Paper detail

Radiation Damage and Recovery Properties of Common Plastics PEN (Polyethylene Naphthalate) and PET (Polyethylene Terephthalate) Using a 137Cs Gamma Ray Source Up To 1 MRad and 10 MRad

Polyethylene naphthalate (PEN) and polyethylene teraphthalate (PET) are cheap and common polyester plastics used throughout the world in the manufacturing of bottled drinks, containers for foodstuffs, and fibers used in clothing. These plastics are also known organic scintillators with very good scintillation properties. As particle physics experiments increase in energy and particle flux density, so does radiation exposure to detector materials. It is therefore important that scintillators be tested for radiation tolerance at these generally unheard of doses. We tested samples of PEN and PET using laser stimulated emission on separate tiles exposed to 1 MRad and 10 MRad gamma rays with a 137Cs source. PEN exposed to 1 MRad and 10 MRad emit 71.4% and 46.7% of the light of an undamaged tile, respectively, and maximally recover to 85.9% and 79.5% after 5 and 9 days, respectively. PET exposed to 1 MRad and 10 MRad emit 35.0% and 12.2% light, respectively, and maximally recover to 93.5% and 80.0% after 22 and 60 days, respectively.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.