Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T22:48:38.686Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Surface and Underground Ultra Low-Level Liquid Scintillation Spectrometry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

Wolfango Plastino  and
Lauri Kaihola
Wolfango Plastino*
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, University of Roma Tre, via della Vasca Navale, 84, I-00146 Rome, Italy; also: INFN, Section of Roma III, via della Vasca Navale, 84, I-00146 Rome, Italy.
Lauri Kaihola
Affiliation:
PerkinElmer Life and Analytical Sciences, Wallac Oy, P.O.B. 10, FIN-20101 Turku, Finland.
*
Corresponding author. Email: plastino@fis.uniroma3.it.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Cosmic background and its variation have been removed in the Gran Sasso National Laboratory (National Institute of Nuclear Physics) by its 1400-m rock overburden. Stable, high-performance liquid scintillation counting conditions are obtained when any remaining variable components of the environmental background, such as radon, are eliminated. The ultra low-level liquid scintillation spectrometer Quantulus™ has an anti-Compton guard detector (guard for short) that allows monitoring of gamma radiation in the background. The guard detector efficiency in radiocarbon background reduction is 8% in the Gran Sasso National Laboratory, while 80% is observed in surface laboratories. Thus, atmospheric pressure variations in surface laboratories cause variation in cosmic radiation flux. The Quantulus anti-Compton detector is highly efficient in detecting cosmic radiation, and the sample count rate remains stable in long-term counting. Also, correlation of sample backgrounds with environmental gamma radiation in various laboratories is examined.

Type
Articles
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 46 , Issue 1: Proceedings of the 18th International Radiocarbon Conference (Part 1 of 2), Conference Editors: Nancy Beavan Athfield, Rodger J Sparks , 2004 , pp. 97 - 104
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

References

Aiginger, H, Maringer, FJ, Rank, D, Unfried, E. 1986. A new laboratory for routine low-level measurements (BVFA Arsenal, Wien). Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 17:435–7.Google Scholar
Buzinny, M, Skripkin, V. 1995. Newly designed 0.8-mL teflon vial for micro-volume radiocarbon dating. Radiocarbon 37(2):743–7.Google Scholar
Haas, H. 1979. Specific problems with liquid scintillation counting of small benzene volumes and background count rates estimation. In: Berger, R, Suess, HE, editors. Radiocarbon Dating. Berkeley: University of California Press. p 246–55.Google Scholar
Hogg, A. 1992. Assessment of 0.3-mL minivials for radiocarbon dating by liquid scintillation counting of benzene. Radiocarbon 34(3):389–93.Google Scholar
Kaihola, L, Kojola, H, Kananen, R. 1986. Low-level liquid scintillation counter performance in a low-level surface laboratory. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 17:509–10.Google Scholar
Kaihola, L. 1991. Liquid scintillation counting performance using glass vials in the Wallac 1220 Quantulus. In: Ross, H, Noakes, JE, Spaulding, JD, editors. Liquid Scintillation Counting and Organic Scintillators. Chelsea: Lewis Publishers. p 495–500.Google Scholar
Kaihola, L, Kojola, H, Heinonen, A. 1992. A minivial for small sample 14C dating. Radiocarbon 34(3):402–5.Google Scholar
Kaihola, L. 1993. Glass vial background reduction in liquid scintillation counting. The Science of the Total Environment 130/131:297–304.Google Scholar
Kaihola, L. 1996. Direct detection of radon gas in air using a liquid scintillation counter. In: Technologically Enhanced Natural Radiation by Non-Uranium Mining. Katowice: Central Mining Institute. p 169–75.Google Scholar
Kalin, RM, Long, A. 1989. Radiocarbon dating with the Quantulus in an underground counting laboratory: performance and background sources. Radiocarbon 31(3):359–67.Google Scholar
Niese, S, Köhler, M, Gleisberg, B. 1998. Low-level-counting techniques in the underground laboratory “Felsenkeller” in Dresden. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry 233(1–2):167–72.Google Scholar
Plastino, W, Bella, F. 2001. Radon groundwater monitoring at underground laboratories of Gran Sasso (Italy). Geophysical Research Letters 28(14):2675–78.Google Scholar
Plastino, W, Kaihola, L, Bartolomei, P, Bella, F. 2001. Cosmic background reduction in the radiocarbon measurement by liquid scintillation spectrometry at the underground laboratory of Gran Sasso. Radiocarbon 43(2A):157–61.Google Scholar
Polach, H, Gover, J, Kojola, H, Heinonen, A. 1983. An ideal vial and cocktail for low-level scintillation counting: copper-shielded PTFE (Teflon) and butyl-PBD. In: McQuarrie, SA, Ediss, C, Wiebe, LI, editors. Advances in Scintillation Counting. Edmonton: University of Alberta Press. p 508–25.Google Scholar
Polach, H, Kojola, H, Nurmi, J, Soini, E. 1984. Multiparameter liquid scintillation spectrometry. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 5:439–42.Google Scholar