Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- literature_links [2021/07/20 11:32]
adamsa
+++ literature_links [2024/07/31 22:31] (current)
sunli
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+https://doi.org/10.61092/iaea.jr1b-5m9p\\
+NS_Radlist: The new atomic radiation library for elements up to Z=100 and all atomic shells has been completed. The testing of the NS_Radlist is progressing well and will be released in early 2023.\\
+NS_RadList – calculations of atomic radiations from nuclear decay (T. Kibedi, B. Tee, B. Coombes /ANU)\\
+A new numerical database (BrIccEmis_DB), and a computer tool (NS_RadList) have been developed to calculate the full energy spectrum of Auger electrons and X-rays from nuclear decay [1]. The program reads ENSDF files and evaluates the atomic vacancy distribution from electron capture decay (EC) and internal conversion (CE). The EC capture rates are taken either from E. Schönfeld and H. Janssen [2], or from BetaShape [3]. Internal conversion coefficients are from BrIcc [4]. The atomic radiation data table used in NS_Radlist has been constructed from a large set of calculations using BrIccEmis [5]. In these calculations atomic radiation rates are taken from EADL [6] and transition energies are calculated using the RAINE code [7] with semi-empirical corrections [1]. The data file contains the complete atomic radiation spectra for Z=6 to 100 and for initial vacancies on each atomic shell. The "condensed phase" approximation was used, which assumes that the atom is in a molecular environment and any valence vacancy will be filled immediately from the continuum. The spectra are binned in 1 eV bins.
+The output files include a detailed report of the calculations with the list of decay energies, intensities of EC, beta, gamma, CE, Auger electron and X-ray radiations, as well as a plot of the emitted atomic radiations. Uncertainties of the atomic radiations are calculated from the uncertainties in the EC and CE processes. Uncertainties in the atomic transition rates in EADL [6] are not very well defined and are excluded from the calculations. The propagation of uncertainties is carried out with UncTools [8] using a Monte Carlo technique.
+References:\\
+[1] B.P.E. Tee., et al., EPJ Web of Conf. 232 (2020) 01006.\\
+[2] E. Schönfeld and H. Janssen, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A369 (1996) 527.\\
+[3] X. Mougeot, Appl. Rad. and Isot. 154 (2019) 108884.\\
+[4] T. Kibédi, et al., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A589 (2008) 202.\\
+[5] B.Q. Lee, et al., Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 92 (2016) 641.\\
+[6] S.T. Perkins, et al., LLNL, UCRL-50400-V-30 1991.\\
+[7] I.M. Band, et al, At. Data and Nucl. Data Tables 81 (2002) 1.\\
+[8] T. Kibédi, B. Coombes and A.E. Stuchbery (in preparation).\\
 Cyburt et al. motivating <sup>59</sup>Cu: [[https://doi.org/10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/55]]
@@ Line 33: / Line 53: @@
 Ch. Miehé et al., Eur. Phys. J. A 5, 143 (1999). The β+-electron capture decay of 73Kr
+T. Rauscher, Phys. Rev. C 81, 045807 (2010). Relevant energy ranges for astrophysical reaction rates [[https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.81.045807]]
+LOGFT calculator from NNDC, Brookhaven National Laboratory: [[https://www.nndc.bnl.gov/logft/]]
+X-Ray attenuation & absorption calculator from GSI: [[https://web-docs.gsi.de/~stoe_exp/web_programs/x_ray_absorption/index.php]]
+X ray database:\\
+http://www.lnhb.fr/nuclear-data/nuclear-data-table/
+https://xraydb.xrayabsorption.org/

PXCT

User Tools

Site Tools

Differences

Page Tools