Reproducibility of Dose Rate Measurements With Radioluminescent Nitrogen-Doped Optical Fibers

Fricano, Fiammetta; Boiron, Hugo; Morana, Adriana; Mélin, Gilles; Weninger, Luca; Campanella, Cosimo; Boukenter, Aziz; Marin, Emmanuel; Ouerdane, Y.; Robin, Thierry; Girard, Sylvain

doi:10.1109/tns.2023.3263381

Cited by 3 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The second part of the study aims to estimate the reproducibility of the RIL measurements on preirradiated samples, as it was done in another study [ 19 ] for the sole pristine fibers. Figure summarizes the obtained results: the colored points indicate the average RIL values obtained over the ten samples of each probes set.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This means that the dose affects the effective reproducibility of the RIL measurement itself, by the way reaching a maximum dispersion of 10% that is still lower than the dispersion obtained for MM fibers in another study. [ 19 ] This value of 10% nevertheless remains acceptable for a wide field of applications and could be improved by optimizing either the preirradiation conditions or the manufacturing processes of the probes.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For pristine fibers, the reproducibility is around 4%, confirming our previous result in another study. [ 19 ] This dispersion increases up to a 10% for the sample irradiated at the largest dose (1 MGy); it could still be related to the fact that the recombination process is slightly different in the preirradiated probes and the radioluminescent emitting centers that contribute to the signal are not always in the same number. Preirradiation seems to have also a very positive impact on the afterglow that is almost totally suppressed in preirradiated samples.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[ 18 ] For this work, we chose a fiber length of 2.5 cm, to avoid any RIA effect accordingly with another study [ 16 ] for doses below 90 kGy(SiO 2 ) and to guarantee, at the same time, an intense RIL signal over the whole range of investigated dose rates. In another study, [ 19 ] we estimated the X‐Ray RIL measurement reproducibility for both SM (as the samples discussed here) and multimode (MM) versions of this fiber type. The associated sensitivity dispersion among the probes was evaluated to be ≈17% for the MM and ≈3.8% for the SM samples.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This protocol is the same as the one that was adopted for our previous study and detailed in another study. [ 19 ] In general, this ‘classic’ RIL measurement can be analyzed by calculating the average of the signal intensity during the irradiation, at a given dose rate, and subtracting the background signal recorded just before the irradiation start. The obtained values were then plotted as a function of the dose rate used to perform each irradiation run.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Preirradiation Treatment Influence on the Radioluminescence of a Nitrogen‐Doped Optical Fiber Dosimeter

Fricano,

Morana,

Vidalot

et al. 2024

Physica Status Solidi (a)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dosimetry performances of a nitrogen‐doped core (diameter of 8 μm) optical fiber, before and after 100 kV X‐Ray preirradiation treatments, up to cumulated dose of 1 MGy(SiO2), to highlight their effects on the radiation‐induced luminescence (RIL), are investigated. The RIL reproducibility versus dose rate calibration curves (in the 0.17–50 Gy s−1 range) are evaluated using four sets of ten different probes: three sets using preirradiated samples at 80 kGy, 280 kGy, 1 MGy, respectively, and one set with pristine samples. The RIL kinetics during ≈60 h long preirradiations at constant dose rate are also studied, showing a non‐negligible bright burn effect. The main outcome is that the preirradiation improves the fiber dosimetry properties since it: 1) enhances fiber radiation detection sensitivity, 2) improves the linearity of the RIL dose rate dependence, and 3) suppresses the observed afterglow postirradiation effect. However, after preirradiation, larger dispersion between the different probes is noted, from 4% (non‐irradiated samples) to 10% for the 1 MGy preirradiated samples. The possible physical explanations are discussed on the basis of the preirradiation filling deep traps that, competing with the RIL centers for the trapping of electrons released by ionization, influence the RIL efficiency.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%