Published 1998 | Version v1
Report

Testing the characteristics of a neutron detector array by Monte-Carlo simulations

  • 1. Department of Applied Physics, Horia Hulubei National Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering, PO Box MG-6, RO-76900 Bucharest (Romania)
  • 2. Department of Experimental Basic Research, National Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering, PO Box MG-6, RO-76900 Bucharest (Romania)
  • 3. LPC-ISMRA, 6 Bd. Marechal Juin, 14050 Caen CEDEX (France)

Description

The characteristics of the neutron detector array TONNERRE have been determined experimentally via preliminary tests with a 252Cf source and by means of simulation using a modified version of the Monte-Carlo program of Cecil et al. Of particular interest is the intrinsic detection efficiency. As it is well known, the neutron detection efficiency for one element of the detector array, depends on the threshold for the light collection (bias) expressed in energy electron equivalent. The experimental efficiencies for five neutron energies and for a bias of 80 KeV ee are presented. The efficiencies for three thresholds and neutron energies between 1-10 MeV are simulated. The neutron energy is determined by TOF over a flight path, s, and the relative energy resolution is given as a function of σs and σt (the uncertainties in the flight path), s (uniform as a function of depth) and flight time, t. The mean time resolution was 1.13 ns which gives a TOF resolution of 1.48 ns. That gives a relative energy resolution which increases slowly from 2% at En=1 MeV to 3.5% at 5 MeV. Position resolution along one module is 12 cm. To help boosting the efficiency, the elements can be arranged in two layers, but that complicates the analysis by enhancing the effects of cross-talk and out-scattering. Cross-talk is the familiar problem of one neutron creating signals in two separate detectors. In out-scattering, a neutron scatters from the non-active part of a detector and is then detected in a different detector with incorrect position and TOF. While methods exist for identifying and eliminating cross-talk events, there are no methods available for identifying out-scattered events. For the case of two layers and a bias of 80 KeV ee, simulated efficiency of two superposed elements versus neutron energy, the out-scattering probability and the probability of cross-talk are presented. The out-scattering probability comes mainly from events when neutrons scatter first on carbon nuclei in one element, without giving a detected signal and then are detected in a second element. In the experimental tests the sources exhibit a continuous spectrum. These tests are thus projected to be performed again, as part of the commissioning of the array, under beam conditions, with nuclei having a number of well established decay branches of relatively narrow width (15B, 16C and/or 17N). Similarly, it is hoped to evaluate the multi-neutron detection capability of the array during commissioning with a beam of 14Be (P2n = 5%) or 11Li (P2n = 4%). (authors)

Availability note (English)

Available from author(s) or from Office of Documentation, Publication and Printing, Horia Hulubei National Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering, PO Box MG-6, RO-76900 Bucharest (RO)
Part of:
NIPNE-Scientific Report 1997

Additional details

Publishing Information

Imprint Title
Report (Progress Report)
Imprint Pagination
285 p.
Journal Page Range
p. 152
ISSN
1454-2714
Report number
IFIN-HH-AR--1997

INIS

Country of Publication
Romania
Country of Input or Organization
Romania
INIS RN
31026588
Subject category
S46: INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY;
Resource subtype / Literary indicator
Non-conventional Literature, Progress Report
Descriptors DEI
COMPUTERIZED SIMULATION; ENERGY RESOLUTION; KEV RANGE 10-100; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NEUTRON DETECTORS; PERFORMANCE TESTING; POSITION SENSITIVE DETECTORS; PROGRESS REPORT; TIME-OF-FLIGHT METHOD
Descriptors DEC
CALCULATION METHODS; DOCUMENT TYPES; ENERGY RANGE; KEV RANGE; MEASURING INSTRUMENTS; RADIATION DETECTORS; RESOLUTION; SIMULATION; TESTING

Optional Information

Notes
2 refs., 2 figs.