1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0273-1177(98)00006-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Variations of the radiation dose onboard Mir station

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2005
2005

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The disturbances in the operation of scientific equipment are determined in [ Dmitriev et al , 2002] as increases of the daily probability of errors in the data from the gas discharge counter ( Z 1) or in the data from the scintillation detector NaI ( Z 2) that is more than one root mean square deviation (RMSD) of their average values, that is, >0.051 and >0.061, respectively, in logarithmic scale. The radiation doses D 1 and D 2 were measured on board the Mir station [ Panasyuk et al , 1998; Tverskaya et al , 2004] under equivalent aluminum shields of 4.5 g/cm 2 and 2 g/cm 2 . Therefore the doses are produced by protons with energies E > 70 MeV and E > 40 MeV, respectively, and by electrons with energies E > 8.5 MeV and E > 4 MeV, respectively.…”
Section: Space Weather Disturbancesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The disturbances in the operation of scientific equipment are determined in [ Dmitriev et al , 2002] as increases of the daily probability of errors in the data from the gas discharge counter ( Z 1) or in the data from the scintillation detector NaI ( Z 2) that is more than one root mean square deviation (RMSD) of their average values, that is, >0.051 and >0.061, respectively, in logarithmic scale. The radiation doses D 1 and D 2 were measured on board the Mir station [ Panasyuk et al , 1998; Tverskaya et al , 2004] under equivalent aluminum shields of 4.5 g/cm 2 and 2 g/cm 2 . Therefore the doses are produced by protons with energies E > 70 MeV and E > 40 MeV, respectively, and by electrons with energies E > 8.5 MeV and E > 4 MeV, respectively.…”
Section: Space Weather Disturbancesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The doses increased by $80% in chamber D2 (E p > 40 MeV) and by $30% in chamber D1 (E p >70 MeV), which corresponds approximately to the ratio of dose increases in similar energy ranges recorded on CRRES (Gussenhoven et al, 1991). The later history of the new belt is difficult to trace in the Mir measurement data because its effect was ''overlapped'' from mid-1992 by the effect of dose increase due to the solar cycle variations of the inner belt proton intensity (Panasyuk et al, 1998). At the same time, the new belt is known to be observable during a few years (Ginzburg et al, 1993).…”
Section: Radiation Belt Variationsmentioning
confidence: 59%
“…Also, because most of the flights are at low altitude, the estimated trapped dose rate is sensitive to the correction applied for the galactic cosmic ray (GCR) contribution to the total TLD dose rate (GCR dose rate Total dose rate). Panasyuk et al [20] qualitatively examined the time variation of the absorbed dose rate on Mir station for the five years from January 1991 to December 1995 and suggested that the trapped particle dose rate has a seasonal dependence, reaching maximum values in summer in the northern hemisphere. They suggested that this is due to the known seasonal variation of the atmospheric density and would be more pronounced at 800 km than at 400 km.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%