The Yield of Oxidation of Ferrous Sulfate in Acid Solution by High-Energy Cathode Rays

Abstract

Articles you may be interested inComparison of ferrous sulfate (Fricke) and ionization dosimetry for highenergy photon and electron beams Med.An absolute determination of the yield of the ferrous sulfate radiation dosimeter has been made by delivering to the solution a measured charge of cathode rays at known energies of 1 or 2 Mev. Appropriate small corrections have been made for backscattering, window absorption and, bremsstrahlung. The result, G= 15.6±0.5, is in complete agreement with Hochanadel's calorimetric determination of the yield, but disagrees by 30 percent with the most widely used value obtained by cavity ion chamber comparison.

Mean atomic number and backscattered electron coefficient calculations for some materials with low mean atomic number

“…No formula correctly predicts the sequence of BSE signal level modes shown in Table I: neither did they give similar values for any of the compounds. The formulae of Büchner (1973), Hohn and Niedrig (1972), and Joyet et al (1953) generally give much lower values of mean atomic number, and values from Everhart's (1960) method were substantially larger than those obtained following Müller (1954) and Saldick and Allen (1954).…”

“…1 a-d). The formulae of Müller (1954) and Saldick and Allen (1954) fit loosely to a straight line, but with a large disparity between the (continuous) line joining the polymers and that (dotted) joining the ionic crystalline materials and the elements. The difference between the two material groups is yet more marked with the Büchner (1973), Hohn and Niedrig (1972), and Joyet et al(1953) equation, as well as that of Everhart (1960).…”

“…There is TABLE II The mean atomic number calculated for the compounds shown in Table I, using the four methods described in Eqs. (1)-(4) Joyet et al (1953) Everhart Hohn and(1960) Saldick andNiedrig (1972) cit Name Müller (1954) Allen (1954) Saldick and Allen (1954); (c) Büchner (1973), Hohn and Niedrig (1972); and Joyet et al (1953); and (d) Everhart (1960) cit Joy (1995a). Polymeric compounds are joined by a solid line; the elements and crystalline materials are joined with a dashed line; the three simulated samples of bone are marked by s. a marked separation between the curve (the continuous line) joining the data for the polymers and the (dashed) line joining the elements and crystalline materials when using the formulae of Herrmann and Reimer (1984) and Wittry (1957): see Figure 2a and c, respectively.…”

“…The simplest method is that by Müller (1954) and Lloyd (1987). This differs from the formula of Saldick and Allen (1954), which Danguy and Quivy (1956) found to give better results when studying electron backscattering from solutions. Variations on this theme have been given, for example, by Büchner (1973), Hohn and Niedrig (1972), and Joyet et al (1953), and while yet another has been attributed to Everhart (1960) by Joy (1995).…”

A New Model For Electron Probe Quantification

“…We found but a single use, nearly 50 years ago, of an algebraically related formula for the "average Z" of a compound for quantitative backscattering analysis of solutions with a Van de Graaff generator, given without explanation or derivation. 6 Two causes, one historic and the other semantic, of this oversight are suggested. First, studies of the attenuation of x-rays and particles by matter predate the discovery of the neutron by Chadwick in 1932, and thus, of necessity, were mass-based.…”