Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (10)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ferrari, A.
Right arrow Articles by Villari, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ferrari, A.
Right arrow Articles by Villari, R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Radiation Protection Dosimetry 108:91-105 (2004)
© 2004 © Oxford University Press 2004; all rights reserved

Evaluation of the influence of aircraft shielding on the aircrew exposure through an aircraft mathematical model

A. Ferrari1, M. Pelliccioni2,* and R. Villari2

1 CERN, 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland and INFN, Sezione di Milano, via Celoria 16, 20133 Milano, Italy
2 INFN, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, 00044 Frascati, Italy

* Corresponding author: pelliccm{at}lnf.infn.it

In order to investigate the influence of aircraft shielding on the galactic component of cosmic rays, an aircraft mathematical model has been developed by the combinatorial geometry package of the Monte-Carlo transport code FLUKA. The isotropic irradiation of the aircraft in the cosmic ray environment has been simulated. Effective dose and ambient dose equivalent rates have been determined inside the aircraft at several locations along the fuselage, at a typical civil aviation altitude (10 580 m), for vertical cut-off rigidity of 0.4 GV (poles) and 17.6 GV (equator) and deceleration potential of 465 MV. The values of both quantities were generally lower than those in the free atmosphere. They depend, in an intricate manner, on the location within the aircraft, quantity of fuel, number of passengers, etc. The position onboard of crew members should be taken into account when assessing individual doses. Likewise due consideration must be taken when positioning detectors which are used to measure H*(10). Care would be needed to avoid ambiguity when comparing the results of calculation with the experimental data.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
P. Beck, A. Ferrari, M. Pelliccioni, S. Rollet, and R. Villari
FLUKA simulation of TEPC response to cosmic radiation
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 20, 2005; 116(1-4): 327 - 330.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
A. Ferrari, M. Pelliccioni, and R. Villari
A mathematical model of aircraft for evaluating the effects of shielding structure on aircrew exposure
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 20, 2005; 116(1-4): 331 - 335.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
G. Battistoni, A. Ferrari, M. Pelliccioni, and R. Villari
Monte Carlo calculation of the angular distribution of cosmic rays at flight altitudes
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 6, 2004; 112(3): 331 - 343.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
R. H. Thomas
Standards for standard-makers? A testing time
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, July 1, 2004; 109(4): 277 - 289.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
M. Pelliccioni
The impact of ICRP publication 92 on the conversion coefficients in use for cosmic ray dosimetry
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, July 1, 2004; 109(4): 303 - 309.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
D. T. Bartlett
Radiation protection aspects of the cosmic radiation exposure of aircraft crew
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, July 1, 2004; 109(4): 349 - 355.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.