The Three-Body Structure of 2n and 2p Halo Nuclei I. Sreeja and M. Balasubramaniam

A three-cluster model developed for ternary fission studies has been applied for the first time to study the three-body structure of 2n and 2p halo nuclei. For the experimentally known 2n, 2p halo nuclei, all possible ternary fragmentation potential energy surface (PES) is calculated. The two-body breakup reported earlier, clearly indicated a strong minimum in the PES corresponding to 1n/1p and/or 2n/2p cluster plus core configuration. However, the present calculations of PES reveal that, the three- body breakup does not result always with 2n and/or 2p as a cluster. A 1n and/or 1p cluster along with the core is initially formed, and then the core loses one nucleon to make either a 2n plus core or 2p plus core structure. The results are substantiated with the calculations of preformation probability calculated within quantum mechanical fragmentation theory.

URL	http://dspace.chitkara.edu.in/jspui/bitstream/123456789/707/1/002JNP_Sreeja.pdf
ISSN	Print : 2321-8649, Online : 2321-9289
DOI	https://doi.org/10.15415/jnp.2018.52024
REFERENCES	I. Tanihata, H. Hamagaki, O. Hashimoto, S. Nagamiya et al., Phys. Lett. 160B, 380 (1985). I. Tanihata, H. Hamagaki, O. Hashimoto, Y. Shida et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 2676 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.55.2676 I. Tanihata, T. Kobayashi, O. Yamakawa, S. Shimoura et al., Phys. Lett. B 206, 592 (1988). M. Brodeur, T. Brunner, C. Champagne, S. Ettenenauer et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 052504 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.052504 B. V. Danilin, I. J. Thompson, J. S. Vaagen and M. V. Zhukov, Nucl. Phys. A 632, 383 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0375-9474(98)00002-5 R. K. Gupta, M. Balasubramaniam, R. K. Puri and W. Scheid, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 26, L23 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/26/2/102 R. K. Gupta, M. Balasubramaniam et al., J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 32, 565 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/32/4/012 G. Sawhney, M. K. Sharma and R. K. Gupta J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys 41, 055101 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/41/5/055101 R. K. Gupta, Sushil Kumar et al., J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 28, 699 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/28/4/309 W. Horiuchi and Y. Suzuki, Phys. Rev. C 74, 034311 (1961). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.74.034311 ] T. Frederico, M. T. Yamashita and Lauro Tomio, Nucl. Phys. A 787, 561c-568c (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2006.12.085 I. Mazhumdar, Pramana - J. Phys., 75, 81 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12043-010-0067-y Shi-Sheng Zhang, M. S. Smith, Zhong-Shu Kang and Jie Zhao, Phys. Lett. B 730, 30 (2014). L. A. Souza, F. F. Bellotti and T. Frederico, J. Phys. 630, 012043 (2015). [15] Y. Togano, T. Nakamura, Y. Kondo, J. A. Tostevin et al., Phys. Lett. B 761, 412 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2016.08.062 [ E. Rydberg, C. Forssen and L. Platter, Few Body Syst. 58, 143 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00601-017-1307-1 W. Schwab et al., Z. Phys. A 350, 283 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01291183 A. Ozawa et al., Phys. Lett. B 334, 18 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(94)90585-1 Z. Ren, B. Chen, Z. Ma and G. Xu, Phys. Rev. C 53, 572 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.53.R572 R. Kanungo, M. Chiba, S. Adhikari, D. Fang et al., Phys. Lett. B 571, 21 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2003.07.050 R. Kanungo, Nucl. Phys. A 738, 293 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2004.04.048 L. V. Grigorenko, Yu. L. Parfenova and M. V. Zhukov, Phys. Rev. C 71, 051604(R) (2005). W. Geithner, T. Neff, G. Audi, K. Blaum et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 252502 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.252502 W.S. Hwash, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 25, 1650105 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218301316501056 R. K. Gupta, Proceedings of the Vth International Conference on Nuclear Reaction Mechanisms, Varenna, Italy (1988) p. 416. S. S. Malik and R. K. Gupta, Phys. Rev. C 39 1992 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.39.1992 R. K. Gupta, W. Scheid, and W. Greiner, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Phys. 17 1731(1991). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/17/11/018 S. Kumar and R. K. Gupta, Phys. Rev. C 55 218 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.55.218 R. K. Gupta, in Heavy Elements and Related New Phenomena, edited by W. Greiner and R.K. Gupta (World Scientific, Singapore, 1999), Vol. II, p. 730. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812816634_0020 K. Manimaran and M. Balasubramaniam, Phys. Rev. C 79, 024610 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.79.024610 K. Manimaran and M. Balasubramaniam, Eur. Phys. J. A 45, 293 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1140/epja/i2010-11000-7 K. Manimaran and M. Balasubramaniam, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 37, 045104 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/37/4/045104 K. Manimaran and M. Balasubramaniam, Phys. Rev. C 83, 034609 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.83.034609 K. R. Vijayaraghavan, W. von Oertzen and M. Balasubramaniam, Eur. Phys. J. A 48, 27 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1140/epja/i2012-12027-4 K. R. Vijayaraghavan, M. Balasubramaniam and W. von Oertzen, Phys. Rev. C 90, 024601 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.90.024601 M. Balasubramaniam, K. R. Vijayaraghavan and C. Karthickraj, Pramana - J. Phys., 85, 423 (2015). M. Balasubramaniam, K. R. Vijayaraghavan and K. Manimaran, Phys. Rev. C 93, 014601 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.93.014601 G. Audi, F. G. Kondev, M. Wang, B. Pfeiffer, X. Sun, J. Blachot and M. MacCormik, Chin. Phys. C 36(12), 1157 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/36/12/ P. Mller, J. R. Nix, W. D. Myers, W. J. Swiatecki, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 59, 185 (1995) J. Blocki, J. Randrup, W. J. Swiatecki and C. F. Tsang, Ann. Phys. (NY) 105, 427 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916(77)90249-4 H. Kröger and W. Scheid, J. Phys. G 6, L85 (1980). https://doi.org/10.1088/0305-4616/6/4/006

Distinguishing Features of Radioactive Compound Nucleus Decays within the Dynamical Cluster decay Model

Hemdeep, Sahila Chopra, Pooja Kaushal and Raj K. Gupta

Dynamical cluster-decay model; deformed non-coplanar fragments; non-compound nucleus effects; radioactive nuclei. In this paper, we are interested to study the distinguishing features of the decaying radioactive compound nuclei 246Bk* and 220Th*, using the Dynamical Cluster-decay Model (DCM) with deformation β and non-coplanar degree-of-freedom Φ. 246Bk* and 220Th* have so-far been studied within the DCM, using quadrupole deformations (β2i), “optimum” orientations (θopt) of the two nuclei lying in the same plane (Φ=0o), which shows that there is a non-compound nucleus (nCN) content in the observed data. The first turning point Ra (equivalently, the neck-length ∆R in Ra=R1+R2+∆R), which fixes both the preformation and penetration paths, is used to best fit the measured evaporation residue (ER) and fusion-fission (ff) cross sections, σER, σff, respectively, in 220Th* and 246Bk*, formed via different entrance channels. In this work, we subsequently add higher multipole deformations, the octupole and hexadecupole (β3i, β4i), `compact’ orientations θci and Φ≠00, and look for their effects on the nCN contribution predicted by the DCM calculations referenced above. URL http://dspace.chitkara.edu.in/jspui/bitstream/123456789/706/1/001JNP_Hampdeep.pdf ISSN Print : 2321-8649, Online : 2321-9289 DOI https://doi.org/10.15415/jnp.2018.52023 B. B. Singh, M. K. Sharma, and R. K. Gupta, Phys. Rev. C 77, 054613 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.77.054613 R. K. Gupta and M. Bansal, Int. Rev. of Phys. (I.RE.PHY) 5, 74 (2011). M. Bansal, Ph.D. Thesis, Panjab University, Chandigarh, (2012). Hemdeep, S. Chopra, A. Kaur, and R. K. Gupta, Phys. Rev. C 95, 014609 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.95.014609 R. K. Gupta, M. Manhas and W. Greiner, Phys. Rev. C 73, 054307 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.73.054307 C. C. Sahm, et al., Nucl. Phys. A 441, 316 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-9474(85)90036-3 D. Vermeulen, et al., Z. Phys. A 318, 157 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01413464 G. N. Knyazheva, et al., Phys. Rev. C 75, 064602 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.75.064602 D. A. Mayorov, et al., Phys. Rev. C 90, 024602 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.90.024602 P. Kaushal, S. Chopra, Hemdeep, and R. K. Gupta, Proceedings DAE-BRNS Symposium on Nucl. Phys. 62, 480 (2017). R. K. Gupta, in Clusters in Nuclei, Lecture Notes in Physics 818, edited by C. Beck, Vol. I, (Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2010), pp. 223–265. R. K. Gupta, R. Kumar, N. K. Dhiman, M. Balasubramaniam, W. Scheid, and C. Beck, Phys. Rev. C 68, 014610 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.68.014610 R. K. Gupta, M. Balasubramaniam, R. Kumar, N. Singh, M. Manhas, and W. Greiner, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 31, 631 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/31/7/009 H. Kroeger and W. Scheid, J. Phys. G 6, L85 (1980). https://doi.org/10.1088/0305-4616/6/4/006 S. S. Malik and R. K. Gupta, Phys. Rev. C 39, 1992 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.39.1992 N. J. Davidson, S. S. Hsiao, J. Markram, H. G. Miller, and Y. Tzeng, Nucl. Phys. A 570, 61c (1994). https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-9474(94)90269-0 M. Balasubramaniam, R. Kumar, R. K. Gupta, C. Beck, and W. Scheid, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 29, 2703 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/29/12/003 G. Audi, A. H. Wapstra, and C. Thiboult, Nucl. Phys. A 729, 337 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2003.11.003 P. Möller, J. R. Nix, W. D. Myers, and W. J. Swiatecki, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 59, 185 (1995) W. Myers and W. J. Swiatecki, Nucl. Phys. 81, 1 (1966). https://doi.org/10.1016/0029-5582(66)90639-0 S. Jensen and J. Damgaard, Nucl. Phys. A, 203, 578 (1973). https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-9474(73)90365-5 R. K. Gupta, N. Singh, and M. Manhas, Phys. Rev. C 70, 034608 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.70.034608 S. Chopra, M. Bansal, M. K. Sharma, and R. K. Gupta, Phys. Rev. C 88, 014615 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.88.014615 M. Manhas and R. K. Gupta, Phys. Rev. C 72, 024606 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.72.024606

Study of Solid-State Radiolysis of Behenic, Fumaric, and Sebacic Acids for their Possible Use as Gamma Dosimeters Measured Via ATR-FT-IR Spectroscopy

 

• J. Cruz-CastañedaInstitute of Nuclear Sciences, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), PO Box 70-543, 04510 Mexico City, Mexico; Master’s and PhD Program in Chemical Sciences, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM). PO Box 70-543, 04510 Mexico City, Mexico
• A. L. Meléndez-LópezInstitute of Nuclear Sciences, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), PO Box 70-543, 04510 Mexico City, Mexico; Master’s and PhD Program in Chemical Sciences, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM). PO Box 70-543, 04510 Mexico City, Mexico
• A. HerediaInstitute of Nuclear Sciences, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), PO Box 70-543, 04510 Mexico City, Mexico
• S. RamosbernalInstitute of Nuclear Sciences, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), PO Box 70-543, 04510 Mexico City, Mexico
• A. Negrón-MendozaInstitute of Nuclear Sciences, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), PO Box 70-543, 04510 Mexico City, Mexico

DOI: https://doi.org/10.15415/jnp.2018.61014

Keywords: dosimeter, carboxylic acid, gamma radiation, ATR-FT-IR spectroscopy

Abstract

The intensive use of ionizing radiation has promoted the constant investigation of adequate dosimetric systems in the measurement of doses applied in irradiated products. The objective of this work is to propose gamma dosimetric systems, using carboxylic acids in a solid state and measuring the change via infrared spectroscopy (carboxylic acid/ ATR-FT-IR1). We worked with three systems: (1) behenic acid/ATR-FT-IR, (2) sebacic acid/ATR-FT-IR, and (3) fumaric acid/ATR-FT-IR. The change in absorbance corresponding to the stretching vibration frequency of the carbonyl group to the absorbed dose (in the range of kGy) was measured. The results showed that the acid/ATR-FT-IR systems have a linear response with respect to the absorbed dose, for behenic acid/ATR-FT-IR from 0 to 122 kGy, for ATR-FT-IR sebacic acid from 0 to 61 kGy, and for fumaric acid/ATR-FT-IR from 0 to 34 kGy. The results indicated that the linear response of the absorbance dose in the three systems allows us to continue studying other variables to be able to propose them as chemical dosimeters.

References

K. Van Laere, J. Buysse, and P. Berkvens, Int. J. Radiat. Appl. Instrumentation. Part A. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 40, 885 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-2889(89)90012-9

A. R. Jones, Radiat.Res. 47, 35 (1971). https://doi.org/10.2307/3573286

A. Negron-Mendoza and S. Ramos-Bernal, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 52, 395 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0969-806X(98)00059-0

J. Cruz-Castañeda, A. Negron-Mendoza, and S. Ramos-Bernal, AIP Conf. Proc. 49, 49 (2013).

H. Fricke and E. J. Hart, in Radiat. Dosim., edited by F. H. Attix; W. C Roesch, 2nd ed. (Academic Press, New York, 1966).

A. Meléndez-López, A. Negrón-Mendoza, V. GómezVidales, R. M. Uribe, and S. Ramos-Bernal, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 104, 230 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2014.03.012

Issue

Vol 6 No 1 (2018)

How to Cite

J. Cruz-Castañeda; A. L. Meléndez-López; A. Heredia; S. Ramosbernal; A. Negrón-Mendoza. Study of Solid-State Radiolysis of Behenic, Fumaric, and Sebacic Acids for Their Possible Use As Gamma Dosimeters Measured Via ATR-FT-IR Spectroscopy. J. Nucl. Phy. Mat. Sci. Rad. A. 2018, 6, 81-85.

Agent Based Model of the Cytosine Radiation Induced Reaction

 

• A L Rivera
  Institute of Nuclear Sciences. National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), PO Box 70-543, 04510 Mexico City, Mexico; Complexity Science Center, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM)
• S Ramos-Beltran
  Complexity Science Center, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM)
• A Paredes-Arriaga
  Institute of Nuclear Sciences. National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), PO Box 70-543, 04510 Mexico City, Mexico; Sciences Faculty, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), 04510 Mexico City, Mexico
• A Negron-Mendoza
  Institute of Nuclear Sciences. National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), PO Box 70-543, 04510 Mexico City, Mexico

DOI: https://doi.org/10.15415/jnp.2018.61016

Keywords: Radiation induced chemical reactions, Cytosine, Kinetics of reactions, Agent-based model

Abstract

The stability of cytosine in aqueous solution was studied in the laboratory, simulating prebiotic conditions and using gamma radiation as an energy source, to describe cytosine behavior under radiation. For a better understanding of the radiation-induced processes, we proposed a mathematical model that considers chemical reactions as nonlinear ordinary differential equations. The radiolysis can be computationally simulated by an agent-based model, wherein each chemical species involved is considered to be an agent that can interact with other species with known reaction rates. The radiation is contemplated as a factor that promotes product formation/destruction, and the temperature determines the diffusion speed of the agents. With this model, we reproduce the changes in cytosine concentration obtained in the laboratory under different irradiation conditions.

 

References

M. Colín-García, A. Negrón-Mendoza, S. RamosBernal, International Journal of Astrobiology, 9, 279– 288, (2009). http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/ast.2006.0117

H. G. Hill, J. A. Nuth, Astrobiology, 3(2), 291–304, (2003). https://doi.org/10.1089/153110703769016389

A. Negrón-Mendoza, C. Ponnamperuma, Photochemistry and Photobiology, 36(5), 595–597, (1982). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-1097.1982.tb04421.x

A. Negrón-Mendoza, G. Albarran, S. Ramos, E. Chacon, Journal of Biological Physics, 20(1), 71–76, (1995). http:/dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00700422.

S. Castillo, A. Negrón-Mendoza, Z. D. Draganic, I. G. Draganic, Radiation Physics and Chemistry, 26, 437–443, (1985). https://doi.org/10.1016/0146-5724(85)90232-8

J. Cruz-Casta-eda, A. Negrón-Mendoza, D. Frías, M. Colín-García, A. Heredia, et al., Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry, 304(1), 219–225, (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-014-3711-z

S. L. Miller, Science, 117(3046), 528–529, (1953). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.117.3046.528

W. Gilbert, Nature, 319(6055), 618, (1986). https://doi.org/10.1038/319618a0

G. Sanchez-Mejorada, D. Frias, A. Negrón-Mendoza, S. Ramos-Bernal, Radiation Measurements, 43(2), 287–290, (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radmeas.2007.11.038

V. P. Zhdanov, Surface Science Reports, 45(7), 231–326, (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-5729(01)00023-1

A. L. Rivera, S. Ramos-Bernal, A. Negrón-Mendoza, J. Nucl. Phys. Mat. Sci. Rad. A., 5(1), 15–23, (2017). https://doi.org/10.15415/jnp.2017.51002

A. L. Rivera, S. Ramos-Bernal, A. Negrón-Mendoza, J. Nucl. Phys. Mat. Sci. Rad. A., 4(1), 149–157, (2016). https://doi.org/10.15415/jnp.2016.41015

A. A. Berryman, Ecology, 75, 1530–1535, (1992). https://doi.org/10.2307/1940005

A. Paredes Arriaga, Estabilidad de la guanina y citosinaendisoluciónacuosa y suspensión con Montmo rillonitasódica: simulaciones de charcasen la tierraprimitive (Stability of guanine and cytosine in aqueous solution and suspension with sodium Montmorillonite: simulations of ponds in the primitive land). Thesis, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico (2018).

A. L. Meléndez-López, S. Ramos-Bernal, M. L. RamírezVázquez, AIP Conference Proceedings 1607, 111, (2014). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4890710

L. Lang, Absorption spectra in the ultraviolet and visible regions, Vol. 1 (Academic Press, New York, 1961). 

Issue

Vol 6 No 1 (2018) 

 

 

How to Cite

A L Rivera; S Ramos-Beltran; A Paredes-Arriaga; A Negron-Mendoza. Agent Based Model of the Cytosine Radiation Induced Reaction. J. Nucl. Phy. Mat. Sci. Rad. A. 2018, 6, 93-97.

 

 

 

Synthesis of MgB4O7:Dy3+and Thermoluminescent Characteristics at Low Doses of Beta Radiation

 

• O Legorreta-AlbaInstitute of Nuclear Sciences, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), PO Box 70-543, 04510 Mexico City, Mexico; Chemistry Faculty, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), 3000 Universidad avenue, 04510 Mexico City, México
• E Cruz-ZaragozaInstitute of Nuclear Sciences, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), PO Box 70-543, 04510 Mexico City, Mexico
• D DíazChemistry Faculty, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), 3000 Universidad avenue, 04510 Mexico City, México
• J Marcazzó"Arroyo Seco” Institute of Physics (Uncpba) and Cificen (Uncpba-Cicpba Conicet), Pinto 399, 7000 Tandil, Argentina

DOI: https://doi.org/10.15415/jnp.2018.61012

Keywords: Magnesium tetraborate, Dysprosium, Thermoluminescence, Beta-radiation, Dosimeter

Abstract

The synthesis and thermoluminescent characteristics of dysprosium-doped MgB4O7 are analyzed. The phosphor at different concentrations (0, 0.1, 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 mol%) of the dopant was prepared by the solution-assisted method. The magnesium borate compound was confirmed by X-ray diffraction. The annealing and dopant concentrations effects on the crystalline matrix were investigated. The highest thermoluminescent sensitivity was found with 450°C of annealing temperature and at high Dy3+ concentration too. The un-doped MgB4O7 phosphor shows a broad glow curve which peaked at 199°C and about 306 °C. Introducing Dy3+ dopant in the matrix that behavior was strongly changed. The wide glow curve shows three glow peaks; two small shoulders at 124 and 195 °C, and a highest peak between 323 and 336 °C temperature range. A large linear dose-response (5 – 2000 mGy) beta dose was obtained. The complex glow curves were deconvolved and the kinetics parameters were determined considering the general order kinetics model.

References

O. Annalakshmi, M. T. Jose, U. Madhusoodanan, J. Sridevi, B. Venkatraman, G. Amarendra, A. B. Mandal, Radiat. Eff. Defects Solids, 169(7), 636–645 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1080/10420150.2014.918128

A. J. J. Bos, Nucl. Instrum. Methods B, 184, 3–28 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-583X(01)00717-0

L. L. Campos, O. O.Fernandes, Radiat. Prot. Dosim., 33(1/4), 111–113 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a080769

G. Cedillo Del Rosario, E. Cruz-Zaragoza, M. García Hipólito, J. Marcazzó J. M. A. Hernández, H. S. Murrieta, Applied Radiation and Isotopes, 127, 103–108 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2017.05.018

E. Cruz-Zaragoza, G. Cedillo Del Rosario, M. García Hipólito, J. Marcazzó, J. M. A. Hernández, E. Camarillo, H. S. Murrieta, J. Nucl. Phys. Mat. Sci. Rad. App., 5(1), 169–178 (2017). https://doi.org/10.15415/jnp.2017.51016

E. Cruz-Zaragoza, C. Furetta, J. Marcazzó, M. Santiago, C. Guarneros, M. Pacio, R. Palomino, J. Lumin., 179, 260–264 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlumin.2016.07.003

T. Depci, G. Ozbayoglu, A. Yilmaz, Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 41(10), 2284–2594 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-010-0341-0

M. Dogan, A. N. Yazici, Journal of Optoelectronics and Advanced Materials, 11(11), 1783–1787 (2009).

C. M. H. Driscoll, S. J. Mundy, J. M. Elliot, Radiat. Prot. Dosim., 1(2), 135–137 (1981).

D. Evis, A. Yucel, N. Kizilkaya, et al., Applied Radiation and Isotopes, 116, 138–142 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2016.08.004

F. Fukuda, N. Takeuchi, J. Mater. Sci. Lett., 8, 1001– 1002 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01730467

C. Furetta, Handbook of Thermoluminescence. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd. (2003). https://doi.org/10.1142/5167

C. Furetta, G. Kitis, P. S. Weng, T. S. Chu, Nucl. Instrum. Methods A, 420, 441–445 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-9002(98)01198-X

T. Hitomi, Radiothermoluminescence Dosimeter and Materials. U.S. Patent Filed no. 213 950 (1971).

M. Israeli, N. Kristianpoller, R. Chen, Phys. Rev. B, 6(12), 4861–4867 (1972). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.6.4861

S. P. Lochab, A. Pandey, P. D. Sahare, R. S. Chauhan, N. Salah, R. Ranjan, Phys. Status Solidi A, 204(7), 2416–2425 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1002/pssa.200622487

C. F. May, J. A. Partridge, J. Chem. Phys., 40, 1401–1409 (1964). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1725324

E. F. Mische, S. W. S. Mckeever, Radiat. Prot. Dosim., 29(3), 159–175 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a080548

M. Prokic, Nucl. Instrum. Methods, 175, 83–86 (1980). https://doi.org/10.1016/0029-554X(80)90262-1

P. D. Sahare, M. Singh, P. Kumar, J. Lumin., 160, 158–164 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlumin.2014.11.042

M. Santiago, C. Graseli, E. Caseli, M. Lester, A. Lavat, F.Spano, Phys. Stat. Sol. (a), 185(2), 285–289 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1002/1521-396X(200106) 185:2<285::AID-PSSA285>3.0.CO;2-9

L. F. Souza, P. L. Antonio, L. V. E. Caldas, D. N. Souza, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, 784, 9–13 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2014.12.030

A. K. Subanakov, Zh. G. Bazarova, A. I. Nepomnyschih, A. V. Perevalov and B. G. Bazarov, Inorg. Mater., 50(5), 485–488 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1134/S0020168514050185

J. H. Schulman, R. D. Kirk, E. J. West, In Proc. Int. Conf. on Luminescence Dosimetry, US AEC Symposium series CONF-650637 (pp. 113–117). Stanford University, USA (1967).

D. I. Shahare, S. J. Dhoble, S. V. Moharil, J. Mater. Sci. Lett., 12, 1873–1874 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00540016

M. Takenaga, O. Yamamoto, T. Yamashita, Nucl. Instrum. Methods, 175, 77–78 (1980). https://doi.org/10.1016/0029-554X(80)90259-1

E. G. Yukihara, E. D. Milliken, B. A. Doull, J. Lumin., 154, 251–259 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlumin.2014.04.038

Issue

Vol 6 No 1 (2018)

How to Cite

O Legorreta-Alba; E Cruz-Zaragoza; D Díaz; J Marcazzó. Synthesis of MgB4O7:Dy3+and Thermoluminescent Characteristics at Low Doses of Beta Radiation. J. Nucl. Phy. Mat. Sci. Rad. A. 2018, 6, 71-76.