Results for “Dose Code” — Page 6

DOE OSTI2013

Delayed-Neutron and Delayed-Photon Dose-Rate Estimations for Chemical Processing of Spent Fuel Using MCNP6

A nondestructive assay (NDA) computational study is conducted using the MCNP6 Monte Carlo radiation-transport code to calculate dose estimates caused by delayed-neutron (DN) and delayed-gamma (DG) emission for spent nuclear fuel (SNF) that is immersed in nitric acid. The SNF isotopic inventories and delayed-particle (DP) sources are prepared using a generic Westinghouse fuel assembly model for three sets of parameters.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

DOE OSTI2015

Education and training in the field of nuclear instrumentation and measurement: CEA/INSTN (National Institute for Nuclear Sciences and Technologies) strategy to improve and develop new pedagogical tools and methods

Part of the French Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission (CEA), the National Institute for Nuclear Science and Technology (INSTN) is a higher education institution whose mission is to provide students and professionals a high level of scientific and technological qualification in all disciplines related to nuclear energy applications. In this frame, INSTN carries out education and training (E and T) programs in nuclear instrumentation and radioprotection. Its strategy has always been to complete theoretical courses by training courses and laboratory works carried out on an extensive range of training tools that includes a large panel of nuclear instrumentation as well as software applications. Since its creation in 1956, the INSTN has conducted both education and vocational programs on ionizing radiation detection. An extensive range of techniques have commonly been used during practical works with students and employees of companies who need to get the knowledge and specialization in this field. Today, the INSTN is mainly equipped with usual detectors and electronics in large numbers in order to be able to accommodate up to 48 trainees at the same time in two classrooms, with only two trainees for one workstation in order to optimize their learning. In the field of the neutron detection systems, the INSTN has strongly developed its offer taking advantage of the use of research reactors, such as ISIS reactor (700 kW) at Saclay. The implementation of neutron detection systems specific to the courses offers a unique way of observing and analysing the signal coming from neutron detectors, as well as learning how to set the parameters of the detection system in real conditions. Providing the trainees with an extensive overview of each part of the neutron monitoring instrumentation apply to a nuclear reactor, hands-on measurements on the ISIS reactor play a major role in ensuring a practical and comprehensive understanding of the neutron detection system and their integration in the safety system of nuclear reactors. It also gives a solid background for the follow up and the development of the neutron detection systems. Another field of activity of the INSTN is the development of new teaching tools using software applications. We describe hereafter two applications that have recently been developed by the institute, O.S.I.R.I.S and DOSIMEX. The INSTN and the company OREKA have developed an innovative teaching tool named O.S.I.R.I.S. The tool is built on a virtual 3D environment in which users operate in a totally free way. The action is located in a pressurised water reactor in the environment of a steam generator building. The users are students or professionals who want to learn and train on concrete situations on how to protect the workers against radiation. Through the use of this serious game, users must: establish a predictive dose evaluation, implement the principles of radiation protection, perform the dose result of the operation, analyse the gap between the predictive collective dose and the collective dose achieved, and decide about the lessons to provide feedback. Taking into account the increasing constraints related to radiation protection, it is essential to use computer codes to evaluate the dose rates generated by sources of ionizing radiation. Many powerful codes exist but are often relatively complex to implement and are dedicated to experts. In addition, these codes are often 'black boxes' that does not allow the user to understand the underlying physics. The objective of DOSIMEX codes developed by the INSTN is to give, by the means of a VBA code with a simple interface, the ability to easily conduct a wide range of radiological exposure situations: calculation of gamma, beta, neutron equivalent dose rate, calculation of internal contamination and atmospheric transfer.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-A-BRA-01: Introduction

Vic Montemayor - No one has been more passionate about improving the quality and effectiveness of the teaching of Medical Physics than Bill Hendee. It was in August of 2008 that the first AAPM Workshop on Becoming a Better Teacher of Medical Physics was held, organized and run by Bill Hendee. This was followed up in July of 2010 with a summer school on the same topic, again organized by Bill. There has been continued interest in alternate approaches to teaching medical physics since those initial gatherings. The momentum established by these workshops is made clear each year in the annual Innovation in Medical Physics Education session, which highlights work being done in all forms of medical physics education, from one-on-one residencies or classroom presentations to large-scale program revisions and on-line resources for international audiences. This symposium, presented on behalf of the Education Council, highlights the work of three finalists from past Innovation in Education sessions. Each will be presenting their approaches to and innovations in teaching medical physics. It is hoped that audience members interested in trying something new in their teaching of medical physics will find some of these ideas and approaches readily applicable to their own classrooms. Rebecca Howell - The presentation will discuss ways to maximize classroom learning, i.e., increasing the amount of material covered while also enhancing students’ understanding of the broader implications of the course topics. Specifically, the presentation will focus on two teaching methodologies, project based learning and flip learning. These teaching methods will be illustrated using an example of graduate medical physics course where both are used in conjunction with traditional lectures. Additionally, the presentation will focus on our experience implementing these methods including challenges that were overcome. Jay Burmeister - My presentation will discuss the incorporation of active learning techniques into a traditional medical physics classroom course. I will describe these techniques and how they were implemented as well as student performance before and after implementation. Student feedback indicated that these course changes improved their ability to actively assimilate the course content, thus improving their understanding of the material. Shahid Naqvi - My talk will focus on ways to help students visualize crucial concepts that lie at the core of radiation physics. Although particle tracks generated by Monte Carlo simulations have served as an indispensable visualization tool, students often struggle to resolve the underlying physics from a simultaneous jumble of tracks. We can clarify the physics by “coding” the tracks, e.g., by coloring the tracks according to their “starting” or “crossing” regions. The regionally-coded tracks when overlaid with dose distributions help the students see the elusive connection between dose, kerma and electronic disequilibrium. Tracks coded according to local energy or energy-loss rate can illustrate the need for stopping power corrections in electron beams and explain the Bragg peak in a proton beam. Coding tracks according to parent interaction type and order can clarify the often misunderstood distinction between primary and scatter dose. The students can thus see the “whole” simultaneously with the “sum of the parts,” which enhances their physical insight and creates a sustainable foundation for further learning. After the presentations the speakers and moderator will be open to questions and discussion with the audience members. Learning Objectives: Be able to explain Project-Based Learning and how can it be incorporated into a Medical Physics classroom. Be able to explain Flipped Learning and how can it be incorporated into a Medical Physics classroom. Be able to explain active-learning strategies for the teaching of Medical Physics. Be able to explain how Monte Carlo simulations can be used to deepen a student’s understanding of radiation physics and dosimetry.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-A-BRA-02: Making the Most of a One Hour Lecture with Alternative Teaching Methodologies: Implementing Project-Based and Flipped Learning

Vic Montemayor - No one has been more passionate about improving the quality and effectiveness of the teaching of Medical Physics than Bill Hendee. It was in August of 2008 that the first AAPM Workshop on Becoming a Better Teacher of Medical Physics was held, organized and run by Bill Hendee. This was followed up in July of 2010 with a summer school on the same topic, again organized by Bill. There has been continued interest in alternate approaches to teaching medical physics since those initial gatherings. The momentum established by these workshops is made clear each year in the annual Innovation in Medical Physics Education session, which highlights work being done in all forms of medical physics education, from one-on-one residencies or classroom presentations to large-scale program revisions and on-line resources for international audiences. This symposium, presented on behalf of the Education Council, highlights the work of three finalists from past Innovation in Education sessions. Each will be presenting their approaches to and innovations in teaching medical physics. It is hoped that audience members interested in trying something new in their teaching of medical physics will find some of these ideas and approaches readily applicable to their own classrooms. Rebecca Howell - The presentation will discuss ways to maximize classroom learning, i.e., increasing the amount of material covered while also enhancing students’ understanding of the broader implications of the course topics. Specifically, the presentation will focus on two teaching methodologies, project based learning and flip learning. These teaching methods will be illustrated using an example of graduate medical physics course where both are used in conjunction with traditional lectures. Additionally, the presentation will focus on our experience implementing these methods including challenges that were overcome. Jay Burmeister - My presentation will discuss the incorporation of active learning techniques into a traditional medical physics classroom course. I will describe these techniques and how they were implemented as well as student performance before and after implementation. Student feedback indicated that these course changes improved their ability to actively assimilate the course content, thus improving their understanding of the material. Shahid Naqvi - My talk will focus on ways to help students visualize crucial concepts that lie at the core of radiation physics. Although particle tracks generated by Monte Carlo simulations have served as an indispensable visualization tool, students often struggle to resolve the underlying physics from a simultaneous jumble of tracks. We can clarify the physics by “coding” the tracks, e.g., by coloring the tracks according to their “starting” or “crossing” regions. The regionally-coded tracks when overlaid with dose distributions help the students see the elusive connection between dose, kerma and electronic disequilibrium. Tracks coded according to local energy or energy-loss rate can illustrate the need for stopping power corrections in electron beams and explain the Bragg peak in a proton beam. Coding tracks according to parent interaction type and order can clarify the often misunderstood distinction between primary and scatter dose. The students can thus see the “whole” simultaneously with the “sum of the parts,” which enhances their physical insight and creates a sustainable foundation for further learning. After the presentations the speakers and moderator will be open to questions and discussion with the audience members. Learning Objectives: Be able to explain Project-Based Learning and how can it be incorporated into a Medical Physics classroom. Be able to explain Flipped Learning and how can it be incorporated into a Medical Physics classroom. Be able to explain active-learning strategies for the teaching of Medical Physics. Be able to explain how Monte Carlo simulations can be used to deepen a student’s understanding of radiation physics and dosimetry.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-A-BRA-03: Creative Stimulation: A Flexible Hands-On Approach to Building a Deeper Understanding of Critical Concepts in Radiation Physics

Vic Montemayor - No one has been more passionate about improving the quality and effectiveness of the teaching of Medical Physics than Bill Hendee. It was in August of 2008 that the first AAPM Workshop on Becoming a Better Teacher of Medical Physics was held, organized and run by Bill Hendee. This was followed up in July of 2010 with a summer school on the same topic, again organized by Bill. There has been continued interest in alternate approaches to teaching medical physics since those initial gatherings. The momentum established by these workshops is made clear each year in the annual Innovation in Medical Physics Education session, which highlights work being done in all forms of medical physics education, from one-on-one residencies or classroom presentations to large-scale program revisions and on-line resources for international audiences. This symposium, presented on behalf of the Education Council, highlights the work of three finalists from past Innovation in Education sessions. Each will be presenting their approaches to and innovations in teaching medical physics. It is hoped that audience members interested in trying something new in their teaching of medical physics will find some of these ideas and approaches readily applicable to their own classrooms. Rebecca Howell - The presentation will discuss ways to maximize classroom learning, i.e., increasing the amount of material covered while also enhancing students’ understanding of the broader implications of the course topics. Specifically, the presentation will focus on two teaching methodologies, project based learning and flip learning. These teaching methods will be illustrated using an example of graduate medical physics course where both are used in conjunction with traditional lectures. Additionally, the presentation will focus on our experience implementing these methods including challenges that were overcome. Jay Burmeister - My presentation will discuss the incorporation of active learning techniques into a traditional medical physics classroom course. I will describe these techniques and how they were implemented as well as student performance before and after implementation. Student feedback indicated that these course changes improved their ability to actively assimilate the course content, thus improving their understanding of the material. Shahid Naqvi - My talk will focus on ways to help students visualize crucial concepts that lie at the core of radiation physics. Although particle tracks generated by Monte Carlo simulations have served as an indispensable visualization tool, students often struggle to resolve the underlying physics from a simultaneous jumble of tracks. We can clarify the physics by “coding” the tracks, e.g., by coloring the tracks according to their “starting” or “crossing” regions. The regionally-coded tracks when overlaid with dose distributions help the students see the elusive connection between dose, kerma and electronic disequilibrium. Tracks coded according to local energy or energy-loss rate can illustrate the need for stopping power corrections in electron beams and explain the Bragg peak in a proton beam. Coding tracks according to parent interaction type and order can clarify the often misunderstood distinction between primary and scatter dose. The students can thus see the “whole” simultaneously with the “sum of the parts,” which enhances their physical insight and creates a sustainable foundation for further learning. After the presentations the speakers and moderator will be open to questions and discussion with the audience members. Learning Objectives: Be able to explain Project-Based Learning and how can it be incorporated into a Medical Physics classroom. Be able to explain Flipped Learning and how can it be incorporated into a Medical Physics classroom. Be able to explain active-learning strategies for the teaching of Medical Physics. Be able to explain how Monte Carlo simulations can be used to deepen a student’s understanding of radiation physics and dosimetry.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-A-BRA-04: Incorporating Active Learning Into Medical Physics Education

Vic Montemayor - No one has been more passionate about improving the quality and effectiveness of the teaching of Medical Physics than Bill Hendee. It was in August of 2008 that the first AAPM Workshop on Becoming a Better Teacher of Medical Physics was held, organized and run by Bill Hendee. This was followed up in July of 2010 with a summer school on the same topic, again organized by Bill. There has been continued interest in alternate approaches to teaching medical physics since those initial gatherings. The momentum established by these workshops is made clear each year in the annual Innovation in Medical Physics Education session, which highlights work being done in all forms of medical physics education, from one-on-one residencies or classroom presentations to large-scale program revisions and on-line resources for international audiences. This symposium, presented on behalf of the Education Council, highlights the work of three finalists from past Innovation in Education sessions. Each will be presenting their approaches to and innovations in teaching medical physics. It is hoped that audience members interested in trying something new in their teaching of medical physics will find some of these ideas and approaches readily applicable to their own classrooms. Rebecca Howell - The presentation will discuss ways to maximize classroom learning, i.e., increasing the amount of material covered while also enhancing students’ understanding of the broader implications of the course topics. Specifically, the presentation will focus on two teaching methodologies, project based learning and flip learning. These teaching methods will be illustrated using an example of graduate medical physics course where both are used in conjunction with traditional lectures. Additionally, the presentation will focus on our experience implementing these methods including challenges that were overcome. Jay Burmeister - My presentation will discuss the incorporation of active learning techniques into a traditional medical physics classroom course. I will describe these techniques and how they were implemented as well as student performance before and after implementation. Student feedback indicated that these course changes improved their ability to actively assimilate the course content, thus improving their understanding of the material. Shahid Naqvi - My talk will focus on ways to help students visualize crucial concepts that lie at the core of radiation physics. Although particle tracks generated by Monte Carlo simulations have served as an indispensable visualization tool, students often struggle to resolve the underlying physics from a simultaneous jumble of tracks. We can clarify the physics by “coding” the tracks, e.g., by coloring the tracks according to their “starting” or “crossing” regions. The regionally-coded tracks when overlaid with dose distributions help the students see the elusive connection between dose, kerma and electronic disequilibrium. Tracks coded according to local energy or energy-loss rate can illustrate the need for stopping power corrections in electron beams and explain the Bragg peak in a proton beam. Coding tracks according to parent interaction type and order can clarify the often misunderstood distinction between primary and scatter dose. The students can thus see the “whole” simultaneously with the “sum of the parts,” which enhances their physical insight and creates a sustainable foundation for further learning. After the presentations the speakers and moderator will be open to questions and discussion with the audience members. Learning Objectives: Be able to explain Project-Based Learning and how can it be incorporated into a Medical Physics classroom. Be able to explain Flipped Learning and how can it be incorporated into a Medical Physics classroom. Be able to explain active-learning strategies for the teaching of Medical Physics. Be able to explain how Monte Carlo simulations can be used to deepen a student’s understanding of radiation physics and dosimetry.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-A-BRA-05: Panel Discussion

Vic Montemayor - No one has been more passionate about improving the quality and effectiveness of the teaching of Medical Physics than Bill Hendee. It was in August of 2008 that the first AAPM Workshop on Becoming a Better Teacher of Medical Physics was held, organized and run by Bill Hendee. This was followed up in July of 2010 with a summer school on the same topic, again organized by Bill. There has been continued interest in alternate approaches to teaching medical physics since those initial gatherings. The momentum established by these workshops is made clear each year in the annual Innovation in Medical Physics Education session, which highlights work being done in all forms of medical physics education, from one-on-one residencies or classroom presentations to large-scale program revisions and on-line resources for international audiences. This symposium, presented on behalf of the Education Council, highlights the work of three finalists from past Innovation in Education sessions. Each will be presenting their approaches to and innovations in teaching medical physics. It is hoped that audience members interested in trying something new in their teaching of medical physics will find some of these ideas and approaches readily applicable to their own classrooms. Rebecca Howell - The presentation will discuss ways to maximize classroom learning, i.e., increasing the amount of material covered while also enhancing students’ understanding of the broader implications of the course topics. Specifically, the presentation will focus on two teaching methodologies, project based learning and flip learning. These teaching methods will be illustrated using an example of graduate medical physics course where both are used in conjunction with traditional lectures. Additionally, the presentation will focus on our experience implementing these methods including challenges that were overcome. Jay Burmeister - My presentation will discuss the incorporation of active learning techniques into a traditional medical physics classroom course. I will describe these techniques and how they were implemented as well as student performance before and after implementation. Student feedback indicated that these course changes improved their ability to actively assimilate the course content, thus improving their understanding of the material. Shahid Naqvi - My talk will focus on ways to help students visualize crucial concepts that lie at the core of radiation physics. Although particle tracks generated by Monte Carlo simulations have served as an indispensable visualization tool, students often struggle to resolve the underlying physics from a simultaneous jumble of tracks. We can clarify the physics by “coding” the tracks, e.g., by coloring the tracks according to their “starting” or “crossing” regions. The regionally-coded tracks when overlaid with dose distributions help the students see the elusive connection between dose, kerma and electronic disequilibrium. Tracks coded according to local energy or energy-loss rate can illustrate the need for stopping power corrections in electron beams and explain the Bragg peak in a proton beam. Coding tracks according to parent interaction type and order can clarify the often misunderstood distinction between primary and scatter dose. The students can thus see the “whole” simultaneously with the “sum of the parts,” which enhances their physical insight and creates a sustainable foundation for further learning. After the presentations the speakers and moderator will be open to questions and discussion with the audience members. Learning Objectives: Be able to explain Project-Based Learning and how can it be incorporated into a Medical Physics classroom. Be able to explain Flipped Learning and how can it be incorporated into a Medical Physics classroom. Be able to explain active-learning strategies for the teaching of Medical Physics. Be able to explain how Monte Carlo simulations can be used to deepen a student’s understanding of radiation physics and dosimetry.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-A-BRA-00: Education Council Symposium: Revitalizing Your Medical Physics Classroom: Some Examples and Thoughts from the Trenches

Vic Montemayor - No one has been more passionate about improving the quality and effectiveness of the teaching of Medical Physics than Bill Hendee. It was in August of 2008 that the first AAPM Workshop on Becoming a Better Teacher of Medical Physics was held, organized and run by Bill Hendee. This was followed up in July of 2010 with a summer school on the same topic, again organized by Bill. There has been continued interest in alternate approaches to teaching medical physics since those initial gatherings. The momentum established by these workshops is made clear each year in the annual Innovation in Medical Physics Education session, which highlights work being done in all forms of medical physics education, from one-on-one residencies or classroom presentations to large-scale program revisions and on-line resources for international audiences. This symposium, presented on behalf of the Education Council, highlights the work of three finalists from past Innovation in Education sessions. Each will be presenting their approaches to and innovations in teaching medical physics. It is hoped that audience members interested in trying something new in their teaching of medical physics will find some of these ideas and approaches readily applicable to their own classrooms. Rebecca Howell - The presentation will discuss ways to maximize classroom learning, i.e., increasing the amount of material covered while also enhancing students’ understanding of the broader implications of the course topics. Specifically, the presentation will focus on two teaching methodologies, project based learning and flip learning. These teaching methods will be illustrated using an example of graduate medical physics course where both are used in conjunction with traditional lectures. Additionally, the presentation will focus on our experience implementing these methods including challenges that were overcome. Jay Burmeister - My presentation will discuss the incorporation of active learning techniques into a traditional medical physics classroom course. I will describe these techniques and how they were implemented as well as student performance before and after implementation. Student feedback indicated that these course changes improved their ability to actively assimilate the course content, thus improving their understanding of the material. Shahid Naqvi - My talk will focus on ways to help students visualize crucial concepts that lie at the core of radiation physics. Although particle tracks generated by Monte Carlo simulations have served as an indispensable visualization tool, students often struggle to resolve the underlying physics from a simultaneous jumble of tracks. We can clarify the physics by “coding” the tracks, e.g., by coloring the tracks according to their “starting” or “crossing” regions. The regionally-coded tracks when overlaid with dose distributions help the students see the elusive connection between dose, kerma and electronic disequilibrium. Tracks coded according to local energy or energy-loss rate can illustrate the need for stopping power corrections in electron beams and explain the Bragg peak in a proton beam. Coding tracks according to parent interaction type and order can clarify the often misunderstood distinction between primary and scatter dose. The students can thus see the “whole” simultaneously with the “sum of the parts,” which enhances their physical insight and creates a sustainable foundation for further learning. After the presentations the speakers and moderator will be open to questions and discussion with the audience members. Learning Objectives: Be able to explain Project-Based Learning and how can it be incorporated into a Medical Physics classroom. Be able to explain Flipped Learning and how can it be incorporated into a Medical Physics classroom. Be able to explain active-learning strategies for the teaching of Medical Physics. Be able to explain how Monte Carlo simulations can be used to deepen a student’s understanding of radiation physics and dosimetry.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗

DOE OSTI2026

User’s Manual for RESRAD-RDD&IND Code Version 2: Vol. 2—User’s Guide for RESRAD-RDD&IND Code

Version 2.0 of the RESRAD-RDD&IND computer code is designed to support the implementation of protective action guides (PAGs) after a nuclear emergency incident including a radiological dispersal device (RDD) and/or an improvised nuclear device (IND) incident (EPA 2017). Eight different group types, addressing various decisions, are available for selection. The RESRAD-RDD&IND code calculates radiological doses, stay times, etc., for the selected group that the user wishes to focus on. (That is, the results for all the groups are not calculated simultaneously, and the input for those other groups do not matter, although some parameter values are shared between groups.) Version 2.0 has a user-friendly interface so that the RESRAD-RDD&IND code can be used with minimal training. For example, the user can select the major characteristics of the problem-event type, source term, and decision type from the left side of the interface and then calculate the results with the default assumptions for the exposure scenarios. More in-depth analysis would include specifying site-specific exposure scenario characteristics in the right side of the interface. The procedures for data entry and results viewing are self-explanatory. This is because common window maneuvering features and text instructions were incorporated in the interface design. General and context-specific help are available to aid users entering parameter values, as well. The RESRAD-RDD&IND computer code gives the user the option to select either an RDD or IND incident for analysis. For an RDD event analysis, 11 radionuclides (Am-241, Cf-252, Cm-244, Co-60, Cs-137, Ir-192, Po-210, Pu-238, Pu-239, Ra-226, and Sr-90) are included. These 11 radionuclides are the radionuclides most likely used for an RDD. More than 90 radionuclides can be selected for an IND event analysis. Initial default concentrations are provided for 44 radionuclides for a uranium-fueled IND event. These 44 radionuclides are those that would contribute significantly to the radiation dose associated with a uranium-fueled bomb detonation. The radionuclides generated from ingrowth of these 44 initial radionuclides are also automatically included in the analysis. Pu-239, Cs-134m, Ru-105, and Rb-89 and their progeny can be selected for analysis if they are detected and their concentrations are determined. This user’s guide, which is Volume 2 of the User’s Manual for RESRAD-RDD&IND Code Version 2, provides instructions to users on how to install the RESRAD-RDD&IND code, navigate the interface, and use the various features, including those discussed above, to set up an analysis and view/print the results in text outputs. Volume 1 of the User’s Manual for RESRAD-RDD&IND Code Version 2 (Yu et al. 2026), which contains descriptions of the methodology and theoretical basis for dose modeling and the mathematical equations implemented in the code, can be accessed and viewed through the Help menu in the code or can be downloaded from the RESRAD website (https://resrad.evs.anl.gov).

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Implementation of the D1S Methodology for Shutdown Dose Rate Calculations in the OpenMC Monte Carlo Particle Transport Code

We present an implementation of the direct one-step (D1S) methodology for shutdown dose rate (SDR) calculations in the OpenMC Monte Carlo particle transport code. In addition to being the first fully open-source D1S implementation, it is also the first to require no ad hoc source code or nuclear data library modifications. The code can seamlessly switch between production of prompt and decay photons based on a user input parameter, and the decay data needed for decay photon generation are made available through a depletion chain file, which is already used for OpenMC’s built-in depletion/activation solver. A set of Python functions significantly eases the burden of computing and applying time correction factors needed to properly account for the time dependence of radionuclide activity. To assess the accuracy of the D1S implementation, SDR calculations have been carried out for three problems: a prism of iron irradiated by 14-MeV neutrons, the ITER port plug computational benchmark, and the Frascati Neutron Generator (FNG) ITER dose rate benchmark problem from the Shielding INtegral Benchmark Archive and Database (SINBAD). For each of these problems, comparisons were made to calculations using the rigorous two-step (R2S) method. The results on the iron prism problem illustrate how the D1S method achieves superior spatial resolution compared to the R2S method without the need for spatial discretization of the activation regions. The D1S and R2S results for the ITER port plug benchmark agree well with previously reported results in the literature. While the D1S results are 10% to 15% lower than the R2S results, this may be due to stochastic uncertainty and/or spatial discretization in the R2S calculations. On the FNG dose rate benchmark problem, the D1S method produces dose rate estimates that are within 4% of the dose rates predicted using a cell-based R2S workflow. The D1S estimates of the SDR are also in reasonable agreement with the experimental measurements and show the same basic trends that have been observed in previous works. A qualitative analysis of the execution time and uncertainty for the R2S and D1S workflows suggests that the D1S method would attain a higher figure of merit.

D1S method↗

DOE OSTI2011

Calculation of Residual Dose Around Small Objects Using Mu2e Target as an Example

The MARS15 code provides contact residual dose rates for relatively large accelerator and experimental components for predefined irradiation and cooling times. The dose rate at particular distances from the components, some of which can be rather small in size, is calculated in a post Monte-Carlo stage via special algorithms described elsewhere. The approach is further developed and described in this paper.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-F-T-12: Monte Carlo Dosimetry of the 60Co Bebig High Dose Rate Source for Brachytherapy

Purpose: The purpose of this work is to obtain the dosimetry parameters in accordance with the AAPM TG-43U1 formalism with Monte Carlo calculations regarding the BEBIG 60Co high-dose-rate brachytherapy. The geometric design and material details of the source was provided by the manufacturer and was used to define the Monte Carlo geometry. Methods: The dosimetry studies included the calculation of the air kerma strength Sk, collision kerma in water along the transverse axis with an unbounded phantom, dose rate constant and radial dose function. The Monte Carlo code system that was used was EGSnrc with a new cavity code, which is a part of EGS++ that allows calculating the radial dose function around the source. The XCOM photon cross-section library was used. Variance reduction techniques were used to speed up the calculation and to considerably reduce the computer time. To obtain the dose rate distributions of the source in an unbounded liquid water phantom, the source was immersed at the center of a cube phantom of 100 cm3. Results: The obtained dose rate constant for the BEBIG 60Co source was 1.108±0.001 cGyh-1U-1, which is consistent with the values in the literature. The radial dose functions were compared with the values of the consensus data set in the literature, and they are consistent with the published data for this energy range. Conclusion: The dose rate constant is consistent with the results of Granero et al. and Selvam and Bhola within 1%. Dose rate data are compared to GEANT4 and DORZnrc Monte Carlo code. However, the radial dose function is different by up to 10% for the points that are notably near the source on the transversal axis because of the high-energy photons from 60Co, which causes an electronic disequilibrium at the interface between the source capsule and the liquid water for distances up to 1 cm.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2014

HDRMC, an accelerated Monte Carlo dose calculator for high dose rate brachytherapy with CT-compatible applicators

Purpose: To present a new accelerated Monte Carlo code for CT-based dose calculations in high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy. The new code (HDRMC) accounts for both tissue and nontissue heterogeneities (applicator and contrast medium). Methods: HDRMC uses a fast ray-tracing technique and detailed physics algorithms to transport photons through a 3D mesh of voxels representing the patient anatomy with applicator and contrast medium included. A precalculated phase space file for the{sup 192}Ir source is used as source term. HDRM is calibrated to calculated absolute dose for real plans. A postprocessing technique is used to include the exact density and composition of nontissue heterogeneities in the 3D phantom. Dwell positions and angular orientations of the source are reconstructed using data from the treatment planning system (TPS). Structure contours are also imported from the TPS to recalculate dose-volume histograms. Results: HDRMC was first benchmarked against the MCNP5 code for a single source in homogenous water and for a loaded gynecologic applicator in water. The accuracy of the voxel-based applicator model used in HDRMC was also verified by comparing 3D dose distributions and dose-volume parameters obtained using 1-mm{sup 3} versus 2-mm{sup 3} phantom resolutions. HDRMC can calculate the 3D dose distribution for a typical HDR cervix case with 2-mm resolution in 5 min on a single CPU. Examples of heterogeneity effects for two clinical cases (cervix and esophagus) were demonstrated using HDRMC. The neglect of tissue heterogeneity for the esophageal case leads to the overestimate of CTV D90, CTV D100, and spinal cord maximum dose by 3.2%, 3.9%, and 3.6%, respectively. Conclusions: A fast Monte Carlo code for CT-based dose calculations which does not require a prebuilt applicator model is developed for those HDR brachytherapy treatments that use CT-compatible applicators. Tissue and nontissue heterogeneities should be taken into account in modern HDR brachytherapy planning.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

DOE OSTI2016

Dosimetric quality, accuracy, and deliverability of modulated radiotherapy treatments for spinal metastases

Cancer often metastasizes to the vertebra, and such metastases can be treated successfully using simple, static posterior or opposed-pair radiation fields. However, in some cases, including when re-irradiation is required, spinal cord avoidance becomes necessary and more complex treatment plans must be used. This study evaluated 16 sample intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans designed to treat 6 typical vertebral and paraspinal volumes using a standard prescription, with the aim of investigating the advantages and limitations of these treatment techniques and providing recommendations for their optimal use in vertebral treatments. Treatment plan quality and beam complexity metrics were evaluated using the Treatment And Dose Assessor (TADA) code. A portal-imaging–based quality assurance (QA) system was used to evaluate treatment delivery accuracy, and radiochromic film measurements were used to provide high-resolution verification of treatment plan dose accuracy, especially in the steep dose gradient regions between each vertebral target and spinal cord. All treatment modalities delivered approximately the same doses and the same levels of dose heterogeneity to each planning target volume (PTV), although the minimum PTV doses in the vertebral plans were substantially lower than the prescription, because of the requirement that the plans meet a strict constraint on the dose to the spinal cord and cord planning risk volume (PRV). All plans met required dose constraints on all organs at risk, and all measured PTV-cord dose gradients were steeper than planned. Beam complexity analysis suggested that the IMRT treatment plans were more deliverable (less complex, leading to greater QA success) than the VMAT treatment plans, although the IMRT plans also took more time to deliver. The accuracy and deliverability of VMAT treatment plans were found to be substantially increased by limiting the number of monitor units (MU) per beam at the optimization stage, and thereby limiting beam modulation complexity. The VMAT arcs that were optimized with MU limitation had higher QA pass rates as well as higher modulation complexity scores (less complexity), lower modulation indices (less modulation), lower MU per beam, larger beam segments, and fewer small apertures than the VMAT arcs that were optimized without MU limitation. It is recommended that VMAT treatments for vertebral volumes, where the PTV abuts or surrounds the spinal cord, should be optimized with MU limitation. IMRT treatments may be preferable to the VMAT treatments, for dosimetry and deliverability reasons, but may be inappropriate for some patients because of their increased treatment delivery time.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

DOE OSTI2020

A Study on Radionuclides Selection for DCGLs Development for Site Release of KRR Units 1 and 2 site in Korea - 20256

The selection of Derived Concentration Guideline Levels (DCGLs) in nuclear facilities decommissioning is important because they serve as criteria for site characterization and final status surveys. DCGLs should be derived for KAERI TRIGA Mark II and III research reactor site clearance and prior to the work, a radionuclides list for DCGLs consideration was created. Radionuclides selection for DCGLs was performed according to the procedure proposed by the US NRC based on the characterization survey related to the decommission site. By evaluating the dose contribution of each radionuclide using D and D computer code, radionuclides with a dose contribution fraction of 0.1% or more for the entire radionuclide were selected. As a result, the selected radionuclides were beta radionuclides H-3, C-14 and Sr-90 and gamma radionuclides Co-60, Cs-137, Eu-152 and Eu-154. The selected radionuclides can be presented for consultation with domestic regulatory agencies in the future and will be used as the technical base of DCGLs for the final status survey. (authors)

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-238: Deriving Electron Contamination Spectra From Pure and Clinical Photon Beams

Purpose: To extract the electron contamination energy spectra for an Elekta Precise Linac, based on pure photon and measured clinical beam percentage depth dose data. And to include this as an additional source in isource 4 in DOSXYZnrc. Methods: A pure photon beam was simulated for the Linac using isource 4 in the DOSXYZnrc Monte Carlo (MC) code. Percentage depth dose (PDD) data were extracted afterwards for a range of field sizes (FS). These simulated dose data were compared to actual measured dose PDD data, with the data normalized at 10 cm depth. The resulting PDD data resembled the electron contamination depth dose. Since the dose fall-off is a strictly decreasing function, a method was adopted to derive the contamination electron spectrum. Afterwards this spectrum was used in a DOSXYZnrc MC simulation run to verify that the original electron depth dose could be replicated. Results: Various square aperture FS’s for 6, 8 and 15 megavolt (MV) photon beams were modeled, simulated and compared to their respective actual measured PDD data. As FS increased, simulated pure photon depth-dose profiles shifted deeper, thus requiring electron contamination to increase the surface dose. The percentage of electron weight increased with increase in FS. For a FS of 15×15 cm{sup 2}, the percentage electron weight is 0.1%, 0.2% and 0.4% for 6, 8 and 15 MV beams respectively. Conclusion: From the PDD results obtained, an additional electron contamination source was added to the photon source model so that simulation and measured PDD data could match within 2 % / 2 mm gamma-index criteria. The improved source model could assure more accurate simulations of surface doses. This research project was funded by the South African Medical Research Council (MRC) with funds from National Treasury under its Economic Competitiveness and Support package.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2014

SU-E-T-238: Monte Carlo Estimation of Cerenkov Dose for Photo-Dynamic Radiotherapy

Purpose: Estimation of Cerenkov dose from high-energy megavoltage photon and electron beams in tissue and its impact on the radiosensitization using Protoporphyrine IX (PpIX) for tumor targeting enhancement in radiotherapy. Methods: The GEPTS Monte Carlo code is used to generate dose distributions from 18MV Varian photon beam and generic high-energy (45-MV) photon and (45-MeV) electron beams in a voxel-based tissueequivalent phantom. In addition to calculating the ionization dose, the code scores Cerenkov energy released in the wavelength range 375–425 nm corresponding to the pick of the PpIX absorption spectrum (Fig. 1) using the Frank-Tamm formula. Results: The simulations shows that the produced Cerenkov dose suitable for activating PpIX is 4000 to 5500 times lower than the overall radiation dose for all considered beams (18MV, 45 MV and 45 MeV). These results were contradictory to the recent experimental studies by Axelsson et al. (Med. Phys. 38 (2011) p 4127), where Cerenkov dose was reported to be only two orders of magnitude lower than the radiation dose. Note that our simulation results can be corroborated by a simple model where the Frank and Tamm formula is applied for electrons with 2 MeV/cm stopping power generating Cerenkov photons in the 375–425 nm range and assuming these photons have less than 1mm penetration in tissue. Conclusion: The Cerenkov dose generated by high-energy photon and electron beams may produce minimal clinical effect in comparison with the photon fluence (or dose) commonly used for photo-dynamic therapy. At the present time, it is unclear whether Cerenkov radiation is a significant contributor to the recently observed tumor regression for patients receiving radiotherapy and PpIX versus patients receiving radiotherapy only. The ongoing study will include animal experimentation and investigation of dose rate effects on PpIX response.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2017

A Comparison of Select USDOE and USEPA Risk and Dose Assessment Tools Utilized at Two FUSRAP Projects - 17388

The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) utilizes several computer programs and models to conduct risk and dose assessments at Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) projects. In the past, the USACE has primarily relied on the US Department of Energy (USDOE)'s Argonne National Lab (ANL) RESidual Radioactivity (RESRAD) computer code for performing dose and risk assessments involving radiological contamination in onsite soils and the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Preliminary Remediation Goal (PRG) and Dose Compliance Calculator (DCC) for radiological contamination in ground water. Recent USEPA guidance requires use of USEPA calculators for all media at National Priority List sites, which includes some FUSRAP sites. The USACE recently utilized both RESRAD and the USEPA PRG and DCC calculators in assessments at two FUSRAP projects for all media in order to evaluate differences in the models and determine adjustments to potentially resolve differences. The two projects involve soil and groundwater assessments and address typical FUSRAP contaminants such as uranium, radium, thorium and their progeny. This paper discusses differences between the models, lessons learned, and methods used to address stakeholder and other concerns regarding these assessments. The paper's discussions are useful for anyone performing risk or dose assessments for radiological contamination and especially those using RESRAD and the PRG and DCC calculators. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗