검색결과

검색조건
좁혀보기
검색필터
결과 내 재검색

간행물

    분야

      발행연도

      -

        검색결과 2

        1.
        2023.05 구독 인증기관·개인회원 무료
        Canada’s Pickering Unit 3 was performed a three-stage decontamination from June to August 1989 in preparation for pressure tube replacement. The first step was a reducing CAN-DECON treatment to dissolve the magnetic film inside the reactor, which was applied following partial defueling of the reactor core. The second step was an oxidative dilute alkaline permanganate treatment to remove the chromium-rich oxides of the stainless steel parts. And the final CAN-DECON step was applied continuously after completely removing fuel from the reactor core. In situ pipe gamma-ray spectroscopy techniques were applied to measure radioactivity within feeder piping during various stages of Pickering Unit 3 decontamination. Measurements were performed at a maximum dose rate of 5 mSv/h, and both the detector and the scanned feeder pipe were properly shielded from other neighboring pipes. 60Co was the dominant radionuclide in feeder piping prior to decontamination. And radionuclides 103Ru, 95Zr, 95Nb, 59Fe, 140La and 124Sb were detected. The Co-60 radioactivity was 2.09×105 Bq/cm2 before decontamination and 3.11×103 Bq/cm2 after decontamination in the inlet feeder pipe T18. And in the outlet feeder pipe P21, it is 2.56×104 Bq/cm2 before decontamination and 2.04×103 Bq/cm2 after decontamination.
        2.
        2022.05 구독 인증기관·개인회원 무료
        The amount of radioactive waste generated during decommissioning directly affects the disposal cost of waste. Most of the radioactive waste generated is a concrete waste. Therefore reducing the amount of concrete waste can ensure the economic feasibility of the decommissioning project. The activated concrete in a concrete waste can reduce waste only by physical cutting. Therefore it is most important to accurately identify and categorize radionuclides, radioactivity levels, and radioactivity distribution. In the case of radioactive concrete, radiological characteristics are generally evaluated by laboratory analysis after sampling. However it is difficult to apply to all facilities (accelerator & NPP, etc.) because it is a destructive method. Therefore it is necessary to secure verified in-situ measurement technology that can be applied to operational monitoring or decommissioning plans. In this study, the applicability of cyclotron facilities was evaluated based on the evaluation algorithm derived from the Peak to Compton (PTC) method of in-situ measurement technology. And the reliability of the PTC method was verified through qualitative analysis and quantitative analysis. In the case of qualitative analysis, the analysis results of KAERI which has core technology are compared. To this end SAEAN and KAERI conducted field application tests on the front concrete shielding wall of the cyclotron facility at the same time. After removing the background spectrum from the measured spectrum the PTC method was applied to calculate the Q-value for the counting rate in the peak area per counting rate in the Compton continuum area was calculated. As a result the Q-values of SAE-AN and KAERI were 0.52 and 0.24 respectively, and the result of deriving activation distribution(β) by substituting this for the β-Q correlation equation was found that 14.78 and 12.94. As a result of evaluating the activation by the thickness of the shielding wall it was found that 89.1% (SAE-AN) and 91.9% (KAERI) of the total radioactivity were exist at a depth of 5 cm. And it was found that 97.7% and 99.05% of the total radioactivity exists at a depth of 10 cm. The relative error between SAE-AN and KAERI is 1.35%, indicating that the analysis results of the two institutions are highly consistent. A core drill was performed on the concrete shielding wall in the cyclotron facility for the technical verification of the quantitative analysis method. A core sample (6 cm in diameter, 10 cm in depth) was cut to a depth of 2 cm and analyzed in the laboratory. The activation distribution(β) was calculated based on the radioactivity level of each depth sample, and it was found to be 16.99. The relative error between the quantitative analysis and the on-site measurement results was 14.95% confirming that the accuracy is relatively high.