Neutron radiography working group test programme

By
Published by

Nuclear energy and safety
Published : Tuesday, May 08, 2012
Reading/s : 9
Origin : EU Bookshop, http://bookshop.europa.eu/
Number of pages: 124
See more See less

• w *
* *
*
* •
+ + *
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
nuclear science
and technology
NEUTRON RADIOGRAPHY
WORKING GROUP
TEST PROGRAMME Commission of the European Communities
nuclear science
and technology
NEUTRON RADIOGRAPHY
WORKING GROUP
TEST PROGRAMME
J. C. Domanus
Risø National Laboratory
DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark
Order No. B004762
FINAL REPORT
(Shortened Version)
The part of the work which was carried out at
Risø National Laboratory, Denmark
has been performed at the request of the Commission of the European Communities
(Joint Research Centre, Petten Establishment)
PAPL EUR~P. B"~\
N.C./CC*-'
Directorate-General Science.
Research and Development
CLLIIR19191FN MARCH 1989 í Published by the
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
Directorate-General
Telecommunications, Information Industries and innovation
L-2920 Luxembourg
LEGAL NOTICE
Neither the Commission of the European Communities nor any person acting
on behalf of then is responsible for the use which might be made of
the following information
Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication
Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1989
ISBN 92-825-9441 -6 Catalogue number: CD-NA-12121 -EN-C
© ECSC-EEC-EAEC, Brussels ' Luxembourg, 1989
Printed in the Netherlands Contents
Page
1 . Introduction 2
Part I: Test Items, Exposure and Recording Techniques,
Measurements 3
2 . Items and Materials for the Test Program
2.1. Beam purity indicator - BPI
2.2. Beam purity indicator-fuel BPI-F 7
2.3. Sensitivity indicator - SI 9
2.4. Calibration fuel pin - CFP-E1
3 . Detection Systems and Exposure Technique 11
3.1. Detection systems H
3.2. Exposure technique
4 . Scope of the Test Program3
5 . Film Density Measurements5
5.1. Background film densities 1
5.2. Beam purity indicator - BPI
5.3. Beam purity indicator-fuel - BPI-F6
6 . Visual Inspection of the SI
7 . Presentation of Test Results8
8. Dimensional Measurements 20
9 . Amount of Work Done3
Part II: Assessment of the Use of the BPI, BPI-F and SI 29
10. The Indicators
11. Assessment of Results Reached with the BPI and BPI-F 29
12.t of Results Reached with the SI 3Page
Part III: Assessment of Dimensional Measurements 39
13. Scope of the Assessment and Presentation of Results 3
14. General Comparison of Measuring Results 41
15. Different Exposure Techniques3
15.1. Direct method
15.2. Transferd
15.3. Exposures on silver halide films 4
15.4. Track-etch method 4
16. Viewing Techniques8
16.1. Direct viewing
16.2. Copies on SO015 (or 4148) film
16.3. Viewing through polarizing filters 49
16.4. Comparison of different viewing techniques 4
17. Influence of Processing 50
18. Results from Different NR Facilities3
19. Different Kinds of Dimensions9
19.1. Axial dimensions
19.2. Radials 64
19.3. Average standard deviations
20. Human and Instrument Factors
20.1. Human factor 71
20.2. Instrument factor
Part IV: Conclusions6
21. Use of the BPI and BPI-F
22. Use of the SI 7
22.1. Al gaps
22.2. Holes under acrylic steps
22.3. Holes under lead steps7
23. Geometric Considerations
23.1. Radiographic unsharpness
23.2. Dimensional distortion 78
24. General Comparison9
25. Exposure Techniques 81
25.1. Direct method with the Gd converter
25.2. Transferd with the Dyr
ii Page
25.3. Exposures on silver halide film 81
25.4. Track-etch method on nitrocellulose2
26. Viewing Techniques , 8
27. Influence of Processing
28. Presentation of Results3
28.1. General comparison
28.2. Different exposure techniques4
28.3.t viewings of the nitrocellulose film 8
28.4. Influence of processing 8
28.5. Results from different NR facilities
28.6. Detectors and measuring instruments 90
29. Different Kinds of Dimensions
29.1. Average standard deviations
29.1.1. Axial dimensions
29.1.2. Radials6
29.2. Different measuring methods7
29.2.1. Axial measurements
29.2.2. Radials
30. Influence of Different Factors on Measuring Accuracy 103
30.1. Human factor 10
30.2. Instrument factor4
31. Transfer vs. Track-Etch Method
32. Image Quality Standards5
33. Summary of Conclusions 10
34. Results of Other Investigations7
34.1. Work done at Risø National Laboratory
34.2. Other work
34.3. Measuring instruments8
Acknowledgements9
References HO
m Illustrations
Page
Fig. 1. NRWG beam purity indicator BPI 4
Fig. 2. BPI configurations 5
Fig. 3.I according to ASTM E545-81 and 86 6
Fig. 4. NRWG beam purity indicator fuel - BPI-F 7
Fig. 5. BPI-F configurations 8
Fig. 6. SI according to ASTM E545-81 and 86 9
Fig. 7. NRWG calibration fuel pin CFP-E1 10
Fig. 8. Object configuration2
Fig. 9. Identification code
Fig. 10. Location of holes in the SI7
Fig. 11. Magnification factor- M 2
Fig. 12. Thermal neutron content and mean background film densities 3
Fig. 13. Axial projection 4
Fig. 14. Radialn1
Fig. 15. Standard deviations for general comparison
Fig. 16.ds for the direct method4
Fig. 17. Standard deviations for the transferd5
Fig. 18.ds for silver halide films « 46
Fig. 19. Standard deviations for the track-etch method 4
Fig. 20. Direct viewing of nitrocellulose film8
Fig. 21. Copies on SO015 (or 4148)9
Fig. 22. Viewing through polarizing filters 50
Fig. 23. Influence of processing 5
Fig. 24. Comparison of etching parameters2
Fig. 25. Axial delta for pellet lengths of 02 GE(PP) 6
Fig. 26.l deltas for pellet-to-pellet gaps of 02 GE(PP)
Fig. 27. Axial delta for pellet lengths ofallNR facilities
Fig. 28. Axial deltas fort gaps of all NR facilities (PP)3
Fig. 29. Radial delta for pellet diameters of 02 GE (PP)5
Fig. 30.l deltas for fuel-to-clad gaps of 02 GE (PP)6
Fig. 31. Radial delta for pellet diameters of all NR facilities (PP)7
Fig. 32.l deltas for fuel-to-clad gaps ofallNRs (PP)8
Fig. 33. Geometric unsharpness 7
Fig. 34. General comparison of results 83
Fig. 35. Comparison of different exposure techniques
Fig. 36.n oft viewings of nitrocellulose film 8
Fig. 37.n of processing at centers and Risø
Fig. 38. Comparison of etching parameters7
Fig. 39. Relation between the general standard deviation and L/D8
Fig. 40.nn theld deviations and C, S, 7 and category values 89
Fig. 41. Standard deviations for axial measurements 9
Fig. 42.ds for axials
Fig. 43. Standard deviations for axials 100
Fig. 44.ds for radial measurements1
Fig. 45. Standard deviations for radials2
IV Tables
Page
Table 1. Data and marking of NR facilities 13
Table 2. NRWG test program4
Table 3. Hole sizes7
Table 4. Gap sizes8
Table 5. Presentation of the test results . 19
Table 6. Axial dimensions 21
Table 7. Radials2
Table 8. Exposure and processing of films 2
Table 9. Film density measurements, calculations and assessments5
Table 10. Dimensional measurements performed by profile projectors6
Table 11.lsd with travelling microdensitometers 2
Table 12. Total number of dimensional measurements 2
Table 13. Exposure contributions from BPI and BPI-F readings 30
Table 14. Hole and gap visibility for the SI exposed with5 \im Gd (direct method) 33
Table 15. Hole and gap visibility for the SI exposed with 100 u.m Dy (transfer method) 34
Table 16.e and gapy for the SId with nitrocellulose film
(track-etch method) 36
Table 17. Effective gamma content (%) calculated for the single-coated SR film
exposed with 25 jj.m Gd converter (direct method)8
Table 18. Standard deviations for general comparison 42
Table 19. Standard deviations (A + R) for all film/converter combinations,
measuring methods and NR facilities 54
Table 20. Standard deviations (A) for all,
measuring methods and NR facilities5
Table 21. Standard deviations (R) for all film/converter combinations,
measuring methods and NR facilities
Table 22. Minimum standard deviations for different NR facilities7
Table 23. Minimum standard deviations for different film/converter combinations 58
Table 24. Averageds fort kinds of dimensions 69
Table 25. Standard deviations for axial and radial measurements performed
with different measuring instruments 70
Table 26. Standard deviations (A + R), (A) and (R) for (PP) measurements
of 02 GE radiographs performed in (1A), (IB) and (2B) modes 72
Table 27. Comparison between (1A) and (IB)3
Table 28.n of radial measurements performed at Petten and Risø from
the CNB film exposed at 06 PE PO facility4
Table 29. Comparison between (IB) and (2B)5
Table 30. Geometric unsharpness ug8
Table 31. Positions of the CFP-E1 pellet edges9
Table 32. Penumbras of1 pellets 80
Table 33. Mean silver halide film densities
Table 34. L/D, L and D values for all 11 NR facilities
Table 35. C, S, -y and category values for all 11 NR facilities7
Table 36. Standard deviations (A + R) for all film/converter combinations,
measuring methods and NR facilities 91 Page
Table 37. Standard deviations (A) for all film/converter combinations,
measuring methods and NR facilities 92
Table 38. Standard deviations (R) for all,
measuring methods and NR facilities3
Table 39. Minimum standard deviations for different NR facilities4
Table 40.mds fort film/converter combinations 95
vi

Be the first to leave a comment!!

12/1000 maximum characters.