ARMAS radiation monitoring first results from the surface to LEO

Tobiska, W. Kent; Gersey, Brad; Didkovsky, L. V.; Wieman, Seth; Judge, Kevin; Bouwer, D.; Bailey, Justin J.; Gupta, Vaibhav; Ozambela, Sofia

doi:10.1002/essoar.10510055.1

Cited by 4 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previously, Tobiska et al (2019) showed a comparative example of absorbed dose rates for two of the commercial flights used here, i.e., Los Angeles–Denver (20 May 2018 at 11.3 km; Figure 13) and Denver–Los Angeles (23 May 2018 at 11.6 km; Figure 14) during very similar quiet geomagnetic conditions. Flight altitudes and locations come from ADS‐B uncorrected pressure altitude flight records that are distributed by FlightAware.…”

Section: Armas Fm Calibration To Tepc Utilizing Ground‐based Experime...mentioning

confidence: 79%

“…Previous calibration discussions for the ARMAS system have been described (Tobiska et al, 2016(Tobiska et al, , 2019 and have been encapsulated in ARMAS algorithms preceding v10. The earlier work (Tobiska et al, 2016) calibrated dD (Ti)/dt and dH/dt dosimetric quantities in the ARMAS system to the RaD-X balloon mission results (Mertens, 2016;Mertens et al, 2016) In this paper we have accomplished more than an updated calibration.…”

Section: Space Weathermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The earlier work (Tobiska et al, 2016) calibrated dD (Ti)/dt and dH/dt dosimetric quantities in the ARMAS system to the RaD‐X balloon mission results (Mertens, 2016; Mertens et al, 2016) and dH*(10)/dt as well as dE/dt to the NAIRAS v1 physics‐based radiation model. A summary of that calibration work by Tobiska et al (2019) provides a discussion of comparative measurements between ARMAS and TEPC between 2011 and 2019.…”

Section: Armas Fm Calibration To Tepc Utilizing Ground‐based Experime...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table 5 is similar to the Table 1 in Tobiska et al (2019) but updated for ARMAS v10.21 results; it also includes additional flights where TEPC and ARMAS were flown together. The absorbed dose rate, dD (Ti)/dt (μGy/h), dose equivalent rate, dH/dt (μSv/h), and Quality Factor, Q (unitless), for the cruising flight altitudes in Table 5 demonstrate an excellent comparison between the average TEPC and median ARMAS v10.21 values.…”

Section: Armas Fm Calibration To Tepc Utilizing Ground‐based Experime...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Beamline and Flight Comparisons of the ARMAS Flight Module With the Tissue Equivalent Proportional Counter for Improving Atmospheric Radiation Monitoring Accuracy

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ionizing radiation at aircraft and commercial suborbital spaceflight altitudes is driven by space weather and is a health concern for crew and passengers. We compare the response functions of two radiation detectors that were exposed to four different ground-based laboratory radiation fields as well as flown alongside each other on aircraft. The detectors were a tissue equivalent proportional counter (TEPC) and a Teledyne silicon micro dosimeter chip that was integrated into an Automated Radiation Measurements for Aerospace Safety Flight Module (ARMAS FM). Both detectors were flown onboard commercial and research aircraft. In addition, both detectors were exposed neutrons at the Los Alamos Neutron Science Center, protons at Loma Linda University Medical Center, 56 Fe particles at the NASA Space Radiation Laboratory, and also a gamma radiation source at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The response of each of these instruments as well as derived dosimetric quantities are compared for each radiation exposure and the ratio for converting ARMAS absorbed dose in silicon to an estimated absorbed dose in tissue is obtained. This process resulted in the first definitive calibration of the silicon-based detector like ARMAS to TEPC. In particular, with seven flights of both instruments together, the ARMAS-derived dose in tissue was then validated with the TEPC-measured dose in tissue and these results are reported. This work provides a method for significantly improving the accuracy of radiation measurements relevant to human tissue safety using a silicon detector that is easy to deploy and can report data in real time.

show abstract

Section: Armas Fm Calibration To Tepc Utilizing Ground‐based Experime...mentioning

confidence: 79%

Section: Space Weathermentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Armas Fm Calibration To Tepc Utilizing Ground‐based Experime...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Armas Fm Calibration To Tepc Utilizing Ground‐based Experime...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Beamline and Flight Comparisons of the ARMAS Flight Module With the Tissue Equivalent Proportional Counter for Improving Atmospheric Radiation Monitoring Accuracy

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Comparisons on commercial carrier flights under similar geomagnetic conditions have shown reasonable agreement between TEPC and ARMAS, with ARMAS v9.46 producing slightly higher dose equivalent rates than TEPC (Gersey et al, 2012;Tobiska et al, 2016). More recent comparisons show better agreement (Tobiska et al, 2019). Another commonly used dosimeter is the Liulin, which consist of one or more silicon detectors and measures the deposited energy and number of particles in the detector(s) when charged particles hit the device, allowing it to calculate the dose rate and particle flux (Dachev et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Characterization of Radiation Exposure at Aviation Flight Altitudes Using the Nowcast of Aerospace Ionizing Radiation System (NAIRAS)

Phoenix,

Mertens,

Gronoff

et al. 2024

Space Weather

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Exposure to ionizing radiation from galactic cosmic rays (GCR) and solar energetic particles (SEP) at aircraft flight altitudes can have an adverse effect on human health. Although airline crews are classified as radiation workers by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), in most countries, their level of exposure is unquantified and undocumented throughout the duration of their career. As such, there is a need to assess pilot ionizing radiation exposure. The Nowcast of Aerospace Ionizing RAdiation System (NAIRAS), a real‐time, global, physics‐based model is used to assess such exposure. The Automated Radiation Measurements for Aerospace Safety (ARMAS) measurement data set consists of high latitude, high altitude, and long‐duration aircraft flights between 2013 and 2023. Here, we characterize radiation exposure at aviation flight altitudes using the NAIRAS model and compare with 45 flight trajectories from the recent ARMAS flight measurement inventory.

show abstract

Unraveling the Atmospheric Energy Input and Ionization due to EMIC-Driven Electron Precipitation from ELFIN Observations

Capannolo,

Marshall,

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Energetic electron precipitation (EEP) from the radiation belts into Earth’s atmosphere leads to several profound effects (e.g., enhancement of ionospheric conductivity, possible acceleration of ozone destruction processes). An accurate quantification of the energy input and ionization due to EEP is still lacking due to instrument limitations of low-Earth-orbit satellites capable of detecting EEP. The deployment of the ELFIN CubeSats marks a new era of observations of EEP with an improved pitch-angle (0°–180°) and energy (50 keV–6 MeV) resolution. Here, we focus on the EEP recorded by ELFIN coincident with electromagnetic ion cyclotron (EMIC) waves, which play a major role in radiation belt electron losses. The EMIC-driven EEP (~200 keV–~2 MeV) exhibits a pitch-angle distribution (PAD) that flattens with increasing energy, indicating a more efficient high-energy precipitation. Leveraging the combination of unique electron measurements from ELFIN and a comprehensive ionization model known as the Boulder Electron Radiation to Ionization (BERI), we quantify the energy input of EMIC-driven precipitation (on average, ~3.3x10-2 erg/cm2/s), identify its location (any longitude, 50°–70° latitude), and provide the expected range of ion-electron production rate (on average, 100–200 pairs/cm3/s), peaking in the mesosphere – a region often overlooked. Our findings are crucial for improving our understanding of the magnetosphere-ionosphere-atmosphere system as they accurately specify the contribution of EMIC-driven EEP, which serves as crucial inputs to state-of-the-art atmospheric models (e.g., WACCM), to quantify the accurate impact of EMIC waves on both the atmospheric chemistry and dynamics.

show abstract

ARMAS radiation monitoring first results from the surface to LEO

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Beamline and Flight Comparisons of the ARMAS Flight Module With the Tissue Equivalent Proportional Counter for Improving Atmospheric Radiation Monitoring Accuracy

Beamline and Flight Comparisons of the ARMAS Flight Module With the Tissue Equivalent Proportional Counter for Improving Atmospheric Radiation Monitoring Accuracy

Characterization of Radiation Exposure at Aviation Flight Altitudes Using the Nowcast of Aerospace Ionizing Radiation System (NAIRAS)

Unraveling the Atmospheric Energy Input and Ionization due to EMIC-Driven Electron Precipitation from ELFIN Observations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About