Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Radiology”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 271 records · Page 15
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

The Influence of Aqueous Dispersivity on Transport of Radiological Material at LANL MDA G - 20450

Aqueous dispersivity is a phenomenon by which a solute moving in groundwater mixes with water that does not contain the solute and becomes diluted. Solutes take paths of varying lengths through pore networks or experience slower velocities due to interactions with pore walls. Aqueous dispersivity leads to breakthrough curves with earlier arrival than expected in purely advective systems and persistent 'tails,' or late-arriving, dilute concentrations of the solute. Dispersivity can be longitudinal (in the direction of flow) or transverse (orthogonal to flow). LANL has disposed of radioactive material at Material Disposal Area (MDA) G since the late 1950's. Most of the disposed materials at MDA G are low-level waste (LLW), but other types of radioactive wastes are disposed or stored at the site. For example, there is a collection of remote-handled transuranic waste (RH-TRU) waste in 33 shafts, which were intended to be stored retrievably. Aqueous-phase radionuclides included in models of contaminant transport at MDA G are subject to dispersive processes in porous media of the vadose zone and saturated zone. To model dispersivity at MDA G probabilistically, we created site-specific distributions of aqueous dispersivity. First, we performed a comprehensive review of peer-reviewed publications, reports from other performance assessments of MDA G, and documentation from sites that were considered similar based on expert opinion, such as Yucca Mountain. Data were included from a wide range of sources, so that distributions developed based on the data reflect the current state of knowledge in properties of the subsurface environment. Data were grouped based on value type (e.g., determined via experiment or used in a different model), rock type, zone type (saturated or unsaturated), and site, and were weighted in the distributions according to their relevance to the site and zone type. We combined Monte Carlo simulation and bootstrapping techniques to produce approximate distributions of mean aqueous dispersivity. Distributions of dispersivity for saturated and unsaturated zone transport are differentiated by data weight and the length scales over which transport occurs. We find that underestimating or disregarding transverse dispersivity may lead to overstating simulated well capture in the saturated zone at MDA G. Neglecting transverse dispersivity is a common assumption due in part to use of one-dimensional transport models that do not consider solute spreading orthogonal to flow. Also, we find that variability in longitudinal dispersivity is associated with substantial travel time alterations in the MDA G unsaturated zone and in simulated contaminant breakthrough times at a downstream observation plane in the MDA G saturated zone. Finally, at large scales (>1000 m), a linear trend between the dispersivity coefficient and length over which transport occurs may overestimate the dispersivity coefficient. Future modeling work with application to solute spreading could include interacting advective and diffusive zones in the highly fractured basalt below MDA G. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

3D Printable Polymers for Radiological Applications

Additive manufacturing of polymers is a widely used and growing technology throughout the DOE complex. Composite filaments for Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) printers are commonly used to enhance material properties such as mechanical strength, operating temperature and chemical resistance. Radio luminescent properties were added to 3D filaments by impregnating clear poly(ethylene terephthalate)-glycol (PETG) with X-ray scintillator powder. X-ray scintillators have unique, narrow emission spectra which can be imaged with low light DSLR cameras, photomultiplier tubes, or spectrometers. Filament Production: 1. Pellets are loaded into the hopper. 2. Temperature and extrusion speed are set on extruder. 3. Extruder turned on and filament is pulled from nozzle along air path to cool. 4. Spooler drive speeds set. 5. Filament is inserted through Filameasure then guided along drive wheels and into traverse. 6. Parameters adjusted to obtain 1.75 mm diameter 7. Filament is inserted into spooler wheel. Traverse speed set and slip nut adjusted to make tight and even roll. From Raw Materials to Printed Part: Clear PETG pellets were dipped in ZnS:Cu scintillator powder to coat pellets. Coated and uncoated pellets were mixed together before inserting into hopper. Filament showed trace amounts of powder and luminesced under UV light. Powder distribution is random and not reproducible thus providing a unique identification marker potentially useful for national security applications. Multiple X-ray scintillators can be arranged in a panel to discriminate incident X-ray photon energies. Variable panel arrangement: pixelated, layered, solid from homogenous filament. Ratio of emission intensities. Response varies with incident photon energy. Spectrally separate scintillators. Scintillators: Yttrium Oxide Europium Doped - Red, Gadolinium Oxysulfide Terbium Doped - Green, Barium Magnesium Aluminate Europium Doped - Blue, Zinc Sulfide Copper Doped - Green. Powder concentrations will need to be increased in the filament for use in the energy discriminating panel. Homogeneity in the filament will be a challenge that can be solved by turning the pellets into a powder and mixing it with scintillator powder prior to extrusion. The panels will be tested using x-ray booths and button sources such as Am-241, Cs-137, and Co-60.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Calculating Potential Radiological Emissions for Waste Management Activities at INL - 20068

At Idaho National Laboratory (INL), work involving radionuclides is evaluated for potential emissions from a project in order to comply with the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) regulations, 40 CFR 61 Subpart H. Emission calculations are documented in an Air Permitting Applicability Determination (APAD) to analyze unmitigated and mitigated emissions and determine if an Application to Construct (ATC) or continuous monitoring is required. To calculate the unmitigated and mitigated emissions, a spreadsheet was developed to provide ease in determining potential emissions by providing the maximum operating temperature and the material being used. The spreadsheet aids in determining the potential emissions for research projects and waste management activities at Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) and other locations across the INL site. Furthermore, it can also be used for periodic confirmatory measurements (PCM) to justify low emissions. Elements that factor into the unmitigated and mitigated calculations include the amount of each radionuclide used (in curies or grams), specific activity (if amount is given in grams), the temperature the material is heated to in Celsius, the dose conversion factor which is derived from Clean Air Act Assessment Package - 1988 (CAP-88) modeling, and the number of HEPA filters used for mitigated measures. The main drivers for calculating the unmitigated emissions for a project are the amount used per radionuclide, the maximum operating temperature, and the location of the work. The maximum operating temperature determines the airborne release factor which is dependent on the physical state of the radionuclide. Prior to October 2017, if the radionuclide was heated to greater than 100 deg. C, the radionuclide was assumed to be a gas, which has the highest airborne release factor. This assumption would be overly conservative for radionuclides with high melting and boiling points, which provided a challenge to demonstrate low emissions. In October 2017, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved an alternative method for INL. This method allows the airborne release factor to be determined by using the melting point and 90% of the boiling point of the radionuclide. This methodology was included in the spreadsheet to allow unmitigated emission calculations for APADs to be completed more efficiently and effectively. Results show a reduction in time completing air emission calculations as well as lower total emissions across all facilities at INL. MFC annual emissions were reduced by 62% from the previous year and Research and Education Campus (REC) facilities were reduced by 38% due to implementation of the approved alternative method. Time spent on APADs, PCMs, and documentation for the annual NESHAP report was also reduced significantly. The spreadsheet provided in Table I provides the potential emission calculations for the 'Advanced Retrieval and Disposition Techniques for Remote Handled Mixed Low Level Waste (RH MLLW) at the Radioactive Scrap and Waste Facility (RSWF)' project. Calculations show the Potential Effective Dose Equivalent (PEDE) at RSWF to be 7.27 E-04 mrem/yr (7.27 E-09 Sv/yr) which is well below the 0.1 mrem/yr threshold. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

In-Situ Approach to Sampling and Survey for Radiological Contaminants to Release Overburden Soil for Reuse - 20120

Various methods may be utilized to determine if overburden soil meets approved release criteria to allow for reuse of overburden soil as backfill material: soil scanning and sorting equipment, survey and sampling of excavated soil, in-situ sampling, and utilization of box or truck counters are common approaches. This paper focuses on a modified approach using elements of in-situ sampling and after excavation survey for a large volume of overburden soil that was expected to meet soil release criteria. This approach was utilized for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) St. Louis District at a North St. Louis County property. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Updates to a Preliminary Probabilistic Performance Assessment Model for Radiological and Chemical Contamination at the West Valley Site, New York - 20420

The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) is the owner of the Western New York Nuclear Service Center (WNYNSC), a 1,351-ha site located approximately 48 km south of Buffalo, New York. In 1962, Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. (NFS) entered into agreements with the Atomic Energy Commission and New York State to construct the first commercial reprocessing plant of nuclear fuel in the United States at the WNYNSC. NFS built and operated the spent fuel reprocessing plant and waste disposal facilities, processing 640 Mg (640 metric tons) of spent nuclear fuel from 1966 to 1972 under an Atomic Energy Commission license. Nuclear fuel reprocessing operations halted in 1972 and never restarted, leaving behind radioactive and chemical wastes. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) was required to complete certain waste management activities under the West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) Act of 1980 including decommissioning of WVDP facilities. As collaborating agencies, NYSERDA and the DOE are tasked with making decisions about decommissioning and risk reduction for the West Valley Site. Neptune and Company, Inc. (Neptune) was contracted to develop a probabilistic performance assessment (PPA) model to assist the agencies in their decision making process for decommissioning the WVDP and WNYNSC. One important tool that is needed in order to inform the decision-making process is a science-based model of the West Valley Site that evaluates potential future consequences for human health and the environment. This forms the core of the spatial domain of the West Valley PPA Model. The PPA Model, developed using the GoldSim system modeling software, is a tool intended to provide support for decision making that evaluates uncertainty, in a manner that is transparent, defensible, and robust. The PPA Model includes contaminant transport and health effects components, and is organized around geographically-grouped contaminated facilities. These include the waste disposal areas licensed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the State of New York, a waste tank farm for storage of high level radioactive waste resulting from reprocessing operations, and several areas contaminated with radioactive and chemical constituents. The PPA Model evaluates contaminant transport from these sources to points of exposure across the site and into receiving surface waters and sediments. Hypothetical people and wildlife could be exposed to contamination at these locations, and the effects of these exposures are evaluated. Contaminant transport processes to be evaluated in the PPA Model include groundwater and surface water transport, contaminant translocation by plants and animals, diffusion, and erosion. The evaluation of exposures to people in this preliminary model is limited to a resident farmer scenario, and ecological assessment is performed at the level of a screening analysis. The results of these preliminary evaluations inform future model developments. PPA Model results are subjected to sensitivity analysis in order to determine those pathways and parameters that are most significant in influencing the results. This information allows analysts and decision makers to focus on those aspects of Site behavior and processes. With this information, the decision makers can drive informed, defensible decisions regarding decommissioning of the Site. This paper includes an update of the information presented at WM2019 [1]. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

GrayQb: A Radiological Contamination Locating and Mapping Tool

Benefits Technology Overview  Easy to operate • Self-contained unit for imaging – no special power, cooling or handling requirements • Standard color camera, easy to use gamma camera and reader • Software automatically processes images, sliders to adjust intensity display • Lightweight – less than 5 lbs. without additional background shielding

Timmons, Daren↗
DOE OSTI2020

Integration of ecosystem science into radioecology: A consensus perspective

In the Fall of 2016 a workshop was held which brought together over 50 scientists from the ecological and radiological fields to discuss feasibility and challenges of reintegrating ecosystem science into radioecology. There is a growing desire to incorporate attributes of ecosystem science into radiological risk assessment and radioecological research more generally, fueled by recent advances in quantification of emergent ecosystem attributes and the desire to accurately reflect impacts of radiological stressors upon ecosystem function. This work is a synthesis of the discussions and consensus of the workshop participant's responses to three primary questions, which were: 1) How can ecosystem science support radiological risk assessment? 2) What ecosystem level endpoints potentially could be used for radiological risk assessment? and 3) What inference strategies and associated methods would be most appropriate to assess the effects of radionuclides on ecosystem structure and function? The consensus of the participants was that ecosystem science can and should support radiological risk assessment through the incorporation of quantitative metrics that reflect ecosystem functions which are sensitive to radiological contaminants. The participants also agreed that many such endpoints exit or are thought to exit and while many are used in ecological risk assessment currently, additional data need to be collected that link the causal mechanisms of radiological exposure to these endpoints. Finally, the participants agreed that radiological risk assessments must be designed and informed by rigorous statistical frameworks capable of revealing the causal inference tying radiological exposure to the endpoints selected for measurement.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Drones for Decommissioning

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has responsibility for regulating the safe decommissioning of facilities and sites to meet the License Termination Rule in 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 20, Standards for Protection Against Radiation, Subpart E “Radiological Criteria for License Termination.” Decommissioning is performed in accordance with 10 CFR Part 50, Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities, as part of license termination (§50.82) and release of the facility or site for unrestricted use (§50.83). The guidance currently demonstrates the minimum requirements and necessary conditions for conducting radiological surveys by a person carrying a radiation detector(s). The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) evaluated the use of an unoccupied aerial vehicle (UAV) to conduct radiological surveys that could be used in decommissioning to potentially reduce time, cost, and worker safety compared to current survey methods. The objective of this project was to evaluate the performance and limitations of a UAV to support a decommissioning radiological survey and compare it to a radiological survey conducted by a human. The primary research questions of interest evaluated were: 1. Did observed UAV paths differ from human paths and, if so, how much? 2. Did survey path deviation affect survey results and, if so, how? 3. Were radiological measurements from human and UAV surveys significantly different? To answer these research questions, an experimental field was set up at PNNL’s 3440 test track, and it included radiological sources commonly surveyed during decommissioning: cobalt-60 (Co-60), cesium-137 (Cs-137), and americium-241 (Am-241). Nine check sources (three each of Am-241, Cs-137, and Co-60) with activities ranging from 3.54 µCi to 39.34 µCi were set over a path that also included an area for measuring background radiation. An Aurelia X6 UAV coupled with a GPS and lidar unit was used to conduct the radiological surveys. UAV and human surveys were conducted using two different NaI(Tl) scintillation radiation detectors (2 in. × 2 in. Ludlum, Inc. and 2 in. × 0.04 in. Alpha Spectra, Inc.) at a travel velocity of approximately 0.2 m/s at a low (15–40 cm median altitude) or high (87–105 cm median altitude) survey altitude. Since the survey velocity and altitude parameters were atypical for normal UAV operations, testing was done prior to conducting the radiological surveys to establish airworthiness, evaluate the navigation system, and establish flight control. Human and UAV surveys were paired according to the detector type and altitude regime to compare the survey data. The results of this proof-of-concept research determined that the UAV and human surveys followed similar survey paths and detected the radiological sources with no significant statistical difference (in 33 out of 36 surveys). However, further research is needed prior to deploying UAVs for decommissioning surveys.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗