CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 4Radiation Therapy and DosimetryRadiation Shielding Materials AnalysisIon-surface interactions and analysis

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An extensive study of depth dose distribution and projectile fragmentation cross-section for shielding materials using Geant4

Sangwan, Nitika, Kumar, Ashavani·2022·Applied Radiation and Isotopes
DOI 10.1016/j.apradiso.2021.110068
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Geant4 Monte Carlo simulation was executed for 16 O beam in various elemental and hydrogenous materials for assessment of ion characteristics and shielding efficacy. In the energy-dependent comparison, at energies 200-594 MeV/n, the peak to entrance ratio decrement up to 78.6% in water target validates the substantial increase in fragmentation factor. Further, hydrogenous materials and low Z elements (C, Al) demonstrate a low peak-to-entrance ratio (0.92-1.66) compared to heavy element (Cu, Sn, Pb) ratio (2.73-3.54), at 594 MeV/n, indicating the high fragmentation properties of hydrogenous and low Z elements. Accordingly, the depth dose reduction percentage was found to be significantly higher for hydrogenous materials (0.92-1.72%) having 4.20-14.37 H wt.% than non-hydrogenous targets (0.09-0.82%). LiH was found to exhibit the lowest peak-to-entrance ratio and highest depth dose reduction. The high shielding effectiveness of LiH (12.59%) irrespective of having a low H fraction compared to polyethylene (14.37%) which is widely used shielding material, suggests the contribution of low Z element Li (87.41 wt%) over the C (85.63 wt%) element in the material. Also, simulated results of fragmentation for high Z materials were compared with the experimental data for the reliability of Geant4. Finally, the comparison of these properties recommends the use of hydrogenous materials with low Z elements for effective space radiation shielding.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.apradiso.2021.110068

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. Agostinelli, 2003, Geant4—a simulation toolkit, Nucl. Instruments Methods Phys. Res. Sect. A Accel. Spectrometers, Detect. Assoc. Equip., 506, 250, 10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Allison, 2006, Geant4 developments and applications, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., 53, 270, 10.1109/TNS.2006.869826 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Bolst, 2017, Validation of Geant4 fragmentation for heavy ion therapy, Nucl. Instruments Methods Phys. Res. Sect. A Accel. Spectrometers, Detect. Assoc. Equip., 869, 68, 10.1016/j.nima.2017.06.046 · DOI
  4. Giraudo, 2018, Accelerator-based tests of shielding effectiveness of different materials and multilayers using high-energy light and heavy ions, Radiat. Res., 190, 526, 10.1667/RR15111.1 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Jalota, 2012, Validation of Geant4 physics models for 56Fe ion beam in various media, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. Sect. B Beam Interact. Mater. Atoms, 291, 7, 10.1016/j.nimb.2012.08.026 · DOI
  6. James, 2006, Recent enhancements in MCNPX: heavy-ion transport and the LAQGSM physics model, Nucl. Instruments Methods Phys. Res. Sect. A Accel. Spectrometers, Detect. Assoc. Equip., 562, 819, 10.1016/j.nima.2006.02.063 · DOI
  7. Kantemiris, 2011, Dose and dose averaged LET comparison of 1H, 4He, 6Li, 8Be, 10B, 12C, 14N, and 16O ion beams forming a spread-out Bragg peak, Med. Phys., 38, 6585, 10.1118/1.3662911 · DOI
  8. Kurz, 2012, First experimental-based characterization of oxygen ion beam depth dose distributions at the Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center, Phys. Med. Biol., 57, 5017, 10.1088/0031-9155/57/15/5017 · DOI
  9. Lobascio, 2008, Accelerator-based tests of radiation shielding properties of materials used in human space infrastructures, Health Phys., 94, 242, 10.1097/01.HP.0000288560.21906.4e · DOI
  10. Mesick, 2018, Benchmarking Geant4 for simulating galactic cosmic ray interactions within planetary bodies, Earth Space Sci., 5, 324, 10.1029/2018EA000400 · DOI
  11. Naito, 2020, Investigation of shielding material properties for effective space radiation protection, Life Sci. Space Res., 26, 69
  12. Narici, 2017, Performances of Kevlar and Polyethylene as radiation shielding on-board the International Space Station in high latitude radiation environment/639/166/984/639/766/25/128 article, Sci. Rep., 7, 1, 10.1038/s41598-017-01707-2 · DOI
  13. Paganetti, 2012, Range uncertainties in proton therapy and the role of Monte Carlo simulations, Phys. Med. Biol., 57, R99, 10.1088/0031-9155/57/11/R99 · DOI
  14. Pshenichnov, 2008, Comparative study of depth-dose distributions for beams of light and heavy nuclei in tissue-like media, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. Sect. B Beam Interact. Mater. Atoms, 266, 1094, 10.1016/j.nimb.2008.02.025 · DOI
  15. Sangwan, 2020, Computational study of fragmentation cross-sections for 28Si ions in various media using GEANT4, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. Sect. B Beam Interact. Mater. Atoms, 464, 5, 10.1016/j.nimb.2019.11.038 · DOI
  16. Sarrut, 2014, A review of the use and potential of the GATE Monte Carlo simulation code for radiation therapy and dosimetry applications, Med. Phys., 41, 10.1118/1.4871617 · DOI
  17. Schall, 1996, Charge-changing nuclear reactions of relativistic light-ion beams (5 < Z < 10) passing through thick absorbers *, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B, 117, 221, 10.1016/0168-583X(96)00325-4 · DOI
  18. Schardt, 1996, Nuclear fragmentation of high-energy heavy-ion beams in water, Adv. Space Res., 17, 87, 10.1016/0273-1177(95)00516-H · DOI
  19. Sihver, 2012, A comparison of total reaction cross section models used in particle and heavy ion transport codes, Adv. Space Res., 49, 812, 10.1016/j.asr.2011.11.029 · DOI
  20. Tripathi, 2008, Mars radiation risk assessment and shielding design for long-term exposure to ionizing space radiation, IEEE Aerosp. Conf. Proc., 1
  21. Zeitlin, 2007, Fragmentation cross sections of 290 and 400 MeV/nucleon C12 beams on elemental targets, Phys. Rev. C: Nucl. Phys., 76, 1, 10.1103/PhysRevC.76.014911 · DOI
  22. Zeitlin, 2006, Measurements of materials shielding properties with 1 GeV/nuc 56Fe, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. Sect. B Beam Interact. Mater. Atoms, 252, 308, 10.1016/j.nimb.2006.08.011 · DOI
  23. Zeitlin, 2011, Fragmentation of N14, O16, Ne20, and Mg24 nuclei at 290 to 1000 MeV/nucleon, Phys. Rev. C: Nucl. Phys., 83, 1, 10.1103/PhysRevC.83.034909 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Sangwan, N., & Kumar, A.
Affiliations
National Institute of Technology Kurukshetra (IN)
Corresponding author
Kumar, Ashavani
ORCID
Kumar, Ashavani
Venue
Applied Radiation and Isotopes
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-02
Volume
180
Pages
110068
ISSN
0969-8043 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.apradiso.2021.110068
OpenAlex
W4200442382
Cited by
4
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2
FWCI
0.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Applied Radiation and Isotopes (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Radiation › Radiation Therapy and Dosimetry
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Radiation Shielding Materials Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Surfaces, Coatings and Films › Ion-surface interactions and analysis
Keywords
depth dose distribution, space radiation shielding, hydrogenous materials, low-Z elements, lithium hydride, polyethylene, shielding materials, Geant4 simulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review