Th28 is present in other materials, the dose rates can be
estimated by comparison of the Th228 curies /kg of material
to the corresponding dose rates given in this report.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I wish to express my appreciation to R. H. Meichle and
R. O. Gumprecht, for their preparation and computation of individual U232daughter radionuclide activities during the initial period of buildup, and to
K. R. Heid whose measurements in 1958 made presentation of the beta dose
possible.
-22-
HW-81964
REFERENCES
1. K. Z. Morgan, W. S. Snyder, and M. R. Ford. "Relative Hazard of
the Various Radioactive Materials, " Health Physics, vol. 10, pp. 151-169.
March 1964.
2. E. D. Arnold. "Radiation Limitations on Recycle of Power Reactor Fuels, "
p/1838, Proceedings of the Second United Nations International Conference
on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy, vol. 13, pp. 237-250. United
Nations, Geneva, 1958.
3. "Radiological Health Handbook, " edited by S. Kinsman, U. S. Dept. of
Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Service, Washington 25, D. C.
September 1960.
4. Landolt-Bornstein Numerical Data and Functional Relationships in Science
and Technology. New Series, K. H. Hellwege, editor, Group I. Nuclear
Physics and Technology, vol. I. Energy Levels of Nuclei: A-5 to A-257.
Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1961.
5. K. R. Heid and A. H. Keck. Unpublished Data, "Exposure Rates from
U3 Source Two Months after Separation. "October 8, 1958.
6. G. L. Helgeson. Surface Dosimetry and Effective Energy Calculations,
HW-41439. September 8, 1956.
7. C. M. Unruh. The Radiological Physics of Plutonium, HW-SA-2740.
August 30, 1962.
-23-
HW-81964
INTERNAL DISTRIBUTION
Copy No.
123456789
10111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849
T. W. AmbroseR. D. AndersonE. R. AstleyG. E. BackmanA. E. BarberW. V. Baumgartner0. F. BeaulieuR. S. BellW. A. BlantonJ. G. BradleyL. I. BreckeL. L. BurgerR. E. BurnsL. A. CarterV. R. ChapmanE. W. ChristophersonE. A. CoppingerJ. J. CourtneyG. E. CunninghamK. DrumhellerL. G. FaustJ. B. FechtW. J. FergusonJ. W. FillmoreL. W. FinchR. F. FosterW. S. FrankG. C. FullmerW. J. GartinS. M. GillJ. C. GloverS. M. Graves0. H. GreagerR. 0. GumprechtM. K. HarmonW. M. HartyR. W. HarveyH. W. HeacockH. H. HopkinsD. L. HovorkaW. P. HowellL. L. HumphreysW. P. IngallsE. R. IrishR. E. IsaacsonJ. J. JechP. C. JermanR. T. JessenB. F. Judson
Copy No.
50515253545556575859606162636465666768697071727374757677787980818283848586878889909192939495969798
R. L. JunkinsA. R. KeeneL. M. KnightsW. N. KoopL. E. KuslerL. W. LangM. C. LeverettC. G. LewisR. H. MeichleL. R. MichelsJ. E. MinorW. N. MobleyR. L. MooreH. A. MoulthropR. NilsonG. C. ObergF. E. OwenG. F. OwsleyA. M. PlattH. G. PowersH. C. RathvonR. W. ReidP. H. ReinkerL. H. RiceW. C. RoeschC. A. RohrmannH. G. RuppertE. D. SayreO. C. SchroederH. P. ShawR. E. SlaterR. J. SloatA. E. SmithM. L. SmithR. H. SmithS. G. SmolenJ. H. SoehnleinW. G. SpearA. J. StevensR. W. StewartJ. T. StringerW. H. SwiftM. J. SzulinskiR. E. TomlinsonR. E. TrumbleC. M. UnruhJ. W. VanderbeekH. H. Van TuylA. P. Vinther
-24-
HW-81964
INTERNAL DISTRIBUTION
Copy No.
99 M. T. Walling
100 L. R. Wallis
101 W. G. Westover
102 O. J. Wick
103 F. W. Woodfield
104 W. K. Woods
105 300 File Copy
106 Record Center
107 - 111 Extra
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION (Special)
No. of Copies
1 Atomic Energy Commission, WashingtonMilitary Liaison CommitteeAttn: Captain D. E. McCoy, Staff Assistant
to the Chairman
1 Richland Operations OfficeAttn: Technical Information Library
-25-
UC-41HEALTH AND SAFET
Ptd.
12
1
1
2
2
4
10
4
1
1
2
1
1
Y
Standard Distribution
ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND
AEROJET-GENERAL CORPORATION
AEROJET-GENERAL NUCLEONICS
AERONAUTICAL SYSTEMS DIVISION
AIR FORCE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
AIR FORCE SURGEON GENERAL
AIR FORCE SYSTEMS COMMAND
AIR FORCE WEAPONS LABORATORY
ALBUQUERQUE OPERATIONS OFFICE
ALLIS-CHALMERS MANUFACTURING COMPANY
*ALLIS-CHALMERS MANUFACTURING COMPANY,BETHESDA
ALLISON DIVISION-GMC
ARGONNE CANCER RESEARCH HOSPITAL
ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY
ARMED FORCES RADIOBIOLOGY RESEARCHINSTITUTE
ARMY CHEMICAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENTLABORATORIES
ARMY ELECTRONICS RESEARCH ANDDEVELOPMENT LABORATORIES
ARMY ENVIRONMENTAL HYGIENE AGENCY
ARMY MATERIALS RESEARCH AGENCY
ARMY MEDICAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
ARMY NATICK LABORATORIES
ARMY NUCLEAR DEFENSE LABORATORY
ARMY SURGEON GENERAL
ARMY TANK-AUTOMOTIVE CENTER
ATOMIC BOMB CASUALTY COMMISSION
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION, BETHESDA
AEC SCIENTIFIC REPRESENTATIVE, ARGENTINA
AEC SCIENTIFIC REPRESENTATIVE, BELGIUM
AEC SCIENTIFIC REPRESENTATIVE, FRANCE
AEC SCIENTIFIC REPRESENTATIVE, JAPAN
Ptd.
3
4
2
4
2
2
2
4
TID-4500
(31st Ed. )Standard Distribution
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION, WASHINGTON
ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED
ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED,WHITESHELL
ATOMICS INTERNATIONAL
BABCOCK AND WILCOX COMPANY
BATTELLE MEMORIAL INSTITUTE
BERYLLIUM CORPORATION
BRIDGEPORT BRASS COMPANY
BRIDGEPORT BRASS COMPANY, ASHTABULA
BROOKE ARMY MEDICAL CENTER
BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY
BUREAU OF MINES, ALBANY
BUREAU OF MINES, SALT LAKE CITY
BUREAU OF MINES, WASHINGTON
BUREAU OF SHIPS (CODE 1500)
BUREAU OF YARDS AND DOCKS
CHICAGO PATENT GROUP
COAST GUARD
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY (ROSSI)
COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC.
COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC. (NRD)
COMMITTEE ON THE EFFECTS OF ATOMICRADIATION
DEFENCE RESEARCH MEMBER
DEFENSE ATOMIC SUPPORT AGENCY,WASHINGTON
DIVISION OF RAW MATERIALS, WASHINGTON
DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY, ROCKY FLATS
DU PONT COMPANY, AIKEN
DU PONT COMPANY, WILMINGTON
EDGERTON, GERMESHAUSEN AND GRIER, INC.,GOLETA
EDGERTON, GERMESHAUSEN AND GRIER, INC.,LAS VEGAS
EDGEWOOD ARSENAL
FRANKFORD ARSENAL
1
1
1
11
I
TID-4500(31st Ed. )
Ptd.
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
UC-41
HEALTH AND SAFETY
Standard Distribution
FRANKLIN INSTITUTE OF PENNSYLVANIA
FUNDAMENTAL METHODS ASSOCIATION
GENERAL ATOMIC DIVISION
GENERAL DYNAMICS/FORT WORTH
GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, CINCINNATI
GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, PLEASANTON
GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, SAN JOSE
GENERAL INSTRUMENT CORPORATION
GOODYEAR ATOMIC CORPORATION
GRAND JUNCTION OFFICE
HAZLETON NUCLEAR SCIENCE CORPORATION
HOLMES AND NARVER, INC.
HUGHES AIRCRAFT COMPANY
IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE
KELLY AIR FORCE BASE
KNOLLS ATOMIC POWER LABORATORY
LING TEMCO BOUGHT, INC.
LOCKHEED-GEORGIA COMPANY
LOCKHEED MISSILES AND SPACE COMPANY(NASA)
LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY
LOVELACE FOUNDATION
LOWRY AIR FORCE BASE
M & C NUCLEAR, INC.
MALLINCKRODT CHEMICAL WORKS
MARITIME ADMINISTRATION
MARTIN-MARIETTA CORPORATION
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
MOUND LABORATORY
NASA LEWIS RESEARCH CENTER
NASA LEWIS RESEARCH CENTER, SANDUSKY
NASA MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER
Ptd.
2
2
1
2
3
2
10
6
3
Standard Distribution
NASA SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICALINFORMATION FACILITY
NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS
NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE
NATIONAL LEAD COMPANY OF OHIO
NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE
NAVAL MEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE
NAVAL ORDNANCE LABORATORY
NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
NAVAL RADIOLOGICAL DEFENSE LABORATORY
NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
NEVADA OPERATIONS OFFICE
NEW BRUNSWICK AREA OFFICE
NEW JERSEY STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
NEW YORK OPERATIONS OFFICE
NEW YORK UNIVERSITY (EISENBUD)
NUCLEAR MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENTCORPORATION
NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION
NUCLEAR UTILITY SERVICES, INC.
OFFICE OF ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSELFOR PATENTS (AEC)
OFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH
OFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH (CODE 422)
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS
OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY
FAN AMERICAN WORLD AIRWAYS, INC.
PETROLEUM CONSULTANTS
PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY (NRTS)
PICATINNY ARSENAL
POWER REACTOR DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
PRATT AND WHITNEY AIRCRAFT DIVISION
1
I
Standard Distribution
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY (SHERR)
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE. LAS VEGAS
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE, MONTGOMERY
RADIOPTICS, INC.
RAND CORPORATION
RENSSELAER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE
RESEARCH ANALYSIS CORPORATION
REYNOLDS ELECTRICAL AND ENGINEERINGCOMPANY, INC.
ROCKY MOUNTAIN ARSENAL
SANDIA CORPORATION, ALBUQUERQUE
SANDIA CORPORATION, LIVERMORE
SCHENECTADY NAVAL REACTORS OFFICE
SCHOOL OF AEROSPACE MEDICINE
SECOND AIR FORCE (SAC)
SOLON (LEO;ARD)
SPACE TECHNOLOGY LABORATORIES, INC.(NASA)
STANFORD UNIVERSITY (SLAC)
STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND
SYLVANIA ELECTRIC PRODUCTS, INC.
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
TODD SHIPYARDS CORPORATION
TULANE UNIVERSITY
UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION (ORGDP)
UNION CARBIDE CCRPORATICN (CRNL)
2
7
UC-41HEALTH AND SAFETY
Ptd.
1
2
1
Ptd.
2
4
2
2
325
UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION (PADUCAHPLANT)
TID-4500
(31st Ed.)Standard Distribution
UNITED NUCLEAR CORPORATION (NDA)
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY (BAL)
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DENVER
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, MENLO PARK
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, WASHINGTON
U. S. WEATHER BUREAU, LAS VEGAS
U. S. WEATHER BUREAU, WASHINGTON
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, DAVIS
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LIVERMORE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO
UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO, USAF RADIATIONLABORATORY
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII
UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO
UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER
UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE (UTA)
UNIVERSITY OF UTAH
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER
WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY
WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY
WESTINGHOUSE BETTIS ATOMIC POWERLABORATORY
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION(NASA)
WHITE SANDS MISSILE RANGE
DIVISION OF TECHNICAL INFORMATIONEXTENSION
1
1
.i: ,j -,
I
1
e
=
4
|