Radiation Physics and Chemistry 144 (2018) 356–360

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Radiation Physics and Chemistry

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/radphyschem

Determination of gamma ray shielding parameters of rocks and concrete T

⁎
Shamsan S. Obaid, Dhammajyot K. Gaikwad , Pravina P. Pawar
Department of Physics, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University, Aurangabad 431004, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Gamma shielding parameters such as mass attenuation coefficient (µ/ρ), effective atomic number (Zeff) and
Rocks electron density (Neff) have been measured and calculated for rocks and concrete in the energy range
Concrete 122–1330 keV. The measurements have been carried out at 122, 356, 511, 662, 1170, 1275, 1330 keV gamma
Mass attenuation coefficient ray energies using a gamma spectrometer includes a NaI(Tl) scintillation detector and MCA card. The atomic and
Effective atomic number
electronic cross sections have also been investigated. Experimental and calculated (WinXCom) values were
compared, and good agreement has been observed within the experimental error. The obtained results showed
that feldspathic basalt, compact basalt, volcanic rock, dolerite and pink granite are more efficient than the
sandstone and concrete for gamma ray shielding applications.

1. Introduction
Study of the interaction of gamma radiations with matter is an
important subject in the field of nuclear medicine, diagnostics, radia-
tion protection and radiation physics and chemistry. The probability of
radiation interacting with a material per unit path length is called the
linear attenuation coefficient (µ), and is of great importance in radia-
tion shielding. The mass attenuation coefficient (µ/ρ), which is defined
as the µ per unit mass of the material, is the basic physical quantity
characterizing the diffusion and penetration gamma radiations in the
materials. Scattering and absorption of gamma radiations are related to
the density and atomic numbers of the material, therefore knowledge of
(µ/ρ), atomic cross section (σt), electronic cross section (σel), Zeff and
Neff are of prime importance. The glass, concrete and rock are used in
the radiation shielding technology because of its high attenuation cross-
section for X-rays, Gamma ray photons and neutrons (Abdo, 2002;
Singh et al., 2008). Typical applications of these materials are in the
construction of hospitals (X-ray unit and therapy room), nuclear re-
search laboratories, power stations, particle accelerators and radio-
active waste disposal units.
Investigation of the physical parameters such as (µ/ρ), σt, σel, Zeff
and Neff of rocks and concretes is useful for understanding their physical
properties. A comparison of predicted and experimental values of at-
tenuation coefficients provides a check on the validity of physical
parameters such as X-ray emission rates, fluorescence yields and jump
ratio (Sitamahalakshmi et al., 2015). In composite materials, a single
number cannot represent the atomic number uniquely in the entire
energy region for photon interactions. This unique number for complex
materials is called Zeff, which is varying with energy. The effective
atomic number is a convenient parameter for understanding the at-
tenuation of X-rays and gamma photons in composites (Manohara et al.,
2007). The accurate value of Zeff is very useful for medical radiation
dosimetry, imaging and technological applications.
Nowadays, radiations and radioisotopes are used in many diverse
fields such as medical diagnosis, medicine, nuclear and food industry,
scientific research. Therefore gamma ray shielding investigation of
various material gains great attention. Tabulations of (µ/ρ) and the
mass energy absorption coefficients for 40 elements and 45 mixtures
and some compounds over the energy range from 1 keV to 20 MeV have
been reported by Hubbell (1982). Chantler published tabulations of
scattering cross-sections and quantities related to (µ/ρ). A computer
program XCOM was developed by the Berger and Hubbell (1987),
which calculates attenuation coefficients and photon cross sections for
elements compounds and mixtures in the energy range 1 keV to
100 GeV. This widely used program transformed to windows platform
called WinXCOM (Gerward, 2001). Using XCOM and WinXCOM, many
attempts have been made to calculate attenuation coefficients for dif-
ferent elements, compounds and mixtures. Kaewkhao et al. (2010)
determined the (µ/ρ) experimentally and theoretically for borate-bis-
muth glass system. Un and Demir (2013) calculated (µ/ρ), Zeff and Neff
of heavy-weight and normal-weight concrete, and observed that iron,
barium and calcium concentration of the concretes is more capable for
X- or gamma radiation shielding. Demir and Keles (2006) performed a
narrow beam transmission experiment using Am-241 and Ba-133 for
concrete containing boron waste, and found out that (µ/ρ) is increased
with increasing boron concentration in the concrete. Medhat (2009)

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: shamsan_abed2012@hotmail.com (S.S. Obaid), dhammajyotg26@gmail.com (D.K. Gaikwad), pravinapawar4@gmail.com (P.P. Pawar).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2017.09.022
Received 23 January 2017; Received in revised form 21 August 2017; Accepted 19 September 2017
Available online 21 September 2017
0969-806X/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S.S. Obaid et al. Radiation Physics and Chemistry 144 (2018) 356–360

Table 1
Chemical composition as weight fraction in percentage (w%) of rocks and concrete.

Sample O (w%) Na (w%) Mg (w%) Al (w%) Si (w%) P (w%) K (w%) Ca (w%) Ti (w%) Mn (w%) Fe (w%) S (w%) H (w%) C (w%)

Feldspathic 0.44352 0.02923 0.02404 0.06711 0.23944 0.00172 0.00769 0.07866 0.01408 0.00132 0.09321 – – –
basalt
Compact basalt 0.44537 0.03282 0.02058 0.06329 0.24496 0.00238 0.00833 0.06438 0.01699 0.0013 0.0996 – – –
Volcanic rock 0.434257 0.038852 0.02455 0.061466 0.222114 0.00372 0.01166 0.08656 0.021733 0.002072 0.093016 – – –
Pink granite 0.487639 0.03831 0.000019 0.054954 0.358348 0.000249 0.041024 0.004965 0.00103 0.000242 0.01322 – – –
Sandstone 0.526674 0.000108 0.000021 0.028128 0.437027 0.000169 0.000043 0.00218 0.000702 0.000064 0.004883 – – –
Dolerite 0.43996 0.02976 0.02287 0.06466 0.22981 0.00152 0.00259 0.07076 0.02251 0.00167 0.1139 – – –
Concrete 0.45558 0.04176 0.02967 0.04176 0.12205 – 0.01934 0.24957 0.00024 – 0.01602 0.00215 0.0087 0.0256

Fig. 1. Schematic view of experimental setup.

determined the (µ/ρ) for the building materials using a high-resolution

HPGe spectrometer detector, and showed that a brick covered with
cement can shield about 49–67% more radiations than brick itself. In
recent years, A great number of researchers reported (µ/ρ), Zeff and Neff Fig. 2. The measured mass attenuation coefficients at 122–1330 keV.
in different materials such as concretes (Akkurt et al., 2012; Medhat,
2012; Oto et al., 2015, 2016), alloys (Singh et al., 2014; Kaewkhaoa
et al., 2008), compound and mixtures (Awasarmol et al., 2017a, 2017b;
Bhosale et al., 2016a, 2016b; Gaikwad et al., 2016; Pawar and Bichile,
2013; Un and Sahin, 2011) and glasses (Matori et al., 2017; Singh et al.,
2014). Oto et al. (2016) calculated Zeff and effective removal cross-
sections of magnetite concrete for gamma and fast neutron shielding.
In this paper, mass attenuation coefficients (µ/ρ) of some rocks and
a concrete have been measured in the energy range 122–1330 keV and
calculated using the computer code WinXCom. Then atomic and elec-
tronic cross sections, effective atomic number and electron density have
been determined using (µ/ρ) for same energies. This work also includes
a comparison of attenuation coefficients of rocks with concrete. Present
results could be very useful in radiation shielding applications for
construction of nuclear power plants, X-ray and radiotherapy units.

2. Experimental details

Concrete has been produced using the ordinary Portland cement (PC
Fig. 3. Experimental (µ/ρ) versus theoretical (µ/ρ).
42.5) and normal sand. A constant water (w) to cement (c) ratio (w/c =
50%) and 25% normal sand concentration was selected for concrete
preparation. Rocks and produced concrete samples were ground sepa-
rately and sieved with 400 mesh. These samples were heated (at 60 °C)

Table 2
Mass attenuation coefficients (cm2/g) of rocks and concrete samples.

Energy (keV) Feldspathic basalt Compact basalt Volcanic rock Pink granite Sandstone Dolerite Concrete

µ/ρ exp. µ/ρ theo. µ/ρ exp. µ/ρ theo. µ/ρ exp. µ/ρ theo. µ/ρ exp. µ/ρ theo. µ/ρ exp. µ/ρ theo. µ/ρ exp. µ/ρ theo. µ/ρ exp. µ/ρ theo.

122 0.182 0.172 0.181 0.172 0.180 0.173 0.167 0.158 0.151 0.156 0.175 0.174 0.154 0.153
356 0.101 0.100 0.098 0.099 0.110 0.101 0.110 0.101 0.099 0.010 0.099 0.099 0.102 0.100
511 0.087 0.086 0.087 0.086 0.089 0.086 0.089 0.087 0.086 0.087 0.084 0.086 0.087 0.086
662 0.078 0.078 0.078 0.078 0.080 0.078 0.080 0.078 0.077 0.079 0.077 0.078 0.078 0.077
1170 0.059 0.058 0.059 0.058 0.059 0.058 0.060 0.059 0.056 0.059 0.056 0.058 0.058 0.059
1275 0.056 0.056 0.057 0.056 0.056 0.056 0.057 0.056 0.054 0.056 0.055 0.055 0.057 0.057
1330 0.056 0.055 0.056 0.055 0.056 0.055 0.056 0.056 0.053 0.056 0.054 0.055 0.055 0.055

357
S.S. Obaid et al. Radiation Physics and Chemistry 144 (2018) 356–360

Table 3
Atomic cross sections (barn/atom) of rocks and concrete samples.

Energy (keV) Feldspathic basalt Compact basalt Volcanic rock Pink granite Sandstone Dolerite Concrete

exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo.

122 26.74 25.22 26.56 25.21 24.57 23.62 20.53 19.46 15.15 15.63 25.10 25.80 15.19 15.10
356 14.67 14.62 14.42 14.58 15.08 13.87 13.58 12.48 9.89 9.99 14.64 14.73 10.06 9.87
511 12.85 12.68 12.79 12.66 12.15 11.81 10.93 10.66 8.58 8.71 12.51 12.77 8.56 8.50
662 11.52 11.45 11.45 11.41 10.89 10.66 9.84 9.63 7.68 7.87 11.35 11.53 7.70 7.58
1170 8.70 8.55 8.64 8.54 8.06 7.96 7.34 7.21 5.58 5.90 8.33 8.61 5.72 5.82
1275 8.25 8.16 8.30 8.14 7.64 7.59 6.97 6.87 5.40 5.63 8.12 8.21 5.62 5.52
1330 8.22 8.13 8.24 8.11 7.61 7.57 6.88 6.84 5.27 5.61 7.99 8.18 5.43 5.41

Table 4
Electronic cross sections (barn/atom) of rocks and concrete.

Energy (keV) Feldspathic basalt Compact basalt Volcanic rock Pink granite Sandstone Dolerite concrete

exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo.

122 2.356 2.222 2.295 2.178 2.130 2.047 1.971 1.869 1.504 1.552 2.243 2.226 1.446 1.436
356 1.292 1.288 1.246 1.260 1.307 1.203 1.304 1.198 0.982 0.992 1.263 1.271 0.958 0.939
511 1.132 1.118 1.105 1.094 1.053 1.024 1.05 1.024 0.852 0.865 1.079 1.102 0.813 0.808
662 1.015 1.009 0.990 0.986 0.944 0.924 0.944 0.924 0.763 0.782 0.980 0.995 0.732 0.721
1170 0.767 0.754 0.746 0.737 0.699 0.690 0.704 0.693 0.554 0.585 0.719 0.743 0.544 0.554
1275 0.726 0.719 0.717 0.703 0.662 0.658 0.669 0.659 0.536 0.559 0.701 0.709 0.535 0.525
1330 0.724 0.716 0.712 0.701 0.659 0.656 0.661 0.657 0.524 0.557 0.689 0.706 0.517 0.515

in a muffle furnace for 48 h. The chemical contents of the concrete and

rock samples were measured by X- ray fluorescence spectrometer (XRF,
SPECTRO XEPOS, AMETEK), are tabulated in Table 1. SPECTRO XEPOS
instrument was controlled by a menu based X-LAB pro software com-
puter. This instrument characteristics included; 50 W end-window X-
ray tube, up to eight polarization and secondary targets, automatic
sample changer, SSD detection system. The attenuation coefficient
measurements were performed using the gamma spectrometer that in-
cludes a NaI(Tl) scintillation detector coupled to 8k MCA card. The
mass attenuation coefficients of the samples were measured at photon
energies of 122, 356, 511, 662, 1170, 1275 and 1330 keV obtained
from 57Co, 133Ba,137Cs,60Co and 22Na gamma ray sources, respectively.
A schematic view of the good geometry transmission experiment is
shown in Fig. 1. The distance (30 cm ≤ d ≤ 50 cm) has been kept
between a source and a detector. The rocks and concrete samples under
investigation were pellets formed. The mass and diameter of the pellet
were used to determined mass per unit area in each case. For given µ/ρ,
Fig. 4. Atomic cross section versus photons energy.
the pellets thickness (mass per unit area) in the range of 0.200–0.540 g/
cm2 was selected. Experimental procedure followed for measuring at-
tenuation coefficients has been discussed with details in previous work
(Pawar and Bichile, 2013, Awasarmol et at, 2017a,b; Bhosale et al.,
2016a, Gaikwad et al., 2017). Photon intensities I and Io, which are
with and without the sample, respectively, were measured for a sample
of thickness t (cm). The linear attenuation coefficient values of the
rocks and concrete are determined by the following relation:
I
= exp (−μ t )
I0 (1)
Where µ (cm−1) is the linear attenuation coefficient of a material and I0
and I are the without attenuated and attenuated photon intensity, re-
spectively. The mass attenuation coefficients for the given materials are
determined by using the following mixture rule (Hubbell and Seltzer,
1995):

μ μ
Fig. 5. Electronic cross section versus photons energy. ρ
= ∑ Wi ⎛ ρ ⎞
⎜ ⎟

i ⎝ ⎠i (2)
Where ρ is the density of the material, Wi and (µ/ρ)i are weight fraction
mass attenuation coefficients of the ith constituent element, respec-
tively. For chemical compound, Wi is given by

358
S.S. Obaid et al. Radiation Physics and Chemistry 144 (2018) 356–360

Table 5
Effective atomic numbers (Zeff) of rocks and concrete samples.

Energy (keV) Feldspathic basalt Compact basalt Volcanic rock Pink granite Sandstone Dolerite Concrete

exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo.

122 14.00 13.94 13.97 13.79 13.97 14.20 12.63 12.53 12.12 12.00 14.37 14.29 12.64 12.63
356 13.23 13.13 13.12 12.10 13.22 13.36 11.95 11.86 11.42 11.38 13.50 13.44 11.98 11.95
511 12.96 12.87 12.89 12.74 12.95 13.09 11.72 11.64 11.20 11.18 13.11 13.17 11.75 11.73
662 12.72 12.68 12.72 12.56 12.77 12.90 11.55 11.48 11.01 11.04 12.90 12.97 11.59 11.57
1170 12.32 12.28 12.30 12.17 12.38 12.49 11.27 11.15 10.65 10.73 12.45 12.56 11.24 11.24
1275 12.25 12.22 12.21 12.11 12.30 12.42 11.21 11.10 10.59 10.68 12.33 12.50 11.19 11.19
1330 12.20 12.20 12.14 12.08 12.24 12.39 11.19 10.66 10.52 10.66 12.30 12.47 11.17 11.16

in this work are given in Table 1. The values of (µ/ρ) for the rocks and a
concrete have been measured at gamma energies from 122 to 1330 keV
and calculated using WinXCom, are shown in Table 2. Fig. 2 shows the
trends of measured (µ/ρ) values for all samples at photon energies from
122 to 1330 keV. It is clearly seen from this figure that (µ/ρ) depends on
the gamma-ray energy. It is obviously seen from Fig. 2 that the values of
(µ/ρ) decrease with increasing photon energies. It can also be seen from
the same figure that the (µ/ρ) values of feldspathic basalt, compact
basalt, volcanic rock, dolerite and pink granie are higher than sand-
stone and concrete. The measured results are compared with calculated
values in Table 2. It can be seen that the results of (µ/ρ) show good
agreement between experimental and calculated results. For a better
view of the comparison between experiment and theory, theoretical
line with the values of experimental (µ/ρ) is plotted versus corre-
sponding calculated (µ/ρ) in Fig. 3 where it can be seen that almost all
experimental data lie within the experimental error evidencing a good
Fig. 6. Effective atomic number versus photons energy. agreement. The overall error in the measured experimental (µ/ρ) is
estimated to be ≤ 2%. The total experimental error in (µ/ρ) was cal-
ni Ai culated from errors in intensities I0 (without attenuation) and I (with
Wi =
∑i ni Ai (3) attenuation), mass per unit area measurements and counting statistics
(< 1%). The errors for the intensities measurements influence the
Where Ai is the atomic weight of the ith element and ni is the number of measured data were estimated to be ≤ 1%. The errors in the mass per
formula units. unit area measurement were within 0.5%. Experimental and theoretical
Theoretical (µ/ρ) for the given samples were calculated by atomic (σt) and electronic cross sections (σel) for the rocks and a con-
WinXCom Code (Gerward, 2001). A detailed information about the crete are given in Tables 3, 4, respectively. The typical plots of ex-
calculation of the atomic cross section, electronic cross section and the perimental σt against the gamma ray energies and σel against the
effective atomic number has been given in our previous work (Pawar gamma ray energies for all the samples are shown in Figs. 4 and 5,
and Bichile, 2013; Gaikwad et al., 2016). The effective electron density, respectively. It is depicted that the trends of σt and σel with photon
Neff, which is expressed as in number of electron per unit mass can be energies are identical to mass attenuation coefficient.
found from Experimental and theoretical effective atomic numbers of all the
samples determined at gamma ray energies from 122 to 1330 keV are
NA (μ/ ρ)
Neff =
N
Zeff ∑ ni =
σel (4)
given in Table 5. Trends of Zeff values with energy are also shown
graphically in Fig. 6. It is clearly seen from the figure and table that the
Where NA is the Avogadro's number, ∑i ni Ai = N is the atomic mass of values of Zeff for present samples vary with the range of atomic num-
materials and σel is the electronic cross-section. bers. As depicted in Fig. 6, Zeff values of each sample decreased with
increasing gamma ray energy. This result supports the statement made
by Hine (1952), who commented that Zeff varies with energy. Results of
3. Results and discussions
Neff for all samples were determined using (µ/ρ) and atomic cross sec-
tion and given in Table 6. Also, experimental Neff values for all samples
The chemical composition of a concrete and the rock samples used

Table 6
Effective electron densities (*1024 electrons/g) of rock and concrete.

Energy (keV) Feld spathic basalt Compact basalt Volcanic rock Pink granite Sandstone Dolerite Concrete

theo. exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo. exp. theo. exp.

122 0.363 0.364 0.362 0.367 0.363 0.357 0.359 0.362 0.357 0.361 0.363 0.365 0.359 0.359
356 0.341 0.344 0.341 0.345 0.342 0.338 0.34 0.342 0.339 0.34 0.342 0.343 0.340 0.340
511 0.335 0.337 0.334 0.338 0.335 0.331 0.333 0.336 0.332 0.334 0.335 0.333 0.333 0.334
662 0.33 0.331 0.33 0.334 0.33 0.327 0.329 0.331 0.328 0.328 0.33 0.328 0.329 0.329
1170 0.319 0.32 0.319 0.323 0.319 0.317 0.32 0.323 0.32 0.317 0.319 0.317 0.319 0.320
1275 0.318 0.318 0.318 0.321 0.318 0.315 0.318 0.321 0.318 0.315 0.318 0.313 0.318 0.318
1330 0.317 0.317 0.317 0.319 0.317 0.313 0.305 0.321 0.317 0.313 0.317 0.312 0.317 0.318

359
S.S. Obaid et al.
Fig. 7. Effective electron density versus photons energies.
plotted versus energy in Fig. 7. It is clearly seen that Neff varies with
energy. The parameter Neff is closely related to Zeff, and has almost
similar energy dependence as Zeff since these parameters are related
through Eq. (4).
4. Conclusion
Gamma rays shielding properties of the rocks and concrete have
been studied. Results of the (µ/ρ), σt and σel increase with decreasing
incident gamma ray energy. It is noticed that Zeff and Neff depend on
elements of the materials and incoming photon energies. The mass at-
tenuation coefficient of feldspathic basalt, compact basalt, volcanic
rock, dolerite and pink granite is higher than sandstone and concrete.
This means that the feldspathic basalt, compact basalt, volcanic rock,
dolerite and pink granite are good candidates for gamma ray shielding
applications. The results of this work will be helpful in the development
of radiation shielding technology.
Acknowledgement
One of the authors DKG would like to thank University Grant
Commission, New Delhi for providing RGNF.
References
Abdo, A. El-Sayed, 2002. Calculation of the cross-sections for fast neutrons and gamma-
rays in concrete shields. Ann. Nucl. Energy 29, 1977–1988.
Akkurt, I., Akyildirim, H., Karipcin, F., Mavi, B., 2012. Chemical corrosion on gamma ray
attenuation properties of barite concrete. J. Saud. Chem. Soc. 16, 199–202.
Awasarmol, V.V., Gaikwad, D.K., Raut, S.D., Pawar, P.P., 2017a. Photon interaction study
of organic nonlinear optical materials in the energy range 122–1330 keV. Radiat.
Phys. Chem. 130, 343–350.
Awasarmol, V.V., Gaikwad, D.K., Raut, S.D., Pawar, P.P., 2017b. Gamma ray interaction
studies of organic nonlinear optical materials in the energy range 122 keV-1330 keV.
Results Phys. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2016.12.017.
360
Radiation Physics and Chemistry 144 (2018) 356–360
Berger, M.J., Hubbell, J.H., 1987. XCOM Photon Cross Section on a Personal Computer
NBSIR. 87. NIST, pp. 3597.
Bhosale, R.R., Gaikwad, D.K., Pawar, P.P., Rode, M.N., 2016a. Effects of gamma irra-
diation on some chemicals using an NaI (Tl) detector. Radiat. Eff. Defects Solids 171,
398–407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10420150.2016.1194418.
Bhosale, R.R., Gaikwad, D.K., Pawar, P.P., Rode, M.N., 2016b. Interaction studies and
gamma-ray properties of some low-Zmaterials. Nucl. Technol. Radiat. Prot. 31,
135–141. http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/NTRP1602135B.
Demir, Demet, Keles, Gurbuz, 2006. Radiation transmission of concrete including boron
waste for 59.54 and 80.99 keV gamma rays. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B.
245, 501–504.
Gaikwad, D.K., Pawar, P.P., Selvam, T.P., 2016. Measurement of attenuation cross-sec-
tions of some fatty acids in the energy range 122–1330 keV. Pramana-J. Phys. 87, 12.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12043-016-1213-y.
Gaikwad, D.K., Pawar, P.P., Selvam, T.P., 2017. Mass attenuation coefficients and ef-
fective atomic numbers of biological compounds for gamma ray interactions. Radiat.
Phys. Chem. 138, 75–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2017.03.040.
Gerward, L., Guilbert, N., Jensen, K.B., Levring, H., 2001. X-ray absorption in matter.
Reengineering Xcom. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 60, 23–24.
Hine, G.J., 1952. The effective atomic numbers of materials for various gamma processes.
Phys. Rev. 85, 725.
Hubbell, J.H., 1982. Photon mass attenuation and energy-absorption. Int. J. Appl. Radiat.
Isot. 33, 1269–1290.
Hubbell, J.H., Seltzer, S.M., 1995. Tables of X-ray Mass Attenuation Coefficients and Mass
Energy-absorption Coefficients 1 keV–20 MeV for elements 1 ≤ Z ≤ 92 and 48
Additional Substances of Dosimetric Interest. National Institute of Standarts and
Physics Laboratory, NISTIR, pp. 5632.
Kaewkhao, J., Pokaipist, A., Limsuwan, P., 2010. Study on borate glass system containing
with Bi2O3 and BaO for gamma-rays shielding materials: comarison with PbO. J.
Nucl. Mater. 933, 38–40.
Kaewkhaoa, J., Laopaiboonb, J., Chewpraditkul, W., 2008. Determination of effective
atomic numbers and effective electron densities for Cu/Zn alloy. J. Quant. Spectrosc.
Radiat. Transf. 109, 1260–1265.
Manohara, S.R., Hanagodimath, S.M., 2007. Studies on effective atomic numbers and
electron densities of essential amino acids in the energy range 1 keV–100 GeV. Nucl.
Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. Sect. B 258, 321–328.
Matori, K.A., Sayyedc, M.I., Sidek, H.A.A., Zaid, M.H.M., Singh, V.P., 2017.
Comprehensive study on physical, elastic and shielding properties of lead zinc
phosphate glasses. J. Non-Cryst. Solids 457, 97–103.
Medhat, M.E., 2009. Gamma-ray attenuation coefficients of some building materials
available in Egypt. Ann. Nucl. Energy 36, 849–852.
Medhat, M.E., 2012. Study of the mass attenuation coefficients and effective atomic
numbers in some gemstones. J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. 293, 555–564.
Oto, B., Yildiz, N., Korkut, T., Kavaz, E., 2015. Neutron shielding qualities and gamma ray
buildup factors of concretes containing limonite ore. Nucl. Eng. Des. 293, 166–175.
Oto, B., Gur, A., Kavaz, E., Cakir, T., Yaltay, N., 2016. Determination of gamma and fast
neutron shielding parameters of magnetite concretes. Progress. Nucl. Energy 92,
71–80.
Pawar, P.P., Bichile, G.K., 2013. Studies on mass attenuation coefficient, Zeff and electron
density of some amino acids in the energy range 0.122–1.330 MeV. Radiat. Phys.
Chem. 92, 22–27.
Singh, K.J., Singh, N., Kaundal, R.S., Singh, K., 2008. Gamma-ray Shielding and Structural
Properties of PbO – SiO2 Glasses. 207. pp. 944–948.
Singh, K.J., Sandeep Kaur, Kaundal, R.S., 2014. Comparative study of gamma ray
shielding and some properties of PbO–SiO2–Al2O3 and Bi2O3 SiO2–Al2O3 glass sys-
tems. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 96, 153–157.
Sitamahalakshmi, N.V., Kareem, M.A., Premachand, K., 2015. Total photon attenuation
coefficients in some rare earth elements using selective excitation method. Radiat.
Phys. Chem. 106, 160–164.
Un, A., Sahin, Y., 2011. Determination of mass attenuation coefficients, effective atomic
and electron numbers, mean free paths and kermas for PbO, barite and some boron
ores. Nucl. Instrum. Methods B. 269, 1506–1511.
Un, Adem, Demir, Faruk, 2013. Determination of mass attenuation coefficients, effective
atomic numbers and effective electron numbers for heavy-weight and normal-weight
concretes. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 80, 73–77.