eS Be ys we pittttdated SO acca
pata 5 NaanST gta
<
sie, Caneel penaltel tiledstoiSd alle ate Satathemetsnineteen om
delivered to the surface of th expcsed individual at a height of 3
fect above the ;lane cy photons with energies in each of these inter-
ment of source area,
4
a
fae te
at
wm
We €netsgy, clolating the dose per vhoton con=
ticn of the radiation frei each incre-
cree
oe
me
¢
t
1,
For each
tributed ty the un
hy
“his requires an expression involving “true and
total absorpidun ea :ificients in air, expcnential inteural, source
energy, and Fraction of
2,0
foreach sevree
@ cle to unscattered ie tons of that energy.
enerwy, caleilating a veishting factor (er
relative dosé) by mubltivsy ng the dose per photon in Step 1, above, by
ine mumber of source i hots
with that enerpy,
3,
for each auurce eniryry, Ggtinating the fraction of dose due
to tource photons vrigihaciy ar that eneroy but ceyraced by scattcring
to energics less tion each Uf 6 gut of arbitrarily chosen erercyy vale
dug to all j;hetons with energies up
ty eieh chisen
atue by souming the product of Steps 2 aad 3,
above, for vach
wriginal courece enerwies
The result is an inte ral or cunsulative airedoge Spectrum; i.e,,
plot cf proton eLer.y versus the airedose resulting from all jhotons
froa zero to that erarcuy,
from this, a rou,h difverential dose histegratis obtained by suttraeting ordinates on the inteyral curve at the
ndpoints of each chosen ener-y interval,
The use of graphical and
eriecal .ebthodsé maxes the “toon ique quite applicatle to the deterninaS se-cnerey distributions.
tion of a number
Figure 4.2 of heference 16 depicts the cifferential air-cose dis~
tritucvion for the whet LE + ou hour data, in percent of dose per 0,05
3
interval versu
ner oy in
5
Mes
Dose ope ra baced on the later
data differea cr ‘erly in the low ener zy region. The relative dose due
to energy up to 100 kev averared about lO percent as compared to 12
percent in the above cistribution, Three other cose distritutions
were calculated frem Shet
and later Shot 1 data and are shewn in
Figures lel, U2, and 3, Figure 4.1, using the data of Tatle h.2,
Mey
4
5
:
vals (Figures hal, b.2, and 4.3),
The process ecnsiets es entially of the following steps
wm
th
Co
Ne
is an ex trene case with respect to
the low eneryy component,
ALL
other samples for all the shots lie between this and Figure 4.2 of
Reference 16, Fiures 4.2 and 4,3 give the dose distritutions for the
H + k,l and H+ 5.2 day times on the other Shot 1 sample, Figure 4.2
also indicates estinated error in rorticns below 0.3 Mev.
The dose spectr: are all seen to zgreup roughly into three regions
with peaks at LOO, 72C, and 15G0 kev,
Since the cpectra are these of
h to § day old fissica jreducts, at which time the Npe9 activity is
at its preatest relative value, the low enersy proportion die to this
nuclide 4s hiyher than it was at H+ 2 days when the Npe3? component
was still increacing (Figure 3.1).
Laced on this distritution, dos4ye
and meter corrections for the low energy region during the exjsure
period aro therelZsre gencrous, Luring the several days tofore and
after this tine the ceneral spectrin shipe apparently did not vary
erossly in the higher enervy regions, & total correction factor for
the survey instr.vents 24S ‘there fore calculated for each of these spec-
tra and was asswiud to hold for the period tetween fallout and surveys,
as ig descrited in Chapter 5,
i9
;, eas