Research Article  Open Access
Shams A. M. Issa, M. I. Sayyed, M. H. M. Zaid, K. A. Matori, "A Comprehensive Study on Gamma Rays and Fast Neutron Sensing Properties of GAGOC and CMO Scintillators for Shielding Radiation Applications", Journal of Spectroscopy, vol. 2017, Article ID 9792816, 9 pages, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/9792816
A Comprehensive Study on Gamma Rays and Fast Neutron Sensing Properties of GAGOC and CMO Scintillators for Shielding Radiation Applications
Abstract
The WinXCom program has been used to calculate the mass attenuation coefficients (μ_{m}), effective atomic numbers (Z_{eff}), effective electron densities (N_{el}), halfvalue layer (HVL), and mean free path (MFP) in the energy range 1 keV–100 GeV for Gd_{3}Al_{2}Ga_{3}O_{12}Ce (GAGOC) and CaMoO_{4} (CMO) scintillator materials. The geometrical progression (GP) method has been used to compute the exposure buildup factors (EBF) and gamma ray energy absorption (EABF) in the photon energy range 0.015–15 MeV and up to a 40 penetration depth (mfp). In addition, the values of the removal cross section for a fast neutron have been calculated. The computed data observes that GAGOC showed excellent γrays and neutrons sensing a response in the broad energy range. This work could be useful for nuclear radiation sensors, detectors, nuclear medicine applications (medical imaging and mammography), nuclear engineering, and space technology.
1. Introduction
Due to the great importance of inorganic scintillator materials in the field of ionizing nuclear radiation detection, they are a very suitable to utilize in many applications such as technology of space, the design of nuclear devices, and medicinal diagnostics [1]. To develop the new scintillator materials, the knowledge of mass attenuation coefficient (μ_{m}) is very considered for scintillators because the results of μ_{m} show the probability of interaction. Furthermore, when the gamma ray interacts with the material, the halfvalue layer (HVL), mean free path (MFP), effective atomic number (Z_{eff}), effective electron density (N_{el}), exposure buildup factors (EBF), and gamma ray energy absorption (EABF) are the fundamental quantities required to explain the penetration of nuclear radiation in matter. HVL, MFP, Z_{eff}, N_{el}, EBF, and EABF parameters can be computed utilizing the values of μ_{m} [2]. Precise μ_{m} values are wanted to provide fundamental results in many nuclear radiation fields like computerized tomography, radiation shielding, nuclear radiation dosimeter, fluorescence of gamma ray, and safety inspection [3]. Various other researchers reported the properties of gamma radiation shielding for alloys, multielemental materials, soils, solutions, polyvinyl alcohol, and biological materials [4–11].
Hine [12] suggested a number of composite changes with energy called effective atomic number (Z_{eff}) to characterize the atomic number of mixed materials with energy. Due to the high light yield, speedy decay time, high density, high Z_{eff}, and good energy resolution of GAGOC scintillator materials, it is a great nominee for many applications like gamma spectroscopy and position emission tomography (PET) [13]; furthermore, GAGOC does not have natural radioactivity [14]. Because there is lack of knowledge of gamma ray and neutron interaction with GAGOC and CMO scintillator materials, μ_{m}, HVL, MFP, Z_{eff}, N_{el}, EBF, and EABF have been investigated in a broad energy range. The values have been computed for μ_{m}, HVL, MFP, Z_{eff}, and N_{el} in the energy range 1 keV–100 GeV and for EBF and EABF in the energy range 0.015–15 MeV using the WinXCom program. Also, the macroscopic fast neutron removal cross section has been calculated.
2. Theory
Photoelectric effect, Compton scattering, and pair production mechanisms can explain the interaction of photons with the GAGOC and CMO scintillator materials. If the intensity of the initial beam penetrates the sample which is I_{0}, the intensity of the beam will be attenuated and exponentially decreased to I according to the Beer–Lambert law. where I_{0} is the intensity of bombarding beam, I is the intensity of transmitting beam, ρ is the density of scintillator samples (g/cm^{3}), and d is the thickness of the samples (cm). The total photon interaction cross section (σ_{t}) of the samples has been calculated with the help of the μ_{m} according to the following equation: where the molecular weight of the sample, A_{i} is the atomic weight of the ith element, n_{i} is the number of the formula units of a molecule, and N_{A} is the Avogadro’s number. Effective atomic cross section, σ_{a}, has been calculated using the following equation:
Total electronic cross section, σ_{e}, has been calculated by where f_{i} indicates to the fractional abundance of the element i and Z_{i} the atomic number of the constituent element. The Z_{eff} is related to σ_{a} and σ_{e} through the following equation:
The effective electron densities (N_{el}) of GAGOC and CMO have been calculated from the following:
Halfvalue thickness (HVL) is the thickness of any given material where 50% of the incident energy has been attenuated and has been computed utilizing the linear attenuation coefficient (μ) through the following equation:
One of the other values that are calculated in this study of GAGOC and CMO is the mean free path (MFP) which is described in [15, 16]. For the detailed knowledge on calculations of the parameters of GP fitting, exposure buildup factor and energy absorption buildup factor, the element GP fitting parameters have been taken from the ANSI/ANS 6.4.3 [17].
Finally, the removal cross sections for fast neutrons for GAGOC and CMO materials can be calculated using the following equations: where ρ_{i} is the partial density and is the mass removal cross section of the ith element which is taken from Kaplan and Chilten [18, 19].
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Mass Attenuation Coefficient (μ_{m})
Coherent scattering, incoherent scattering, photoelectric absorption, nuclear pair production, and electron pair production are the interaction processes of photon energy with matter. These interaction processes can explain the dependency of total mass attenuation coefficient (μ_{m}) on the photon energy, as shown in Figure 1 for GAGOC. This figure shows that the low photon energy range (E < 0.3 MeV), intermediate photon energy range (0.3 < E < 5 MeV), and high photon energy range (E > 5 MeV) are the three photon energy ranges in interaction processes. Figure 2 shows the calculated μ_{m} values of GAGOC and CMO scintillator materials. As shown in Figure 2, the μ_{m} values of the samples decrease quickly, from 3.50 × 10^{3} to 1.68 × 10^{−1}cm^{2}/g and 4.81 × 10^{3} to 1.17 × 10^{−1}cm^{2}/g for GAGOC and CMO, respectively, as the photon energy increases up to 0.3 MeV. In this photon energy range, the K, L, and Mabsorption edges have been observed of Al, Ca, Ga, Mo, Ce, and Gd as shown in Table 1 due to the photoelectric effect. This behavior of μ_{m} with photon energy may be attributed to the photoelectric absorption cross section which is relative to E^{3.5}. In the photon energy range 0.3 < E < 5 MeV, the μ_{m} values of GAGOC and CMO scintillator materials change slowly, form 0.01179 to 0.0345 cm^{2}/g and 0.0971 to 0.0317 cm^{2}/g for GAGOC and CMO, respectively. The difference of the μ_{m} values becomes approximately equal to zero as shown in Figure 2. This is because the process of Compton scattering is a predominant mechanism [20]. Since, the Compton scattering crosssection process is relative to E^{−1} and linearly changes with the Z number. Figure 2 shows that, as the photon energy increases from 5 MeV to 100 GeV, the values of μ_{m} increase slowly, becoming constant and highly dependent on the composition of samples. This may be attributed to the fact that the pair production process is a predominant mechanism. The results show that the GAGOC scintillator material has higher μ_{m} than CMO.

3.2. HVL and MFP
The HVL and MFP results are the most suitable quantities describing the radiation attenuation. For a best radiation shielding mixture, lower HVL and MFP values are required. The values of the halfvalue layer as a function of photon energy are plotted in Figure 3. In the photon energy range 1–100 keV, the values of the halfvalue layer are photon energy and sample composition independent. The halfvalue layer values increase when the photon energy increases up to 6 and 10 MeV for GAGOC and CMO, respectively. Above 2000 MeV, the HVL values are dependent on the composition of GAGOC and CMO. The values of HVL for GAGOC are lower than those for CMO [21].
As shown in Figure 4, the values of the mean free path (MFP) increase with increasing photon energy. In the photon energy range 1–300 keV and 1–150 keV, the MFP values are <1 for GAGOC and CMO. Above 5 MeV, the values of MFP are dependent on the composition of the GAGOC and CMO samples. The values of MFP for GAGOC are lower than those for CMO. The results of HVL and MFP indicate that the GAGOC compound is the excellent γray sensing a response in the broad energy range.
3.3. Effective Atomic Numbers () and Electron Densities ()
Figure 5 shows Z_{eff} as a function of photon energy for GAGCO and CMO scintillator materials. In the photon energy range 1 keV–100 GeV, the values of Z_{eff} are dependent on the composition of GAGCO and CMO scintillator materials. As shown in Figure 5, there are two peaks at 10 and 60 keV for GAGCO due to the Kabsorption edges of Ga and Gd, respectively. The other two peaks for CMO at 4 and 20 keV are due to the Kabsorption edges of Ca and Mo, respectively. In the photon energy range 0.03–1 MeV, the values of Z_{eff} decrease rapidly as the photon energy increases and then increase slowly up to 200 MeV. As the photon energy increases up to 100 GeV, the values of Z_{eff} become nearly constant for both scintillator materials. It is worth noting that different values of Z_{eff} occur due to their corresponding Kabsorption edges. We have calculated the Z_{eff} values at Kedge energies of the constituent elements of the scintillators and obtained two possible Z_{eff} values, one corresponding to the lower side and the other to the upper side of the same energy (Table 2) [22].
 
^{a}Refers to the elemental composition (%). 
The N_{el} results of the investigated GAGCO and CMO scintillator materials in the photon energy 1 keV–100 GeV have been computed according to (6). There are slight variations in N_{el} results for various GAGCO and CMO scintillator materials where a higher result of N_{el} would indicate an increased probability of photon–electron energy transfer and energy deposition into the material. The results of N_{el} present identical photon energy dependence to what was observed for Z_{eff} [23]. This behavior has been confirmed in Figure 6 which showing a correlation of Z_{eff} and N_{el}.
Besides, the calculated μ_{m} and Z_{eff} values of GAGOC and CMO scintillators were compared with the experimental values at different energies for the two scintillator materials taken from [1] and the results were shown in Table 3. In general, it can be seen that the experimental μ_{m} and Z_{eff} values show good agreement with the theoretical values.
(a)  
 
(b)  

3.4. Exposure Buildup Factors (EBF) and Gamma Ray Energy Absorption (EABF)
Equivalent atomic number (Z_{eq}) and GP exposure (EBF) and energy absorption (EABF) buildup factor coefficients of GAGOC and CMO are listed in Tables 4 and 5. The variation of EBF and EABF values with photon energy at 1, 10, 20, 30, and 40 mfp of GAGCO and CMO scintillator materials has been presented in Figure 7. This figure shows that the maximum values of EBF and EABF are dependent on the composition of scintillator materials and penetration depth and shifted to higher energy. Also, it is clear that the EBF and EABF values increase up to the maximum value with increase in photon energy and then decrease with further increase in photon energy. In the lowphoton energy region, the EBF and EABF values are smallest because a great number of photons were absorbed because the predominant interaction process is the photoelectric effect. In the intermediate photon energy region, the EBF and EABF values are highest because the predominant interaction process is the Compton scattering. In the highenergy region, the photons have been absorbed again because the predominant interaction process is the pair production. The EBF and EABF results of GAGCO and CMO observe sharp peaks at 20 and 60 keV which may be attributed to Kabsorption edges of Mo and Gd, respectively. Due to the occurrence of multiple scatterings at high penetration depths, the highest values of EBF and EABF were observed at a penetration depth of 40 mfp while the lowest values were observed at 1 mfp. Figures 8 and 9 show the variation of buildup factors (EBF and EABF) with incident photon energy for GAGCO and CMO at different penetration depths (1, 10, 20, and 40 mfp). It is clear that at the selected penetration depths, the GAGCO in general has the lowest EBF and EABF values which emphasize that the GAGCO compound is superior as a gamma ray sensor material.


3.5. Fast Neutron Removal Cross Section
The removal cross section for fast neutron of GAGCO and CMO scintillator materials is listed in Table 6. The values of are 0.121 and 0.048 cm^{−1} for GAGCO and CMO, respectively. The height value of was found for GAGCO—this may be attributed to the fact that the elements that have a high Z number are greatly accountable to the removal of fast neutrons as the elements that have a low Z number do [23].

4. Conclusions
The gamma ray mass attenuation coefficient, halfvalue layer, mean free path, effective atomic number, and effective electron densities have been calculated using the WinXCom program in the energy range 1 keV–100 GeV of GAGCO and CMO scintillator materials. The EBF and EABF values in the energy range 0.015–15 MeV and penetration depth of up to 40 mfp have been computed using the GP fitting parameter method for GAGCO and CMO scintillator materials. In addition, the values of removal cross section for fast neutrons have been calculated. The calculated values present that the GAGCO showed excellent γrays and neutrons sensing a response in the broad energy range due to higher values for mass attenuation coefficient and effective atomic number and lower values for the halfvalue layer, mean free path, and buildup factors.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support for this study which is from the Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE) through the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme, and also, the financial support from the University of Tabuk and AlAzhar University is gratefully acknowledged.
References
 W. Chaiphaksa, P. Limkitjaroenporn, H. J. Kim, and J. Kaewkhao, “The mass attenuation coefficients, effective atomic numbers and effective electron densities for GAGG:Ce and CaMoO_{4} scintillators,” Progress in Nuclear Energy, vol. 92, pp. 48–53, 2016. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 S. Gupta and G. S. Sidhu, “Gammarays absorption studies of garnet series of gemstones at 1 keV to 100 GeV: theoretical calculation,” IOSR Journal of Engineering, vol. 4, pp. 01–08, 2014. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 S. G. Gounhalli, A. Shantappa, and S. M. Hanagodimath, “Studies on effective atomic numbers and electron densities of some chemical explosives in the energy range 1KeV–100 GeV,” Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Research, vol. 4, pp. 2545–2563, 2012. View at: Google Scholar
 H. Hideo, K. Fumito, G. Shinji et al., “Measurements of photon mass attenuation coefficients for Ge and BGO crystals at 10 Me V,” Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, vol. 45, pp. 1228–1232, 2008. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 B. O. Elbashir, M. I. Sayyed, M. H. M. Zaid, and K. A. Matori, “Comprehensive study on physical, elastic and shielding properties of ternary BaOBi_{2}O_{3}P_{2}O_{5} glasses as a potent radiation shielding material,” Journal of NonCrystalline Solids, vol. 468, pp. 92–99, 2017. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 Y. Yoshiki, K. Masashi, K. Masaru et al., “Measurement of effective atomic numbers using energyresolved computed tomography,” Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, vol. 51, pp. 1256–1263, 2014. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 M. H. M. Zaid, K. A. Matori, H. J. Quah et al., “Investigation on structural and optical properties of SLSZnO glasses prepared using a conventional melt quenching technique,” Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics, vol. 26, pp. 3722–3729, 2015. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 I. Shams and A. Mostafa, “Effect of Bi_{2}O_{3} in boratetelluritesilicate glass system for development of gammarays shielding materials,” Journal of Alloys and Compounds, vol. 695, pp. 302–310, 2017. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 I. Shams, “Effective atomic number and mass attenuation coefficient of PbOBaOB_{2}O_{3} glass system,” Radiation Physics and Chemistry, vol. 120, pp. 33–37, 2016. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 M. I. Sayyed and H. Elhouichet, “Variation of energy absorption and exposure buildup factors with incident photon energy and penetration depth for borotellurite (B_{2}O_{3}TeO_{2}) glasses,” Radiation Physics and Chemistry, vol. 130, pp. 335–342, 2017. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 K. A. Matori, M. I. Sayyed, H. A. A. Sidek, M. H. M. Zaid, and V. P. Singh, “Comprehensive study on physical, elastic and shielding properties of lead zinc phosphate glasses,” Journal of NonCrystalline Solids, vol. 457, pp. 97–103, 2017. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 G. J. Hine, “Effective atomic numbers of materials for various gamma ray interactions,” Physics Review, vol. 85, pp. 725–737, 1952. View at: Google Scholar
 J. Y. Yeom, S. Yamamoto, S. E. Derenzo et al., “First performance results of Ce: GAGG scintillation crystals with silicon photomultipliers,” IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, vol. 60, pp. 988–992, 2013. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 S. David, M. Georgiou, E. Fysikopoulos, and G. Loudos, “Evaluation of a SiPM array coupled to a Gd_{3}Al_{2}Ga_{3}O_{12}:Ce (GAGG: Ce) discrete scintillator,” Physica Medica, vol. 31, pp. 763–766, 2015. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 A. M. A. Mostafa, S. A. M. Issa, and M. I. Sayyed, “Gamma ray shielding properties of PbOB_{2}O_{3}P_{2}O_{5} doped with WO3,” Journal of Alloys and Compounds, vol. 708, pp. 294–300, 2017. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 M. I. Sayyed, “Half value layer, mean free path and exposure buildup factor for tellurite glasses with different oxide compositions,” Journal of Alloys and Compounds, vol. 695, pp. 3191–3197, 2017. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 ANSI/ANS6.4.3, Gamma Ray Attenuation Coefficient and Buildup Factors for Engineering Materials, American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, IL, USA, 1991.
 M. F. Kaplan, Concrete Radiation Shielding, Longman scientific and Technology, Lonman Group UK, Limited, Essex, England, 1989.
 A. B. Chilten, J. K. Shultis, and R. E. Faw, Principle of Radiation Shielding, PrenticeHall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1984.
 M. I. Sayyed, “Bismuth modified shielding properties of zinc borotellurite glasses,” Journal of Alloys and Compounds, vol. 688, pp. 111–117, 2016. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 S. A. M. Issa, T. A. Hamdalla, and A. A. A. Darwish, “Effect of ErCl_{3} in gamma and neutron parameters for different concentration of ErCl_{3}SiO_{2} (EDFA) for the signal protection from nuclear radiation,” Journal of Alloys and Compounds, vol. 698, pp. 234–240, 2017. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 M. Kurudirek, M. Büyükyıldız, and Y. Özdemir, “Effective atomic number study of various alloys for total photon interaction in the energy region of 1 keV–100 GeV,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A, vol. 613, pp. 251–256, 2010. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 V. P. Singh, N. M. Badiger, N. Chanthima, and J. Kaewkhao, “Evaluation of gammaray exposure buildup factors and neutron shielding for bismuth borosilicate glasses,” Radiation Physics and Chemistry, vol. 98, pp. 14–21, 2014. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 Shams A. M. Issa et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.