Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Radiological survey”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Overview of a Methodology for Calculating the A Priori Scan Minimum Detectable Concentration for Post-Processed Radiological Surveys (Final Report) (Rev.1)

Increased continuous data collection using automated data loggers and autonomous radiological survey devices or vehicles has introduced a need for corresponding guidance and statistical techniques for data that are collected without surveyor vigilance. This report presents a method for calculating the a priori scan minimum detectable concentrations (MDCs) for surveys performed without vigilance similar to methods described in the Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual, NUREG-1507, and NUREG/CR-6364. A priori scan MDCs are calculated during survey planning to ensure that survey parameters (e.g., scanning speed, scanning altitude, detector geometry) will lead to collecting data in which potentially contaminated areas can be detected when data are processed after the survey, within acceptable statistical error probabilities.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Small UAS radiological survey flights at the NNSS

News highlight intended for a new publication, the "LDRD Quarterly Highlights." The quarterly newsletter contains highlights from LDRD and SDRD programs and will be published on a LANL-hosted website. This story was previously featured on the NNSS.gov website

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2020

Results from the AMS Hanford Aerial Radiological Survey

This is a presentation that will be given during the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting to an international audience. The meeting is in December, but since it is virtual this year,

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
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↗
DOE OSTI2022

Multi-Sensor Optimal Motion Planning for Radiological Contamination Surveys by Using Prediction-Difference Maps

Distributed and networked mobile sensor platforms using unmanned aerial and/or ground vehicles to survey areas of interest offer a safer and more efficient method for radiological contamination mapping; however, most applications rely on uniformly sweeping of the area in a raster-type motion without utilizing the information available in a dynamic sense. We have developed a fully autonomous optimal motion planning procedure for networks with two or more mobile sensors. The procedure utilizes well-established concepts of Gaussian processes in combination with control laws based on centroidal Voronoi tessellations to achieve optimal next-iteration sensor movements. A new method of informing optimal motion planning is proposed, whereby the absolute difference between the prior and current full-map prediction, referred to as the prediction-difference map, is used as the spatial density function within each Voronoi cell, providing immediate and iterative feedback for dynamic use of available information. The Gaussian process regression model used to estimate the contamination in unvisited locations also provides prediction uncertainties, and can be used as a quantitative metric to assess the confidence in the calculated contamination map; these estimates and prediction uncertainties are unavailable for standard uniform survey routines as they can only produce maps in the vicinity of observed locations. We present through simulation the achievable performance gains from using this new method by directly comparing to a uniform survey method. Results show that using the prediction-difference maps to inform motion planning procedures offers a faster rate of producing an accurate and convergent map relative to a uniform survey route.

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗
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 OSTI2021

LANL MLU 20 October TRUPACT Loading Survey Document

This SNL document contains requested radiological survey information, as part of the documentation for the MLU shipment performed by the LANL MLU team on October 20th. The survey was performed in TA-5, on October 20th, 2021. This survey was for radiological coverage for the disassembly of two TRUPACTs, the assembly and loading of their payloads, and the reassembly of the TRUPACTs.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

LANL MLU TRUPACT Loading Survey Document

The following SNL document contains requested radiological survey information, as part of the documentation for the MLU shipment being performed by the LANL MLU team. The survey was performed in TA-5, on October 19th, 2021. This survey was for radiological coverage for the disassembly of two TRUPACTs, the assembly and loading of their payloads, and the reassembly of the TRUPACTs.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2020

WIPP MLU Incoming Vehicles Survey Document

The following SNL document contains requested radiological survey information, as part of the documentation for the TRU-waste shipment being performed by the LANL MLU team. The surveys were performed in TA-5, on July 20th, 2020: Incoming WIPP TRU-Pact trailers survey: 1-20200720-4, and, Incoming MLU trailer and mobile crane survey: 1-20200720-8 The first survey was of 2 WIPP trailers carrying 2 empty TRU Half-Pacts each. The second survey was for a trailer with the MLU team's equipment, and for the contracted mobile crane that be used for loading Half-Pacts. All information contained was completed, reviewed, and approved by SNL RP personnel, and is released for receipt and use by the LANL MLU Team and WIPP personnel at their discretion.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Preliminary and Incoming LANL MLU Surveys Document

The following SNL document contains requested radiological survey information, as part of the documentation for the MLU shipment being performed by the LANL MLU team. The surveys were performed in TA-5, on October 11th - 15th, 2021. These surveys were of the shipping containers, the dunnage container, MLU equipment trailer, and contracted mobile crane.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2021

LANL MLU Truck Shipment Surveys Document

The following SNL document contains requested radiological survey information, as part of the documentation for the LANL MLU shipment performed by the LANL MLU team the week of October 18th . The surveys were performed in TA-5 October 19th – 21st, 2021. The surveys were for the official shipments of 4 loaded TRUPACTs and 2 empty TRUPACTs. Surveys were completed after the trucks were hitched to their respective trailers.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Challenges and Practical Solutions for Conducting Structural MARSSIM Surveys in Elevated Radon Environments - 20413

The Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM) [1] provides comprehensive guidance for the development and implementation of radiological surveys conducted to demonstrate compliance with a dose- or risk-based cleanup goal during final status survey. The MARSSIM methodology follows an integrated strategy combining direct measurements and sampling to assess uniform residual contamination, and scanning surveys to identify localized areas of elevated activity. Building surveys assessing residual surface contamination present unique challenges from reliance on field measurements that may be subject to less than ideal environmental conditions. Additionally, limited characterization and excessive conservatism incorporated into the conceptual site model may result in derived concentration guideline levels (DCGL) and, as a consequence of relatively inefficient field instrumentation, corresponding attributable count rates generally comparable to background. The presence of elevated ambient radon concentrations and associated progeny deposition both exacerbate these intrinsic survey challenges and introduce a series of technical, logistic, and administrative obstacles that can wreak havoc on the statistical legitimacy of each component of the MARSSIM process. Short-lived radon progeny including polonium-218, lead-214, bismuth-214, and polonium-214 produce excessive alpha and beta radiation that may decrease instrument sensitivity through an increase in background count rates, and, at worst, may result in incorrect survey unit failure through the simulation of residual surface activity. Aside from the obvious solution of exhaustive radon mitigation, the primary objectives are to distinguish between radon progeny deposition and actual surface activity, and collect sufficient defensible data. The following is a technical discussion of the consequences of performing building MARSSIM surveys in the presence of elevated ambient radon atmospheres, conceptual examples, and an overview of practical strategies to minimize the effects of radon interference while collecting sufficient defensible data to complete the survey. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗