Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-qxsvm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-19T08:32:43.474Z Has data issue: true hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of the clay fractions from various horizons on the radiation shielding parameters of an Arenosol

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2024

Luiz F. Pires Open the ORCID record for Luiz F. Pires [Opens in a new window] ,
Victor A. Yanaguisawa Open the ORCID record for Victor A. Yanaguisawa [Opens in a new window] ,
André M. Brinatti Open the ORCID record for André M. Brinatti [Opens in a new window] ,
Sérgio C. Saab Open the ORCID record for Sérgio C. Saab [Opens in a new window]  and
Vladia Correchel Open the ORCID record for Vladia Correchel [Opens in a new window]
Luiz F. Pires*
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, State University of Ponta Grossa (UEPG), Ponta Grossa, Brazil
Victor A. Yanaguisawa
Affiliation:
Physics Graduate Program, State University of Ponta Grossa (UEPG), Ponta Grossa, Brazil
André M. Brinatti
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, State University of Ponta Grossa (UEPG), Ponta Grossa, Brazil
Sérgio C. Saab
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, State University of Ponta Grossa (UEPG), Ponta Grossa, Brazil
Vladia Correchel
Affiliation:
School of Agronomy, Federal University of Goiás (UFG), Goiânia, Brazil
*
*Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examines the effects of the chemical composition of the clay fraction of various soil horizons on radiation shielding parameters. X-ray fluorescence (XRF) analysis did not reveal significant differences in the concentration of the most abundant oxides (Al2O3, SiO2, Fe2O3) among the various horizons. Consequently, the mass attenuation coefficient did not vary among the horizons in terms of the photon energies studied (15 keV–10 MeV). The mean free path (MFP), half-value layer (HVL) and tenth-value layer (TVL) did not differ for energies up to 100 keV. However, at higher energies, these parameters were mainly influenced by the differences in the densities of the soil horizons. The effective atomic number did not differ across the horizons for the various photon energies, nor did the mass attenuation coefficient. It is shown that slight differences in the chemical composition of the clay fraction of soil horizons do not affect radiation shielding parameters (MFL, HVL, TVL) for low photon energies (<500 keV). Density is more important for radiation shielding than the chemical composition of the various horizons of the same soil type for higher energies (>100 keV); hence, compacting the clay fraction might be more efficient for radiation shielding purposes at higher energies.

Keywords

Half-value layermean free pathPhy-X/PSDsoiltenth-value layerXCOM
Type
Article
Information
Clay Minerals , First View , pp. 1 - 12
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Mineralogical Society of the United Kingdom and Ireland

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor: Hongping He

References

Abdul, A.T. & Rashid, J.M. (2021) Experimental Investigation of gamma-ray shielding capability of clay used as building materials in Thi Qar Province. P. 012124 in: Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1999, No. 1). IOP Publishing, Bristol, UK.Google Scholar
AbuAlRoos, N.J., Amin, N.A.B. & Zainon, R. (2019) Conventional and new lead-free radiation shielding materials for radiation protection in nuclear medicine: a review. Radiation Physics and Chemistry, 165, 108439.Google Scholar
Akbulut, S., Sehhatigdiri, A., Eroglu, H. & Çelik, S. (2015) A research on the radiation shielding effects of clay, silica fume and cement samples. Radiation Physics and Chemistry, 117, 88–92.Google Scholar
Akman, F., Turan, V., Sayyed, M.I., Akdemir, F., Kaçal, M.R., Durak, R. & Zaid, M.H.M. (2019) Comprehensive study on evaluation of shielding parameters of selected soils by gamma and X-rays transmission in the range 13.94–88.04 keV using WinXCom and FFAST programs. Results in Physics, 15, 102751.Google Scholar
Al-Masri, M.S., Hasan, M., Al-Hamwi, A., Amin, Y. & Doubal, A.W. (2013) Mass attenuation coefficients of soil and sediment samples using gamma energies from 46.5 to 1332 keV. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 116, 28–33.Google Scholar
Alabsy, M.T. & Elzaher, M.A. (2023) Radiation shielding performance of metal oxides/EPDM rubber composites using Geant4 simulation and computational study. Scientific Reports, 13, 7744.Google Scholar
Azreen, N.M., Rashid, R.S., Haniza, M., Voo, Y.L. & Amran, Y.M. (2018) Radiation shielding of ultra-high-performance concrete with silica sand, amang and lead glass. Construction and Building Materials, 172, 370–377.Google Scholar
Balan, E., Lazzeri, M., Morin, G. & Mauri, F. (2006) First-principles study of the OH-stretching modes of gibbsite. American Mineralogist, 91, 115–119.Google Scholar
Bish, D.L. & Von Dreele, R.B. (1989) Rietveld refinement of non-hydrogen atomic positions in kaolinite. Clays and Clay Minerals, 37, 289–296.Google Scholar
Bortoluzzi, E.C., dos Santos, D.R., Santanna, M.A. & Caner, L. (2013) Mineralogy and nutrient desorption of suspended sediments during a storm event. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 13, 1093–1105.Google Scholar
Camargo, M.A., Kodum, K.S. & Pires, L.F. (2021) How does the soil chemical composition affect the mass attenuation coefficient? A study using computer simulation to understand the radiation-soil interaction processes. Brazilian Journal of Physics, 51, 1775–1783.Google Scholar
Camargo, M.A., Kodum, K.S. & Pires, L.F. (2022) How does the soil chemical composition affect its cross-sections, effective atomic number and electron density? Computer simulation analysis to highlight the radiation-soil interaction processes. Brazilian Journal of Physics, 52, 154.Google Scholar
Costa, J.C., Borges, J.A.R., Pires, L.F., Arthur, R.C.J. & Bacchi, O.O.S. (2014) Soil mass attenuation coefficient: analysis and evaluation. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 64, 206–211.Google Scholar
Delage, P., Cui, Y.J. & Tang, A.M. (2010) Clays in radioactive waste disposal. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 2, 111–123.Google Scholar
dos Santos, J.C.B.D., Le Pera, E., Souza Júnior, V.S.D., Corrêa, M.M. & Azevedo, A.C.D. (2017) Gneiss saprolite weathering and soil genesis along an east-west regolith sequence (NE Brazil). Catena, 150, 279–290.Google Scholar
Eke, C. (2021) Investigation of gamma-ray attenuation properties of beach sand samples from Antalya, Turkey. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 14, 1–16.Google Scholar
Eke, C. (2022) The effect of soil depth on the radiation absorption parameters of soil samples. Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences: Physics, 86, 1391–1399.Google Scholar
Ferraz, E.S.B. & Mansell, R.S. (1979) Determining water content and bulk density of soil by gamma -ray attenuation technique. University of Florida, Technical Bulletin no. 807. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA, 51 pp.Google Scholar
Ferreira, T.R., Pires, L.F., Brinatti, A.M. & Auler, A.C. (2018) Surface liming effects on soil radiation attenuation properties. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 18, 1641–1653.Google Scholar
Gedik, S. & Baytaş, A. (2015) Shielding of gamma radiation by using porous materials. Acta Physica Polonica A, 128, 174–175.Google Scholar
Gee, G.W. & Bauder, J.W. (1986) Particle size analysis. Pp. 383–412 in: Methods of Soil Analysis Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical Methods, 2nd edition (Klute, A., editor). Agronomy Society of America and Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, USA.Google Scholar
Gili, M.B.Z. (2023) Photon-shielding properties of alkali- and acid-treated Philippine natural zeolite. Clay Minerals, 58, 258–266.Google Scholar
Graf, D.L. (1961) Crystallographic tables for the rhombohedral carbonates. American Mineralogist, 46, 1283–1316.Google Scholar
Gülbiçim, H., Tufan, M.Ç. & Türkan, M.N. (2017) The investigation of vermiculite as an alternating shielding material for gamma rays. Radiation Physics and Chemistry, 130, 112–117.Google Scholar
Gurler, O., Tumsavas, Z. & Akar Tarim, U. (2020) Gamma-ray attenuation study for the soils of Bursa, Turkey, in the energy range 59.5–1332.5 keV. Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions A: Science, 44, 1161–1166.Google Scholar
Hammer, Ø., Harper, D.A.T. & Ryan, P. (2001) Past: paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica, 4, 1–9.Google Scholar
Hartemink, A.E., Zhang, Y., Bockheim, J.G., Curi, N., Silva, S.H.G., Grauer-Gray, J. et al. (2020) Soil horizon variation: a review. Advances in Agronomy, 160, 125–185.Google Scholar
Hila, F.C., Javier-Hila, A.M.V., Sayyed, M.I., Asuncion-Astronomo, A., Dicen, G.P., Jecong, J.F.M. et al. (2021) Evaluation of photon radiation attenuation and buildup factors for energy absorption and exposure in some soils using EPICS2017 library. Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 53, 3808–3815.Google Scholar
Hillel, D. (2014) Environmental Soil Physics: Fundamentals, Applications, and Environmental Considerations. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 800 pp.Google Scholar
Howard, C.J., Sabine, T.M. & Dickson, F. (1991) Structural and thermal parameters for rutile and anatase. Acta Crystallographica, B47, 462–468.Google Scholar
Hubbell, J.H. & Berger, M.J. (1987) XCOM: photon cross section on a personal computer. US Department of Commerce, Gaithersburg, MD, USA, 32 pp.Google Scholar
Hubbell, J.H. & Seltzer, S.M. (1995) Tables of X-Ray Mass Attenuation Coefficients and Mass Energy-Absorption Coefficients 1 keV to 20 MeV for Elements Z = 1 to 92 and 48 Additional Substances of Dosimetric Interest. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, USA. Retrieved from http://physics.nist.gov/PhysRefData/XrayMassCoef/cover.htmlGoogle Scholar
Isfahani, H.S., Abtahi, S.M., Roshanzamir, M.A., Shirani, A. & Hejazi, S.M. (2019a) Investigation on gamma-ray shielding and permeability of clay–steel slag mixture. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 78, 4589–4598.Google Scholar
Isfahani, H.S., Abtahi, S.M., Roshanzamir, M.A., Shirani, A. & Hejazi, S.M. (2019b) Permeability and gamma-ray shielding efficiency of clay modified by barite powder. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 37, 845–855.Google Scholar
IUSS Working Group WRB (2022) World Reference Base for Soil Resources, 4th edition. International Union of Soil Sciences (IUSS), Vienna, Austria, 236 ppGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, I. (1963) Nuclear Physics. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Boston, MA, USA, 783 pp.Google Scholar
Kucuk, N., Tumsavas, Z. & Cakir, M. (2013) Determining photon energy absorption parameters for different soil samples. Journal of Radiation Research, 54, 578–586.Google Scholar
Lima, A.P.B., Inda, A.V., Zinn, Y.L., Silva, E.R.D. & Nascimento, P.C.D. (2022) Soil formation and properties along a sedimentary lithosequence in the ecotonal cerrados of Mato Grosso, Brazil. Catena, 219, 106599.Google Scholar
Mamikhin, S.V., Manakhov, D.V., Shcheglov, A.I. & Tsvetnov, E.V. (2017) Some aspects of evaluation of the role of soils as a shielding medium from ionizing-radiation. Moscow University Soil Science Bulletin, 72, 66–70.Google Scholar
Mann, H.S., Brar, G.S., Mann, K.S. & Mudahar, G.S. (2016) Experimental investigation of clay fly ash bricks for gamma-ray shielding. Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 48, 1230–1236.Google Scholar
Mann, K.S., Kaur, B., Sidhu, G.S. & Kumar, A. (2013) Investigations of some building materials for γ-rays shielding effectiveness. Radiation Physics and Chemistry, 87, 16–25.Google Scholar
Mareschal, L., Nzila, J.D.D., Turpault, M.P., Thongo M'Bou, A., Mazoumbou, J.C., Bouillet, J.P. et al. (2011) Mineralogical and physico-chemical properties of ferralic Arenosols derived from unconsolidated Plio-Pleistocenic deposits in the coastal plains of Congo. Geoderma, 162, 159–170.Google Scholar
Marquez-Mata, C.A., Chavez, M.J.M., Campillo-Rivera, G.E., Vazquez-Bañuelos, J., Garcia-Duran, A. & Vega-Carrillo, H.R. (2021) Shielding features of seven types on natural quartz. Applied Radiation and Isotopes, 167, 109450.Google Scholar
Medhat, M.E., Demir, N., Akar Tarim, U. & Gurler, O. (2014a) Calculation of gamma-ray mass attenuation coefficients of some Egyptian soil samples using Monte Carlo methods. Radiation Effects and Defects in Solids, 169, 706–714.Google Scholar
Medhat, M.E., Pires, L.F. & Arthur, R.C.J. (2014b) Analysis of photon interaction parameters as function of soil composition. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry, 300, 1105–1112.Google Scholar
Mirji, R. & Lobo, B. (2017) Computation of the mass attenuation coefficient of polymeric materials at specific gamma photon energies. Radiation Physics and Chemistry, 135, 32–44.Google Scholar
Mudahar, G.S., Modi, S. & Makhan, S. (1991) Total and partial mass attenuation coefficients of soil as a function of chemical composition. International Journal of Radiation Applications and Instrumentation. Part A. Applied Radiation and Isotopes, 42, 13–18.Google Scholar
Ngole-Jeme, V.M. & Ekosse, G.I.E. (2015) A comparative analyses of granulometry, mineral composition and major and trace element concentrations in soils commonly ingested by humans. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12, 8933–8955.Google Scholar
Oliveira, P.T.S., Nearing, M.A., Hawkins, R.H., Stone, J.J., Rodrigues, D.B.B., Panachuki, E. & Wendland, E. (2016) Curve number estimation from Brazilian cerrado rainfall and runoff data. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 71, 420–429.Google Scholar
Pires, L.F. (2022) Radiation shielding properties of weathered soils: influence of the chemical composition and granulometric fractions. Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 54, 3470–3477.Google Scholar
Prandel, L.V., Saab, S.C., Brinatti, A.M., Giarola, N.F.B., Leite, W.C. & Cassaro, F.A.M. (2014). Mineralogical analysis of clays in hardsetting soil horizons, by X-ray fluorescence and X-ray diffraction using Rietveld method. Radiation Physics and Chemistry, 95, 65–68.Google Scholar
Şakar, E., Özpolat, Ö.F., Alım, B., Sayyed, M.I. & Kurudirek, M. (2020) Phy-X/PSD: development of a user friendly online software for calculation of parameters relevant to radiation shielding and dosimetry. Radiation Physics and Chemistry, 166, 108496.Google Scholar
Schaefer, C.E.G., Fabris, J.D. & Ker, J.C. (2008) Minerals in the clay fraction of Brazilian Latosols (Oxisols): a review. Clay Minerals, 43, 137–154.Google Scholar
Shultis, J.K. & Faw, R.E. (2005) Radiation shielding technology. Health Physics, 88, 587–612.Google Scholar
Silva, V.E., Montanari, R., Lima, E.S., da Silva, P.R.T., Freitas, L.A., Pinotti, C.R. et al. (2017) Liming influence on the spatial variability of the leaf chemical composition and in the initial growth of the Eucalyptus. Journal of Geospatial Modelling, 2, 1–11.Google Scholar
Singh, V.P., Badiger, N.M. & Kucuk, N. (2014) Gamma-ray and neutron shielding properties of some soil samples. Indian Journal of Pure and Applied Physics, 52, 579–587.Google Scholar
Taqi, A.H. & Khalil, H.J. (2017) An investigation on gamma attenuation of soil and oil–soil samples. Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences, 10, 252–261.Google Scholar
Tarim, U.A., Gurler, O.R.H.A.N., Ozmutlu, E.N. & Yalcin, S. (2013) Monte Carlo calculations for gamma-ray mass attenuation coefficients of some soil samples. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 58, 198–201.Google Scholar
Tech, L., Pires, L.F., Brinatti, A.M., Saab, S.C., Correchel, V. & Momoli, R.S. (2022) Elemental and radiation attenuation parameter analyses to characterize a Cambisol from the Serra Dourada State Park, Brazil. Environmental Earth Sciences, 81, 63.Google Scholar
Tsang, C.F., Neretnieks, I. & Tsang, Y. (2015) Hydrologic issues associated with nuclear waste repositories. Water Resources Research, 51, 6923–6972.Google Scholar
Wechsler, B., Lindsley, D. & Prewitt, C. (1984) Crystal structure and cation distribution in titanomagnetites (Fe3–xTixO4). American Mineralogist, 69, 754–770.Google Scholar
Wei, P.H. (1935) Die Bindung im Quarz. Zeitschrift fur Kristallographie, 92, 355–362.Google Scholar
Zacháry, D., Filep, T., Jakab, G., Ringer, M., Balázs, R., Németh, T. & Szalai, Z. (2023) The effect of mineral composition on soil organic matter turnover in temperate forest soils. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 23, 1389–1402.Google Scholar