Annals of Nuclear Energy 177 (2022) 109297

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Annals of Nuclear Energy

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

QADCGPIC–M: A point kernel shielding code with features for handling

bulk shields up to 100 mean free path and stratified shielding
configurations
Pew Basu a,b,⇑, R. Sarangapani a, B. Venkatraman a,b
a
Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam, Tamilnadu 603102, India
b
Homi Bhabha National Institute, Training School Complex, Anushaktinagar, Mumbai 400094, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Salient modifications and validations performed on a Point Kernel method based code QADCGPIC, which
Received 2 February 2022 are important for optimizing shield design is presented in the paper. The geometric progression method
Received in revised form 1 June 2022 based build–up factors (BUFs) for penetration depths of medium up to 100 mean free path is incorporated
Accepted 18 June 2022
into the modified QADCGPIC–M code. Further improvement to the code is made by incorporating the
modified Kalos’ formula of double layer gamma ray exposure build–up factor (DBUF) for the shielding
materials used in the design of nuclear and radiological facilities. The modified code is validated by esti-
Keywords:
mating the BUFs, DBUFs, and gamma dose rates at the exit of the shield with Monte Carlo simulation for
BUF
DBUF
various shielding configurations of lead, tungsten, iron, and concrete and published values. The validation
Monte Carlo computation exercise indicates a good agreement between the computed values by different methods. The incorpora-
Point Kernel method tion of geometric progression fitting formula and modified Kalos’ formula into the QADCGPIC–M code
QADCGGPIC increases the ability of the code to handle bulk shielding and optimization of thicknesses of double lay-
QADCGPIC
M ered shielding configurations.
Ó 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Point kernel technique based codes are widely used in the
gamma ray shielding design calculations. The technique is based
on gamma ray tracing which determines the strength of photons
emerging out of the shield, i.e. the un–collided flux along the line
of sight and modified by appropriate gamma ray build–up factor
(BUF) to account for the collided flux. For a distributed volume
source, the point kernel is integrated over the entire source volume
for all probable energies emitted. The series of QAD codes
(Malefant, 1967) based on point kernel technique have been devel-
oped by Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory to calculate the transport
of neutrons and gamma rays through various shielding media and
further modified by many investigators. QADCGGP code
(QADCGGP, 1989) incorporates combinatorial geometry (CG) pack-
age for defining the bodies and geometric progression (GP) fitting
function (Harima and Nishiwaki, 1972) for computing the BUF.
The code has been further modified to include PICTURE subroutine
for viewing the 2D geometry and option to choose GP (Harima and
⇑ Corresponding author at: Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam,
Tamilnadu 603102, India.
E-mail address: pewbasu@igcar.gov.in (P. Basu).
Nishiwaki, 1972) or Capo’s form (Capo, 1958) for computing the
BUF and published as QADCGPIC (Subbaiah et al., 2001;
Subbaiah, 2001) along with an user friendly input processor, GUI2-
QAD–3D developed in Visual Basic@. QADCGPIC code can handle
shielding thickness up to 40 mean free path (mfp). The user has
to specify the medium for the computation of BUFs. Thus, the
selection of shielding medium by user could lead to over/ under
estimation of dose rate outside the shield in case of stratified
shielding configurations.
For handling double layered shielding configurations, Trontl
and Bace (1998) introduced Lin–Jiang formula (Lin and Jiang,
1996) into the QADCGGP code for computing the double layer BUFs
(DBUFs). Muhammad et al., 2018 carried out a detailed review on
multi–layered radiation shielding combinations and their effects
on BUFs. However, no straightforward method on arranging the
shielding layers could be deduced. Mann, 2019 investigated the
use of double layered enclosures made of lead (Pb) with Alu-
minium, clay, lime stone, and concrete (Con). Recently Mann and
Mann, 2021 developed an online platform ‘PYMLBUF’ for gamma
ray shielding calculations in which GP (Harima, 1983) and Lin–
Jiang formulae are used in the estimation of BUFs for single and
multi–layered configurations respectively. Hansda and Mammen,
2021 developed a new 3D gamma ray shielding code, ‘3DGShield’

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2022.109297
0306-4549/Ó 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
P. Basu, R. Sarangapani and B. Venkatraman
for arbitrary source and shield geometry based on point kernel
technique in which GP and Broder (Broder et al., 1962) formulae
are used in the estimation of BUFs for single and double layered
configurations respectively. The limitations of Broder and Lin–Jiang
formulae are discussed in our earlier work (Basu et al., 2021).
Based on our earlier works on BUFs for thicknesses up to 100
mfp (Basu et al., 2019) and double layered configurations encoun-
tered in nuclear facilities (Basu et al., 2021), QADCGPIC code has
been further modified to enhance its utility and named as ‘QADCG-
PIC–M’. Point kernel method based code that can handle shield
thickness beyond 40 mfps is necessary for the estimation of dose
rates in order to consider the possibility of severe nuclear reactor
accidents (Brar et al., 1994; Shimizu et al., 2004, Basu et al.,
2019). The modified GP fitting formula proposed by Harima et al.
(2014) for evaluating BUF for bulk shielding of thickness up to
100 mfp is tested in our earlier work (Basu et al., 2019) and has
been incorporated into the QADCGPIC–M code. Similarly, for han-
dling double layered configurations involving materials such as
Pb, tungsten (W), iron (Fe), and Con, the modified Kalos’ formula
(KFM) (Basu et al., 2021) for the computation of DBUFs has been
incorporated into the QADCGPIC–M code. QADCGPIC–M is vali-
dated by studying various double layered shielding configurations
and the results are compared with the KFM and Monte Carlo sim-
ulation (MCS). A detailed comparative analysis between QADCGPIC
and QADCGPIC–M indicates the advantages of the modified code. A
few subroutines are included in the code but minimum changes
are made in the existing structure of the code. The input format
is similar to the earlier version of the code with which the users
are familiar. An option is provided to the user to choose between
the existing and modified code and results based on both old and
new algorithms are given in the same output file.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. QADCGGPIC code
QADCGPIC code (Subbaiah et al., 2001; Subbaiah, 2001) is a
point kernel code written in FORTRAN–77. The source volume is
divided into a number of infinitesimal volume sources, which are
treated as point isotropic sources. The code determines the line
of sight distance between source point and detector location
through different material regions. The attenuation of the un–col-
lided beam in the shielding media is determined. The BUF for a
user specified material is computed for a particular source energy
and optical path length between source and detector. The gamma
ray flux for every energy group of radiation from the un–collided
beam due to all the source points are summed up at the detector
location to get the total contribution from the volume source.
The un–collided flux value is multiplied with the flux to dose rate
conversion factor to obtain the un–collided dose rate at the detec-
tor location. By multiplying the BUF value of the specified medium
with the un–collided dose rate, the total dose rate at the detector
position is obtained. The dose rate, D(r) at position ‘r’ in the point
kernel method is mathematically formulated as (Subbaiah and
Sarangapani, 2008):
Z
Sðr0 ÞBðljr
r 0 j; EÞexpð
ljr
r 0 jÞ
Dðr Þ ¼ k dV; ð1Þ
4pjr
r 0 j2
where k is the gamma flux to dose rate conversion factor taken
from ICRP–21, Sðr0 Þ is the source density, Bðljr
r 0 j; EÞ is the BUF
at gamma ray energy E taken from ANSI–6.4.3, 1991 (ANSI–6.4.3,
1991), l is the gamma ray linear attenuation coefficient at energy
E, The photon cross section data given in ANSI/ANS–6.4.3 of 1991
is used in QADCGPIC, jr
r 0 j is the distance between the source
and detector point. The cross section without coherent scattering
2
Annals of Nuclear Energy 177 (2022) 109297
is used in the calculations. The above integral is replaced by sum-
mation by discretising the source into voxels of definite small vol-
ume. For calculations, point source is assumed at the center of the
volume element with source strength present in that volume. The
optical distance from the source point to the detector location is
calculated by the CG package in–built into the code. From the
appropriate values of the variables in Eq. (1), the dose rate is calcu-
lated. The dose rates thus estimated are summed up over the entire
region of the source and over all possible gamma ray energy groups.
The BUFs used in the QADCGPIC code is based on gamma ray
transport calculations, performed in infinite homogeneous media
from various codes. There are different types of BUF options avail-
able in QADCGPIC and among them most widely used option is the
GP fitting function of BUF by Harima and Nishiwaki (1972). The GP
fitting of BUF has the following form:
ðb
1ÞðKx
1Þ
BðE; xÞ ¼ 1 þ for K–1 ð2Þ
ðK
1Þ
BðE; xÞ ¼ 1 þ ðb
1Þx for K ¼ 1 ð3Þ
 
tan h x
Xk

2
tanhð
2Þ
KðE; xÞ ¼ cxa þ d for 0  x  xm ð4Þ
1
tanhð
2Þ
where E is the incident gamma ray energy, x is the penetration
depth in mfp, a, b, c, d, and Xk are the GP fitting parameters, and
b is the BUF value at 1 mfp. The parameter K represents gamma
ray dose multiplication and a change in the shape of the spectrum.
Two separate files FORT 10 and FORT 11 are linked to the source
code, where FORT 10 includes the gamma ray mass attenuation
cross sections library and FORT 11 includes the GP fitting parame-
ters (a, b, c, d, Xk) of conventional shielding materials.
The important subroutine named ‘Kernel’ in the code is based
on the ray tracing technique where it computes the total mfp
length travelled by the radiation in the intervening media. It iden-
tifies the region and the corresponding distance travelled in this
region (x cm) and multiplies with the attenuation coefficient (l
cm
1) of the material present in this region and thereby estimates
the mfp thickness (lx). Similarly, the mfp thickness is determined
for all the regions and the summation gives the total mfp. The
thickness specified in terms of mfp and user chosen shielding med-
ium are the inputs for ‘Build’ subroutine of the code where the
methodologies based on expressions (2) to (4) are used to compute
the BUF. The GP fitting parameters (a, b, c, d, Xk) are taken from the
linked ‘FORT 110 file.
2.2. QADCGGPIC –M code
2.2.1. Incorporation of bulk shielding thickness up to 100 mfp
To refine the QADCGPIC–M code for bulk shielding thickness up
to 100 mfp, ‘FORT110 file and ‘BUILD’ function are modified based
on the methodologies suggested by Harima et al. (2014). A new
function, namely, ‘BUILDNEW’ is added to the code to take into
account the change in the shape of the spectrum for two range of
atomic numbers of build–up media as suggested in the latest GP
fitting formulation. Harima et al. (2014) showed that the GP fitting
formula used in QADCGPIC for the determination of BUF is valid
only up to 40 mfp for elements of atomic number between 4 to
29 and up to 70 mfp for elements of atomic number between 44
and 92. If the penetration depth crosses 40 mfp and 70 mfp, sepa-
rate formula for the change in the spectrum has to be used for ele-
ments of atomic number between 4  Z  29 and 44  Z  92
respectively. The expression for parameter K(E, x) is modified
depending on the atomic number and the thickness of the medium.
The fitting form in Eq. (4) is valid for xm  40 mfp for beryllium
(Z = 4) to copper (Z = 29) and xm  70 mfp for ruthenium
P. Basu, R. Sarangapani and B. Venkatraman
(Z = 44) to uranium (Z = 92). The value of Xk is fixed at 15 mfp and
25 mfp for 4  Z  29 and 44  Z  92 respectively. Therefore,
FORT11 file linked to the QADCGPIC code consisting of the GP fit-
ting parameters is modified by incorporating the changes in the
Xk parameter. The modified expression of K(E, x) for shields thick-
ness greater than xm mfp is given in Eq. (5).
 nðxÞ
Km
1
KðE; xÞ ¼ 1 þ ðKm
1
1Þ ; ð5Þ
Km
1
1
ðxm
1
x
Þ0:1
1
nðxÞ ¼ 0:1
ðxxm
1
m
Þ
1
2.2.2. Incorporation of the KFM for double layered shielding
configurations
In order to incorporate the KFM into the QADCGPIC–M code for
handling double layered shielding configurations, ‘KERNEL’ sub-
routine of the QADCGPIC code is modified and a new subroutine
named as ‘KERNELNEW’ is incorporated into the QADCGPIC–M.
The new subroutine calculates the mfp thickness travelled in each
region and for the corresponding mfp thickness, value of BUF is
obtained by calling the ‘BUILDNEW’ subroutine. BUFs of medium
for the thickness of path travelled in different regions such as
B1(x1), B2(x1), B2(x2), and B2(x1 + x2) as discussed in Eq. (7) and
Eq. (8) are obtained. Finally, combining these BUF values, DBUFs,
B(x1, x2) for the stratified configuration is calculated. The correction
factor C(x2) in Eq. (7) is defined in expressions (9) and (10) for
Zhigh + Zlow and Zlow + Zhigh configurations respectively. To carry
out the DBUF calculation, a new subroutine ‘DOUBLELAYER’ is
added to avoid any alterations to the original gamma transport
computation considering single medium build–up in QADCGPIC.
The KFM has the following form:
B(x1 , x2 ) = B2 (x2 ) + [B2 (x1 + x2 )
B2 (x2 )] [K(x1 ) C(x2 )]
B1 ðx1 Þ
1
Kðx1 Þ ¼
B2 ðx1 Þ
1
i.e. the ratio of the scattered component transmitted through x1
mfp of the 1st medium relative to that of the 2nd medium,
B(x1, x2) = DBUF with thickness of 1st medium as x1 mfp and 2nd
medium as x2 mfp,
Bi(xi) = BUF of the ith layer with thickness of xi mfp,
x1 + x2 = total mfp thickness of both 1st and 2nd medium,
C(x2) = correction factor,
for Zhigh + Zlow configurations,
Cðx2 Þ ¼ exp ð
x2 =cÞ þ ð1:1=cÞ ½1
exp ð
x2 Þ
for Zlow + Zhigh configurations,
Cðx2 Þ ¼ expð
cx2 Þ þ ðia=KÞ ½1
exp ð
x2 Þ
ðlc =qÞ1
c¼
ðlc =qÞ2
i.e. the ratio of mass Compton scattering cross section of 1st
medium relative to that of 2nd medium.
ðlc =lt Þ1
a¼
ðlc =lt Þ2
i.e. the ratio of Compton scattering cross section to total atten-
uation cross section in the 1st and 2nd medium respectively.
The parameter ‘i’ is specific to the shielding configuration and
has the following values:
i = 0.90 for Fe + W combination.
= 0.95 Con + W combination.
Annals of Nuclear Energy 177 (2022) 109297
= 0.78 for Fe + Pb combination.
= 0.85 for Con + Pb combination.
= 1.00 for Con + Fe combination.
The structure of the input file of QADCGPIC–M and QADCGPIC
codes is shown in Fig. 1. The parameters of source such as position,
geometry, energy, and emission rate are the source related inputs.
The geometry of the source and shielding are defined in terms of
bodies, such as box type (BOX), rectangular parallel piped (RPP),
spherical (SPH), right circular cylinder (RCC), right elliptical cylin-
der (REC), ellipsoid (ELL), truncated cone (TRC), wedge shaped
(WED), and arbitrary shaped (ARB). Dimension of the bodies are
ð6Þ defined in the standard input file itself and the different zones
are formed using the combinatorial geometry concept. Materials
to be filled in each zone are provided using atomic numbers and
fractional density.
The existing code can handle different types of BUF options as
given below.
(1) H2O dose BUF,
(2) Aluminium dose BUF,
(3) Fe dose BUF,
(4) Pb dose BUF,
(5) H2O energy absorption BUF,
(6) Con dose BUF,
(7) Fe energy absorption BUF, and
(8) Pb energy absorption BUF.
If the index of the type of BUF as indicated in bracket is greater
than 8 then the program uses GP BUF. In case of GP BUF, the index of
medium (first four alphabets of the medium’s name in capital letter
e.g. for concrete index is CONC) and index of response such as
energy absorption BUF (ABS) or exposure BUF (EXP) needs to be
specified. In case of ABS, the quantity of interest is the absorbed
energy in the interacting material and the detector response is that
ð7Þ due to the absorption in the interacting material, whereas for EXP,
the quantity of interest is the exposure and the detector response is
due to the absorption in the air (Singh et al., 2012). Based on the
ð8Þ
option ABS or EXP, FORT11 file is called and the GP fitting parameter
of the medium corresponding to the gamma photon’s energy of
interest is taken from the file. In case of QADCGPIC–M, two addi-
tional inputs have to be provided such as number of build–up
media which is either one or two and the corresponding atomic
numbers of the build–up media. The detectors used in the Point
Kernel codes are point detectors and hence, only the location of
the detectors is the inputs.
Few more modifications have been made to the QADCGPIC–M
code to accept commands from user during execution. The details
ð9Þ asked under DOS prompt while running the code is shown in
Fig. 2. The statements printed on the screen by the program are
shown in italic letters and the response chosen by the user is shown
ð10Þ in bold letters. The user has to select the nature of input file, viz.,
only picture data (index is 0) or complete input file (index is 1).
The build–up factor media, either single region (index 1) or two
ð11Þ
regions (index 2) have to be selected. The program then prints the
name of the medium and the response due to absorption in the
interacting material (e.g. LEAD MEDIUM, LEAD RESPONSE i.e. ABS)
or due to absorption in the in air medium (LEAD MEDIUM, AIR
RESPONSE i.e. EXP). The next step is to provide the corresponding
ð12Þ atomic numbers of the build–up media. Based on the material con-
figurations, the combination of two layers has to be selected among
the options. The detail of the index for the double layered configu-
rations used in the program is given in Table 1. The modifications in
the code is made in such a way that the program will give the
results of both QADCGPIC and QADCGPIC–M in the same output file
as given later in the Annexure. One sample input file and extract of
the output file is given in Annexure 1 and Annexure 2 respectively.
3
P. Basu, R. Sarangapani and B. Venkatraman
Fig. 1. Structure of the input file of QADCGPIC and QADCGPIC–M codes.
The schematic geometry of the double layered shield model for
which the computation of DBUFs and gamma dose rates (GDRs)
has been performed is shown in Fig. 3. The model shows a point
source and a point detector placed at two other sides of the shield
material which consists of double layered configurations of Fe and
Pb, each of thickness 4 mfp. However, computation has been per-
formed for a range of thickness of the shielding medium with com-
bined thickness of the double layered shield up to 8 mfp. The
thickness of the 1st medium is varied from 2 mfp to 4 mfp and
the thickness of the 2nd medium is varied from 1 mfp to 6 mfp.
3. Results and discussions
3.1. BUFs using QADCGPIC–M for bulk shielding thickness up to 100
mfp
Fig. 4 compares the computed BUFs of Pb, W, Fe, and Con for
1 MeV gamma ray up to a thickness of 100 mfp using the QADCG-
4
Annals of Nuclear Energy 177 (2022) 109297
PIC–M (present work) and our earlier work (Basu et al., 2019). The
BUFs obtained using the QADCGPIC–M agrees extremely well with
the published values within a maximum variation of 0.004%,
implying successful incorporation of the latest GP fitting formula
into the QADCGPIC–M code.
3.2. DBUFs using QADCGPIC–M for double layered shielding
configurations
Table 2 compares the DBUFs for 1 MeV gamma ray source using
the QADCGPIC–M with the KFM values for Zhigh + Zlow and Zlow +
Zhigh configurations. While using the KFM, the single medium
BUF data has been taken from the GP fitting formulation results
(Basu et al., 2019). The DBUFs computed using the QADCGPIC–M
is found to be within a maximum variation of ± 2% of the results
obtained using the KFM, implying successful incorporation of the
KFM into the QADCGPIC–M code.
P. Basu, R. Sarangapani and B. Venkatraman
Fig. 2. Structure of the FORTRAN execution statements of QADCGPIC–M code (User selected parameters are shown in bold letters).
Table 1
Details of different double layered configurations handled in QADCGPIC–M code.
Index number Index name
1 T
I
2 T
C
3 L
I
4 L
C
5 I
C
6 I
T
7 C
T
8 I
L
9 C
L
10 C
I
Fig. 3. Schematic geometry of the double layered computational shield model.
Annals of Nuclear Energy 177 (2022) 109297
3.3. Standardization of the QADCGPIC–M code
Configuration The modified code, QADCGPIC–M is validated by comparing the
W + Fe
GDRs at the exit of the double layered slab shielding configurations
W + Con of Pb, W, Fe, and Con. Tables 3 and 4 give the comparison of com-
Pb + Fe puted GDRs using QADCGPIC–M, QADCGPIC, and MCS for Zhigh +
Pb + Con Zlow and Zlow + Zhigh configurations respectively for 1 MeV gamma
Fe + Con
ray of strength 37 GBq. The maximum variations between the
Fe + W
Con + W GDRs obtained from QADCGPIC–M and MCS is about 14% for
Fe + Pb W + Fe, 26% for W + Con, 13% for Pb + Fe, 27% for Pb + Con, and
Con + Pb 29% for Fe + Con. The GDRs at the exit of Fe + W, Con + W,
Con + Fe Fe + Pb, and Con + Pb obtained from QADCGPIC–M is found to be
lower than the values of MCS by 16%. However, for Con + Fe, the
GDRs obtained from QADCGPIC–M are higher than the values of
MCS by 19%. The variation is attributed to the fact that the gamma
ray cross section data used in both QADCGPIC–M and MCS are dif-
ferent. The GDRs obtained from QADCGPIC is higher than the val-
ues of MCS by 82% for W + Fe, 125% for W + Con, 99% for
Pb + Fe, 147% for Pb + Con, and 32% for Fe + Con. Whereas, The
GDRs obtained from QADCGPIC is lower than the values of MCS
by 30% for Zlow + Zhigh configurations. Therefore, QADCGPIC–M
results in the values of GDR which are closer to the Monte Carlo
computation. The GDRs obtained from QADCGPIC is always overes-
timated as compared to QADCGPIC–M by 75% for W + Fe, 104% for
W + Con, 95% for Pb + Fe, 124% for Pb + Con, and 11% for Fe + Con. In
case of Zlow + Zhigh configurations, the GDRs obtained from QADCG-
PIC are always underestimated than QADCGPIC–M by a maximum
factor of 22%. In QADCGPIC, single build–up medium is chosen
even for multi–layered shielding configurations. Since, no clear
cut procedure is adopted in QADCGPIC in handling double layered
shielding configurations, user has to choose appropriate medium.
Therefore, the BUFs at the exit of double layered shielding config-
uration changes abruptly and leads to the over or under estimation
of secondary radiation build–up and hence the GDRs at the exit of
the shield. The BUFs of QADCGPIC–M changes smoothly with the
stratified shield thickness as it is physically correct and no arbi-
trary choice is required between the 1st and 2nd medium BUF
5
P. Basu, R. Sarangapani and B. Venkatraman Annals of Nuclear Energy 177 (2022) 109297

unlike QADCGPIC. Hence, for the accurate determination of GDRs

at the exit of the shielding configuration, it is important to accu-
rately take into account the contribution of scattered radiation
build–up in the shielding medium.

3.4. Experimental validation of the QADCGPIC–M code

Tables 5 and 6 compare the DBUFs and GDRs obtained for the
double layered slab shielding configurations of Pb (2.5 cm) + Fe
(2.5 cm and 5 cm) and Fe (2.5 cm) + Pb (2.5 cm and 5 cm) config-
urations from the QADCGPIC–M, QADCGPIC, and experimental
measurements. A standard 60Co source of strength 163.91 ± 9.83
MBq has been used for this purpose. The distance between the
source and detector is kept fixed at 1 m. The results from the
QADCGPIC–M are found to be closer to the experimental
measurements especially for Zhigh + Zlow configurations. Hence,
QADCGPIC–M is found to be better than the QADCGPIC for shield-
ing design calculations with gamma ray source and double layered
shielding configurations as it results in closer values to the practi-
cal scenario. Provision is made in the QADCGPIC–M to visualize the
results of gamma transport calculations from both QADCGPIC and
QADCGPIC–M.

3.5. Application of QADCGPIC–M in the design of a shielding cask

The utility of the QADCGPIC–M code has further been studied

Fig. 4. Comparison of BUFs for 1 MeV gamma ray in Pb, W, Fe, and Con up to 100
mfp from QADCGPIC–M and literature.
for a practical problem where a cask is designed for storing a
radioactive source. The activity of source is 37 GBq, energy of the
gamma ray emitted is 1 MeV with abundance or yield of 100%.
The cask is provided with Pb of thickness 6 cm near the source fol-
lowed by Fe of thickness 2 cm. The maximum surface dose rate is
computed using QADCGPIC and QADCGPIC–M. The un–collided
dose rate obtained from these codes is 0.26 mSv/h. The computed
DBUF obtained from the QADCGPIC and QADCGPIC–M is 7.67 and
3.50 respectively. The estimated GDRs obtained using QADCGPIC
and QADCGPIC–M codes is 1.99 mSv/h and 0.91 mSv/h respec-
tively. Hence, QADCGPIC overestimates the GDR at the exit of the
cask by a factor of 2.19. The variation in GDR is due to the selection
of build–up factor medium as discussed elsewhere. There is a scope
for further reduction in the shielding thickness if the permissible
dose rate is 2 mSv/h. Hence, the new code is useful in providing
optimised shielding design.

Table 2
Estimated DBUFs for 1 MeV gamma ray with slab shielding configurations of Zhigh + Zlow and Zlow + Zhigh.

Media QADCGPIC–M (C) KFM (F) Ratio (C/F) Media QADCGPIC–M (C) KFM (F) Ratio (C/F)
2W + 1Fea 2.88 2.92 0.99 2Fe + 1Wf 2.49 2.50 1.00
2W + 2Fe 4.11 4.16 0.99 2Fe + 2W 2.64 2.66 0.99
2W + 3Fe 5.46 5.52 0.99 2Fe + 3W 2.91 2.94 0.99
2W + 4Fe 6.91 6.99 0.99 2Fe + 4W 3.20 3.24 0.99
2W + 5Fe 8.47 8.57 0.99 2Fe + 5W 3.49 3.54 0.99
2W + 6Fe 10.16 10.27 0.99 2Fe + 6W 3.78 3.83 0.99
3W + 1Fe 3.31 3.36 0.99 3Fe + 1W 3.06 3.08 0.99
3W + 2Fe 4.61 4.68 0.99 3Fe + 2W 3.08 3.08 1.00
3W + 3Fe 6.02 6.10 0.99 3Fe + 3W 3.28 3.31 0.99
3W + 4Fe 7.52 7.62 0.99 3Fe + 4W 3.55 3.59 0.99
3W + 5Fe 9.13 9.24 0.99 3Fe + 5W 3.83 3.88 0.99
4W + 1Fe 3.70 3.76 0.98 4Fe + 1W 3.50 3.51 1.00
4W + 2Fe 5.07 5.15 0.98 4Fe + 2W 3.65 3.68 0.99
4W + 3Fe 6.52 6.62 0.98 4Fe + 3W 3.70 3.70 1.00
4W + 4Fe 8.07 8.18 0.99 4Fe + 4W 3.90 3.94 0.99
2W + 1Conb 3.11 3.14 0.99 2Con + 1Wg 2.59 2.59 1.00

6
P. Basu, R. Sarangapani and B. Venkatraman Annals of Nuclear Energy 177 (2022) 109297

Table 2 (continued)

Media QADCGPIC–M (C) KFM (F) Ratio (C/F) Media QADCGPIC–M (C) KFM (F) Ratio (C/F)
2W + 2Con 4.68 4.71 0.99 2Con + 2W 2.69 2.71 0.99
2W + 3Con 6.44 6.47 1.00 2Con + 3W 2.96 2.98 0.99
2W + 4Con 8.37 8.40 1.00 2Con + 4W 3.25 3.28 0.99
2W + 5Con 10.49 10.52 1.00 2Con + 5W 3.54 3.58 0.99
2W + 6Con 12.80 12.83 1.00 2Con + 6W 3.83 3.88 0.99
3W + 1Con 3.56 3.60 0.99 3Con + 1W 3.15 3.16 1.00
3W + 2Con 5.23 5.27 0.99 3Con + 2W 3.26 3.24 1.01
3W + 3Con 7.06 7.11 0.99 3Con + 3W 3.36 3.38 0.99
3W + 4Con 9.06 9.11 0.99 3Con + 4W 3.63 3.66 0.99
3W + 5Con 11.24 11.29 1.00 3Con + 5W 3.91 3.95 0.99
4W + 1Con 3.97 4.02 0.99 4Con + 1W 3.62 3.61 1.00
4W + 2Con 5.72 5.78 0.99 4Con + 2W 3.75 3.77 0.99
4W + 3Con 7.62 7.68 0.99 4Con + 3W 3.99 3.95 1.01
4W + 4Con 9.67 9.74 0.99 4Con + 4W 4.00 4.03 0.99
2Pb + 1Fec 2.70 2.74 0.99 2Fe + 1Pbh 2.26 2.26 1.00
2Pb + 2Fe 3.90 3.95 0.99 2Fe + 2Pb 2.30 2.31 1.00
2Pb + 3Fe 5.22 5.28 0.99 2Fe + 3Pb 2.48 2.50 0.99
2Pb + 4Fe 6.65 6.72 0.99 2Fe + 4Pb 2.68 2.72 0.99
2Pb + 5Fe 8.18 8.28 0.99 2Fe + 5Pb 2.89 2.93 0.99
2Pb + 6Fe 9.84 9.96 0.99 2Fe + 6Pb 3.09 3.13 0.99
3Pb + 1Fe 3.04 3.08 0.99 3Fe + 1Pb 2.62 2.63 1.00
3Pb + 2Fe 4.30 4.36 0.99 3Fe + 2Pb 2.74 2.76 0.99
3Pb + 3Fe 5.66 5.73 0.99 3Fe + 3Pb 2.77 2.76 1.00
3Pb + 4Fe 7.13 7.22 0.99 3Fe + 4Pb 2.93 2.96 0.99
3Pb + 5Fe 8.70 8.81 0.99 3Fe + 5Pb 3.12 3.16 0.99
4Pb + 1Fe 3.34 3.39 0.99 4Fe + 1Pb 2.95 2.95 1.00
4Pb + 2Fe 4.65 4.72 0.99 4Fe + 2Pb 3.00 3.02 0.99
4Pb + 3Fe 6.05 6.13 0.99 4Fe + 3Pb 3.16 3.19 0.99
4Pb + 4Fe 7.55 7.65 0.99 4Fe + 4Pb 3.31 3.29 1.01
2Pb + 1Cond 2.92 2.94 0.99 2Con + 1Pbi 2.36 2.35 1.00
2Pb + 2Con 4.44 4.47 0.99 2Con + 2Pb 2.36 2.37 1.00
2Pb + 3Con 6.15 6.19 0.99 2Con + 3Pb 2.53 2.55 0.99
2Pb + 4Con 8.05 8.08 1.00 2Con + 4Pb 2.74 2.76 0.99
2Pb + 5Con 10.14 10.17 1.00 2Con + 5Pb 2.94 2.98 0.99
2Pb + 6Con 12.41 12.44 1.00 2Con + 6Pb 3.14 3.18 0.99
3Pb + 1Con 3.27 3.30 0.99 3Con + 1Pb 2.71 2.71 1.00
3Pb + 2Con 4.87 4.91 0.99 3Con + 2Pb 2.82 2.84 0.99
3Pb + 3Con 6.65 6.69 0.99 3Con + 3Pb 2.95 2.92 1.01
3Pb + 4Con 8.60 8.64 1.00 3Con + 4Pb 3.00 3.03 0.99
3Pb + 5Con 10.73 10.77 1.00 3Con + 5Pb 3.20 3.23 0.99
4Pb + 1Con 3.58 3.63 0.99 4Con + 1Pb 3.07 3.06 1.00
4Pb + 2Con 5.25 5.30 0.99 4Con + 2Pb 3.10 3.11 1.00
4Pb + 3Con 7.08 7.13 0.99 4Con + 3Pb 3.26 3.28 0.99
4Pb + 4Con 9.07 9.12 0.99 4Con + 4Pb 3.58 3.54 1.01
2Fe + 1Cone 4.44 4.46 1.00 2Con + 1Fej 4.12 4.13 1.00
2Fe + 2Con 6.23 6.24 1.00 2Con + 2Fe 5.34 5.35 1.00
2Fe + 3Con 8.18 8.20 1.00 2Con + 3Fe 6.75 6.77 1.00
2Fe + 4Con 10.31 10.33 1.00 2Con + 4Fe 8.30 8.34 1.00
2Fe + 5Con 12.63 12.63 1.00 2Con + 5Fe 9.98 10.02 1.00
2Fe + 6Con 15.12 15.12 1.00 2Con + 6Fe 11.77 11.89 0.99
3Fe + 1Con 5.88 5.90 1.00 3Con + 1Fe 5.52 5.46 1.01
3Fe + 2Con 7.92 7.94 1.00 3Con + 2Fe 6.81 6.80 1.00
3Fe + 3Con 10.09 10.12 1.00 3Con + 3Fe 8.33 8.34 1.00
3Fe + 4Con 12.42 12.44 1.00 3Con + 4Fe 10.00 10.02 1.00
3Fe + 5Con 14.91 14.93 1.00 3Con + 5Fe 11.80 11.82 1.00
4Fe + 1Con 7.44 7.49 0.99 4Con + 1Fe 7.08 7.07 1.00
4Fe + 2Con 9.73 9.77 1.00 4Con + 2Fe 8.41 8.42 1.00
4Fe + 3Con 12.11 12.16 1.00 4Con + 3Fe 10.03 10.05 1.00
4Fe + 4Con 14.62 14.67 1.00 4Con + 4Fe 11.82 11.85 1.00
a
2W + 1Fe – 2 mfp tungsten followed by 1 mfp iron.
b
2W + 1Con – 2 mfp tungsten followed by 1 mfp concrete.
c
2Pb + 1Fe – 2 mfp lead followed by 1 mfp iron.
d
2Pb + 1Con – 2 mfp lead followed by 1 mfp concrete.
e
2Fe + 1Con – 2 mfp iron followed by 1 mfp concrete.
f
2Fe + 1W – 2 mfp iron followed by 1 mfp tungsten.
g
2Con + 1W – 2 mfp concrete followed by 1 mfp tungsten.
h
2Fe + 1Pb – 2 mfp iron followed by 1 mfp lead.
i
2Con + 1Pb – 2 mfp concrete followed by 1 mfp lead.
j
2Con + 1Fe – 2 mfp concrete followed by 1 mfp iron.

7
P. Basu, R. Sarangapani and B. Venkatraman Annals of Nuclear Energy 177 (2022) 109297

Table 3
Estimated GDRs (mSv/h) at the exit of Zhigh + Zlow shielding configurations for 1 MeV gamma ray source of strength 37 GBq.

Media QADCGPIC–M (C1) QADCGPIC (C2) MCS (M) Ratio (C1/M) Ratio (C2/M) Ratio (C1/C2)
2W + 1Fe 276.0845 375.9554 257.3050 1.0730 1.4611 0.7344
2W + 2Fe 77.5703 97.8937 71.0848 1.0912 1.3771 0.7924
2W + 3Fe 23.5641 28.4733 21.2875 1.1069 1.3376 0.8276
2W + 4Fe 7.5029 8.8157 6.9142 1.0851 1.2750 0.8511
2W + 5Fe 2.4660 2.8389 2.2429 1.0995 1.2657 0.8687
2W + 6Fe 0.8282 0.9389 0.7238 1.1442 1.2972 0.8821
3W + 1Fe 93.4893 145.5702 88.0752 1.0615 1.6528 0.6422
3W + 2Fe 27.4164 38.8690 25.2050 1.0877 1.5421 0.7054
3W + 3Fe 8.5171 11.4085 8.0275 1.0610 1.4212 0.7466
3W + 4Fe 2.7470 3.5421 2.6335 1.0431 1.3450 0.7755
3W + 5Fe 0.9103 1.1408 0.8250 1.1034 1.3827 0.7980
4W + 1Fe 31.7854 55.7388 30.6869 1.0358 1.8164 0.5703
4W + 2Fe 9.6585 15.2365 9.1711 1.0532 1.6614 0.6339
4W + 3Fe 3.0601 4.5176 2.9451 1.0390 1.5339 0.6774
4W + 4Fe 0.9989 1.4087 0.9364 1.0668 1.5044 0.7091
2W + 1Con 90.9095 136.3385 81.8459 1.1107 1.6658 0.6668
2W + 2Con 18.3984 24.8985 16.4155 1.1208 1.5168 0.7389
2W + 3Con 4.7742 6.1081 4.2197 1.1314 1.4475 0.7816
2W + 4Con 1.3863 1.7110 1.2131 1.1427 1.4104 0.8102
2W + 5Con 0.4278 0.5148 0.3701 1.1560 1.3912 0.8310
2W + 6Con 0.1376 0.1624 0.1135 1.2121 1.4310 0.8470
3W + 1Con 34.2787 60.5998 30.6651 1.1178 1.9762 0.5657
3W + 2Con 7.1580 11.1813 6.3902 1.1202 1.7498 0.6402
3W + 3Con 1.8731 2.7194 1.6563 1.1309 1.6419 0.6888
3W + 4Con 0.5443 0.7530 0.4748 1.1465 1.5861 0.7228
3W + 5Con 0.1678 0.2241 0.1335 1.2567 1.6784 0.7487
4W + 1Con 12.7270 26.0055 11.5789 1.0992 2.2459 0.4894
4W + 2Con 2.7419 4.8628 2.4237 1.1313 2.0064 0.5638
4W + 3Con 0.7240 1.1809 0.6517 1.1109 1.8119 0.6131
4W + 4Con 0.2109 0.3249 0.1810 1.1654 1.7953 0.6491
2Pb + 1Fe 195.0826 283.0256 181.9164 1.0724 1.5558 0.6893
2Pb + 2Fe 59.7526 79.6126 54.2942 1.1005 1.4663 0.7505
2Pb + 3Fe 19.1317 24.2398 17.0212 1.1240 1.4241 0.7893
2Pb + 4Fe 6.3094 7.7356 5.7455 1.0981 1.3464 0.8156
2Pb + 5Fe 2.1364 2.5452 1.8989 1.1251 1.3403 0.8394
2Pb + 6Fe 0.7311 0.8554 0.6492 1.1261 1.3175 0.8547
3Pb + 1Fe 59.2842 100.7463 57.7285 1.0269 1.7452 0.5885
3Pb + 2Fe 19.2441 29.4030 17.9698 1.0709 1.6363 0.6545
3Pb + 3Fe 6.3789 9.1256 5.7931 1.1011 1.5753 0.6990
3Pb + 4Fe 2.1519 2.9439 2.0324 1.0588 1.4484 0.7310
3Pb + 5Fe 0.7403 0.9750 0.6912 1.0710 1.4105 0.7593
4Pb + 1Fe 18.5465 36.2289 18.2312 1.0173 1.9872 0.5119
4Pb + 2Fe 6.2832 10.8794 6.0098 1.0455 1.8103 0.5775
4Pb + 3Fe 2.1404 3.4312 2.0528 1.0427 1.6715 0.6238
4Pb + 4Fe 0.7358 1.1177 0.6835 1.0765 1.6352 0.6583
2Pb + 1Con 72.9892 115.9860 65.3635 1.1167 1.7745 0.6293
2Pb + 2Con 15.9312 22.6420 13.8375 1.1513 1.6363 0.7036
2Pb + 3Con 4.2925 5.7221 3.6626 1.1720 1.5623 0.7502
2Pb + 4Con 1.2744 1.6302 1.0309 1.2361 1.5813 0.7817
2Pb + 5Con 0.3993 0.4959 0.3271 1.2209 1.5163 0.8052
2Pb + 6Con 0.1298 0.1577 0.1020 1.2734 1.5463 0.8235
3Pb + 1Con 25.2838 48.4071 22.7940 1.1092 2.1237 0.5223
3Pb + 2Con 5.8330 9.7374 5.1435 1.1340 1.8931 0.5990
3Pb + 3Con 1.6043 2.4657 1.3759 1.1660 1.7921 0.6507
3Pb + 4Con 0.4807 0.6989 0.4222 1.1386 1.6553 0.6878
3Pb + 5Con 0.1513 0.2111 0.1313 1.1522 1.6078 0.7166
4Pb + 1Con 8.7458 19.5554 7.9200 1.1043 2.4691 0.4472
4Pb + 2Con 2.1161 4.0751 1.8392 1.1506 2.2157 0.5193
4Pb + 3Con 0.5934 1.0390 0.5556 1.0682 1.8702 0.5712
4Pb + 4Con 0.1795 0.2943 0.1590 1.1290 1.8506 0.6101
2Fe + 1Con 77.9628 82.3709 68.5429 1.1374 1.2017 0.9465
2Fe + 2Con 17.4089 17.8917 14.8586 1.1716 1.2041 0.9730
2Fe + 3Con 4.6752 4.7453 3.9989 1.1691 1.1866 0.9852
2Fe + 4Con 1.3765 1.3898 1.0993 1.2521 1.2643 0.9904
2Fe + 5Con 0.4273 0.4312 0.3477 1.2288 1.2401 0.9909
2Fe + 6Con 0.1377 0.1388 0.1076 1.2800 1.2903 0.9920
3Fe + 1Con 28.1971 30.5645 24.2113 1.1646 1.2624 0.9225
3Fe + 2Con 6.6717 6.9883 5.6431 1.1823 1.2384 0.9547
3Fe + 3Con 1.8273 1.8833 1.4999 1.2183 1.2557 0.9702
3Fe + 4Con 0.5416 0.5540 0.4329 1.2512 1.2800 0.9775
3Fe + 5Con 0.1683 0.1719 0.1301 1.2938 1.3209 0.9794
4Fe + 1Con 10.2146 11.3187 8.7098 1.1728 1.2995 0.9025
4Fe + 2Con 2.5332 2.7015 2.2066 1.1480 1.2242 0.9377
4Fe + 3Con 0.7069 0.7398 0.5832 1.2120 1.2684 0.9555
4Fe + 4Con 0.2110 0.2189 0.1718 1.2286 1.2744 0.9641

8
P. Basu, R. Sarangapani and B. Venkatraman Annals of Nuclear Energy 177 (2022) 109297

Table 4
Estimated GDRs (mSv/h) at the exit of Zlow + Zhigh shielding configurations for 1 MeV gamma ray source of strength 37 GBq.

Media QADCGPIC–M (C1) QADCGPIC (C2) MCS (M) Ratio (C1/M) Ratio (C2/M) Ratio (C1/C2)
2Fe + 1W 153.1738 132.7411 146.9684 1.0422 0.9032 1.1539
2Fe + 2W 49.9499 46.9846 50.3378 0.9923 0.9334 1.0631
2Fe + 3W 17.2638 16.6014 17.6739 0.9768 0.9393 1.0399
2Fe + 4W 6.0606 5.8722 6.0533 1.0012 0.9701 1.0321
2Fe + 5W 2.1407 2.0821 2.2428 0.9545 0.9283 1.0281
2Fe + 6W 0.7593 0.7404 0.7940 0.9563 0.9326 1.0254
3Fe + 1W 41.2880 33.5590 41.1244 1.0040 0.8160 1.2303
3Fe + 2W 13.3735 12.1740 14.5843 0.9170 0.8347 1.0985
3Fe + 3W 4.6501 4.4031 5.1941 0.8953 0.8477 1.0561
3Fe + 4W 1.6614 1.5912 1.8646 0.8910 0.8533 1.0441
3Fe + 5W 0.5975 0.5753 0.6254 0.9554 0.9198 1.0386
4Fe + 1W 11.4999 9.2478 12.2248 0.9407 0.7565 1.2435
4Fe + 2W 3.9892 3.4023 4.0653 0.9813 0.8369 1.1725
4Fe + 3W 1.3564 1.2480 1.4144 0.9590 0.8823 1.0868
4Fe + 4W 0.4821 0.4571 0.5062 0.9523 0.9030 1.0545
2Con + 1W 29.6005 24.7179 28.6823 1.0320 0.8618 1.1975
2Con + 2W 10.6428 9.8283 10.5676 1.0071 0.9300 1.0829
2Con + 3W 4.0558 3.8402 4.0529 1.0007 0.9475 1.0561
2Con + 4W 1.5529 1.4831 1.6387 0.9476 0.9050 1.0471
2Con + 5W 0.5921 0.5682 0.6216 0.9525 0.9141 1.0420
2Con + 6W 0.2247 0.2165 0.2430 0.9251 0.8911 1.0382
3Con + 1W 6.6183 5.2470 6.6462 0.9958 0.7895 1.2614
3Con + 2W 2.4321 2.0963 2.6160 0.9297 0.8014 1.1602
3Con + 3W 0.8911 0.8266 1.0059 0.8859 0.8218 1.0780
3Con + 4W 0.3437 0.3229 0.3835 0.8962 0.8420 1.0644
3Con + 5W 0.1325 0.1253 0.1352 0.9795 0.9262 1.0575
4Con + 1W 1.6700 1.3017 1.8066 0.9244 0.7205 1.2830
4Con + 2W 0.6243 0.5197 0.6403 0.9749 0.8116 1.2013
4Con + 3W 0.2395 0.2054 0.2378 1.0075 0.8640 1.1661
4Con + 4W 0.0870 0.0806 0.1036 0.8393 0.7778 1.0791
2Fe + 1Pb 123.3268 105.7099 123.8538 0.9957 0.8535 1.1667
2Fe + 2Pb 35.1793 33.4255 38.1559 0.9220 0.8760 1.0525
2Fe + 3Pb 11.0779 10.8030 11.7116 0.9459 0.9224 1.0254
2Fe + 4Pb 3.6178 3.5540 3.8238 0.9461 0.9294 1.0179
2Fe + 5Pb 1.2043 1.1864 1.2681 0.9497 0.9355 1.0151
2Fe + 6Pb 0.4063 0.4009 0.4358 0.9323 0.9199 1.0135
3Fe + 1Pb 33.6187 26.8788 35.4018 0.9496 0.7592 1.2508
3Fe + 2Pb 9.6136 8.8845 10.6016 0.9068 0.8380 1.0821
3Fe + 3Pb 3.1160 2.9750 3.5021 0.8897 0.8495 1.0474
3Fe + 4Pb 1.0328 1.0074 1.1843 0.8721 0.8506 1.0253
3Fe + 5Pb 0.3517 0.3444 0.3829 0.9183 0.8995 1.0210
4Fe + 1Pb 8.9801 7.4034 10.6142 0.8460 0.6975 1.2130
4Fe + 2Pb 2.8510 2.5167 3.2065 0.8891 0.7849 1.1328
4Fe + 3Pb 0.9539 0.8628 1.0247 0.9308 0.8420 1.1055
4Fe + 4Pb 0.3220 0.2981 0.3670 0.8773 0.8123 1.0800
2Con + 1Pb 25.5662 21.0710 25.3267 1.0095 0.8320 1.2133
2Con + 2Pb 8.4615 7.8399 9.0719 0.9327 0.8642 1.0793
2Con + 3Pb 3.0225 2.8902 3.3429 0.9042 0.8646 1.0458
2Con + 4Pb 1.0989 1.0601 1.2314 0.8924 0.8609 1.0366
2Con + 5Pb 0.4003 0.3878 0.4215 0.9497 0.9200 1.0322
2Con + 6Pb 0.1458 0.1417 0.1521 0.9591 0.9320 1.0291
3Con + 1Pb 5.4917 4.4515 5.8827 0.9335 0.7567 1.2337
3Con + 2Pb 1.9638 1.6911 2.0503 0.9578 0.8248 1.1613
3Con + 3Pb 0.7090 0.6371 0.7403 0.9578 0.8606 1.1129
3Con + 4Pb 0.2509 0.2388 0.2836 0.8845 0.8418 1.0506
3Con + 5Pb 0.0931 0.0892 0.1032 0.9025 0.8641 1.0444
4Con + 1Pb 1.3794 1.0944 1.5310 0.9010 0.7148 1.2605
4Con + 2Pb 0.4902 0.4194 0.5507 0.8902 0.7616 1.1688
4Con + 3Pb 0.1818 0.1597 0.1994 0.9114 0.8007 1.1383
4Con + 4Pb 0.0706 0.0605 0.0723 0.9762 0.8364 1.1672
2Con + 1Fe 39.1683 38.1471 35.2020 1.1127 1.0837 1.0268
2Con + 2Fe 14.9423 14.8451 12.7891 1.1684 1.1608 1.0065
2Con + 3Fe 5.6932 5.6738 5.1474 1.1060 1.1023 1.0034
2Con + 4Fe 2.1511 2.1444 1.8132 1.1864 1.1827 1.0032
2Con + 5Fe 0.8071 0.8045 0.7037 1.1468 1.1431 1.0032
2Con + 6Fe 0.3012 0.3003 0.2560 1.1769 1.1733 1.0031
3Con + 1Fe 10.0806 9.7093 9.1116 1.1063 1.0656 1.0382
3Con + 2Fe 3.8887 3.8503 3.4424 1.1296 1.1185 1.0100
3Con + 3Fe 1.5082 1.5009 1.3211 1.1416 1.1360 1.0049
3Con + 4Fe 0.5805 0.5780 0.5028 1.1546 1.1496 1.0043
3Con + 5Fe 0.2216 0.2207 0.1908 1.1617 1.1567 1.0043
4Con + 1Fe 2.9114 2.7776 2.5828 1.1272 1.0754 1.0482
4Con + 2Fe 1.1212 1.1068 0.9765 1.1482 1.1334 1.0130
4Con + 3Fe 0.4372 0.4345 0.3847 1.1364 1.1295 1.0062
4Con + 4Fe 0.1696 0.1687 0.1502 1.1288 1.1229 1.0052

9
P. Basu, R. Sarangapani and B. Venkatraman Annals of Nuclear Energy 177 (2022) 109297

Table 5
60
Estimated DBUFs at the exit of double layered slab shielding configurations for Co source of strength 163.91 ± 9.83 MBq.

Medium Thickness of medium (cm) QADCGPIC–M (C1) QADCGPIC (C2) Experiment (E) Ratio Ratio Ratio
(Present study) (Present study) (Basu et al., 2021) (C1/E) (C2/E) (C1/C2)
Pb + Fe 2.5 + 2.5 2.63 3.46 2.47 1.06 1.40 0.76
Pb + Fe 2.5 + 5.0 3.80 4.65 3.85 0.99 1.21 0.82
Fe + Pb 2.5 + 2.5 1.99 1.94 2.24 0.89 0.87 1.03
Fe + Pb 2.5 + 5.0 2.44 2.41 3.02 0.81 0.80 1.01

Table 6
Estimated GDRs (lSv/h) at the exit of double layered slab shielding configurations for 60
Co source of strength 163.91 ± 9.83 MBq.

Media Thickness of medium QADCGPIC–M (C1) QADCGPIC (C2) Experiment (E) Ratio (C1/E) Ratio (C2/E) Ratio (C1/C2)
(cm) (Present study) (Present study) (Basu et al., 2021)
Pb + Fe 2.5 + 2.5 5.74 7.55 5.50 1.04 1.37 0.76
Pb + Fe 2.5 + 5.0 2.91 3.56 3.00 0.97 1.19 0.82
Fe + Pb 2.5 + 2.5 4.34 4.23 5.00 0.87 0.85 1.03
Fe + Pb 2.5 + 5.0 1.02 1.01 1.30 0.78 0.78 1.01

4. Summary and conclusions Declaration of Competing Interest

The QADCGPIC code is modified for handling shielding thick-
nesses up to 100 mfp for twenty three elements, one compound,
and two mixtures. The results obtained using the modified QADCG-
PIC–M code for bulk shielding of Pb, W, Fe, and Con is validated
with the results of our earlier published work. Excellent agreement
with a deviation of 0.004% between the results is observed, indicat-
ing successful incorporation of the formula into the code. Another
improvement to the code is made by incorporating the KFM for
handling double layered shielding configurations which are widely
used in nuclear facilities. The DBUFs computed using the QADCG-
PIC–M is compared with the results from the KFM. A very good
agreement within ± 2% between the results is observed, indicating
successful incorporation of the formula into the code. The modified
code, QADCGPIC–M is validated by comparing the GDRs at the exit
of various double layered slab shielding configurations of Pb, W, Fe,
and Con using QADCGPIC–M, QADCGPIC, and MCS for 1 MeV
gamma ray of strength 37 GBq. The GDRs obtained from QADCG-
PIC–M are found to be within a maximum variation of 29% as com-
pared to the MCS results, whereas, using the QADCGPIC code, the
variation goes up to 147%. Experimental validation of the QADCG-
PIC–M has also been carried out for double layered shielding con-
figurations of Pb and Fe of different thicknesses with a standard
60
Co source of strength 163.91 ± 9.83 MBq. DBUFs and GDRs are
measured experimentally and then compared with the computed
values from the QADCGPIC and QADCGPIC–M. The values from
the QADCGPIC–M are found to be closer to the measured values.
A practical application of the modified code has also been demon-
strated for storing a radioactive source inside a cask made of dual
layered shielding of Pb and Fe. It is observed that the modified code
gives more optimized shielding thickness. All these studies show
that the variation between the QADCGPIC and QADCGPIC–M is
quite large which is due to the difference in the secondary radia-
tion build–up values. The reason lies in handling the double lay-
ered shielding configurations where in–built procedure is not
provided in QADCGPIC, whereas QADCGPIC–M handles the double
layered configurations accurately.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Pew Basu: Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing – original
draft. R. Sarangapani: Supervision. B. Venkatraman: Supervision.
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Dr. R. Venkatesan, Head, Radiological & Envi-
ronmental Safety Division (RESD), Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic
Research (IGCAR), and Smt. M. Menaka, Head, Radiation Applica-
tion & Metrology Section, RESD, IGCAR for their support in this
work.
References
ANSI/ANS–6.4.3, 1991. Gamma–ray attenuation coefficients and buildup factors for
engineering materials. American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, Illinois 60525,
USA.
Basu, P., Sarangapani, R., Venkatraman, B., 2019. Gamma ray buildup factors for
conventional shielding materials and buildup factors computed for tungsten
with a thickness beyond 40 mean free paths. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 154C (108864),
1–7.
Basu, P., Sarangapani, R., Venkatraman, B., 2021. An improvement to the Kalos’
formula for double layer gamma ray exposure buildup factors for shielding
materials of nuclear and radiological facilities. Ann. Nucl. Energy 151 (107944),
1–14.
Brar, G.S., Singh, K., Singh, M., Mudahar, G.S., 1994. Energy absorption buildup factor
studies in water, air and concrete up to 100 mean free path using GP fitting
formula. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 43 (6), 623–627.
Broder, D. L., Kayurin, Y. P., Kutrezov, A. A., 1962. Transmission of gamma radiation
through heterogeneous media. Sov. J. Atom. Energy 12 (1), 26–31.
Capo, R. M., 1958. Polynomial approximation of gamma ray buildup factors for a
point isotropic source. U.S. AEC Report APEX–5l0.
Hansda, M.K., Mammen, S., 2021. 3DGShield: A new 3D gamma ray shielding code
for arbitrary source and shield geometry based on point kernel technique. Ann.
Nucl. Energy 159, 108352.
Harima, Y., Nishiwaki, Y., 1972. An Approximation of gamma ray buildup factors by
geometrical progression. Nucl. Eng. Des. 23, 209–227.
Harima, Y., Kurosawa, N., Sakamoto, Y., 2014. Parameter search of geometric–
Progression formula for gamma–ray isotropic point source buildup factors up to
depths of 100 mean free path, including contribution of secondary radiations.
Prog. Nucl. Sci. Technol. 4, 548–552.
Harima, Y., 1983. An approximation of gamma ray buildup factors for two layer
shields. Nucl. Sci. Eng. 85 (1), 45–51.
Lin, U.T., Jiang, S.H., 1996. A dedicated empirical formula for gamma ray buildup
factors for a point isotropic source in stratified shields. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 48
(4), 389–401.
Malefant, R.E., 1967. QAD—a series of point kernel general purpose shielding
programs, LA–3572.
Mann, K.S., 2019. Investigation of gamma–ray shielding by double layered
enclosures. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 159, 207–221.

10
P. Basu, R. Sarangapani and B. Venkatraman
Mann, K.S., Mann, S.S., 2021. Py–MLBUF: Development of an online–platform for
gamma–ray shielding calculations and investigations. Ann. Nucl. Energy 150,
107845.
Muhammad, A.S., Nahrul, K.A.R., Khaidzir, H., 2018. A review on multilayer
radiation shielding. Int. Nucl. Sci., Tech. Eng. Conf. IOP Conf. Series: Mater. Sci.
Eng. 555, (1) 012008.
QADCGGP: A combinatorial geometry version of QAD–P5A, 1989. A point kernel
code system for neutron and gamma ray shielding calculations using the GP
buildup factor. ORNL, RSICC–CCC–493.
Shimizu, A., Onda, T., Sakamoto, Y., 2004. Calculation of gamma–ray buildup factors
up to depths of 100 mfp by the method of Invariant Embedding. J. Nucl. Sci.
Technol. 41 (4), 413–424.
11
Annals of Nuclear Energy 177 (2022) 109297
Singh, J.D., Singh, B., Singh, G.S., 2012. A comprehensive study on energy absorption
and exposure buildup factors for some Vitamins and Tissue Equivalent
Materials. Int. J. Sci. Res. Publ. 2 (9), 1–8.
Subbaiah, K.V., Sarangapani, R., 2008. IGSHIELD: a new interactive point kernel
gamma ray shielding code. Ann. Nucl. Energy 35 (12), 2234–2242.
Subbaiah, K.V., Sarangapani, R., Baskar, S., 2001. GUI2QAD
a graphical user
interface for QAD
CGPIC program. Rad. Prot. Envn. 24 (1&2), 274.
Subbaiah, K. V., 2001. A graphical user interface for QAD
CGPIC
program
GUI2QAD, Contributed by Safety Research Institute, AERB,
Kalpakkam, RSICC CCC
697.
Trontl, K., Bace, M., 1998. Incorporation of multi–layer option into QAD–CGGP code.
Nucl. Energy in Central Europe, 139–146.