Calibration and simulation of a silicon dosemeter for ambient dose equivalent in low-earth orbit space

Sukwon Youn; Uk-Won Nam; Sunghwan Kim; Hongjoo Kim; Won-Kee Park; Jongdae Sohn; Bongkon Moon; Insoo Jun; Sung-Joon Ye

doi:10.1093/rpd/ncad226

Calibration and simulation of a silicon dosemeter for ambient dose equivalent in low-earth orbit space

Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2023 Oct 18;199(17):2118-2125. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncad226.

Authors

Sukwon Youn¹, Uk-Won Nam², Sunghwan Kim³, Hongjoo Kim⁴, Won-Kee Park², Jongdae Sohn², Bongkon Moon², Insoo Jun⁵, Sung-Joon Ye^{1

6

7}

Affiliations

¹ Department of Applied Bioengineering and Research Institute for Convergence Science, Graduate School of Convergence Science and Technology, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea.
² Space Science Division, Korea Astronomy and Space Science Institute, Daejeon 34055, Korea.
³ Department of Radiological Science, Cheongju University, Cheongju 28503, Korea.
⁴ Department of Physics, Kyungpook National University, Daegu 41566, Korea.
⁵ Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91109, United States.
⁶ Advanced Institute of Convergence Technology, Seoul National University, Suwon 16229, Korea.
⁷ Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul 03080, Korea.

PMID: 37581005
DOI: 10.1093/rpd/ncad226

Abstract

A particle dosemeter (PD) is a payload of NEXTSat-2 in the low-earth orbit (LEO). The absorbed dose in LEO needs to be converted into the ambient dose equivalent (H*(10)). Due to a mixed field in LEO, the calibration factors (klow and khigh) should be determined for the low-and high-linear energy transfers (LET) (below and above 1.5 keV/μm), respectively. The PD was irradiated with a 137Cs source at the Korea Radiation Solution facility to obtain H*(10) and absorbed doses. However due to the lack of sources for the high-LET calibration, H*(10) and an absorbed dose were calculated by simulating PD for the high-energy neutron field at CERN-EU high-energy Reference Field. The measured klow of PD had a difference of 5.1% and 9.5% from the calculated value of PD and the measured value of Liulin detectors, respectively. However, a difference in khigh between PD and Liulin was explained by the contribution of non-neutron components to Liulin in the measurements.

Abstract

Grants and funding