Measurements of energetic particle radiation in transit to mars on the mars science laboratory

Science

Volumn 340, Issue 6136, 2013, Pages 1080-1084

  Zeitlin, C ^a   Hassler, D M ^a   Cucinotta, F A ^b   Ehresmann, B ^a   Wimmer Schweingruber, R F ^c   Brinza, D E ^d   Kang, S ^d   Weigle, G ^e   Bottcher S ^c   Bohm E ^c   Burmeister, S ^c   Guo, J ^b   Kohler J ^c   Martin, C ^c   Posner, A ^f   Rafkin, S ^a   Reitz, G ^g  

^a SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b NASA JOHNSON SPACE CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF KIEL   (Germany)

^d CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^e SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^f NASA HEADQUARTERS   (United States)

^g GERMAN AEROSPACE CENTER DLR   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ASSESSMENT METHOD; DATA SET; ENERGY EFFICIENCY; LABORATORY METHOD; LINEARITY; MARS; MEASUREMENT METHOD; PARTICULATE MATTER; RADIATION BALANCE;

ARTICLE; ASTRONOMY; BIOLOGICAL ACTIVITY; CANCER RISK; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COSMIC RADIATION; DOSIMETRY; HEALTH HAZARD; HUMAN; IONIZING RADIATION; LINEAR ENERGY TRANSFER; PARTICLE RADIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION HAZARD; RISK ASSESSMENT; SOLAR CYCLE; SOLAR ENERGY; SPACE FLIGHT;

EID: 84878352790     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: 10959203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.1235989     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Radiation Hazards to Crews on Interplanetary Missions (National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1996).
2. F. A. Cucinotta, M. Durante, Lancet Oncol. 7, 431 (2006).
3. Quantities and Units in Radiation Protection Dosimetry (ICRU Report 51, International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, Bethesda, MD, 1993).
4. Recommendations of Dose Limits for Low Earth Orbit (NCRP Report No. 132, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Bethesda, MD, 2000).
5. Information Needed to Make Radiation Protection Recommendations for Space Missions Beyond Low-Earth Orbit (NCRP Report No. 153, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Bethesda, MD, 2006).
6. International Commission on Radiological Protection, Ann. ICRP 21, 1 (1991).
7. Health Risks From Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, BEIR VII Phase 2 (National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2006).
8. The full spacecraft model contains thousands of components, hence the need for simplification. At present, only a subset of materials within the charged particle telescope's field of view is included in the shielding model, the current state of which is described in the supplementary materials.
9. S. L. Koontz, P. A. Boeder, C. Pankop, B. Reddell, "The ionizing radiation environment on the International Space Station: Performance vs. expectations for avionics and materials, " in Radiation Effects Data Workshop, 2005 (IEEE, 2005), pp. 110-116.
10. J. W. Wilson et al., Galactic and Solar Cosmic Ray Shielding in Deep Space (NASA Technical Paper No. 3682, NASA, Hampton, VA, 1997).
11. D. M. Hassler et al., Space Sci. Rev. 170, 503 (2012).
12. A. Posner et al., Adv. Space Res. 36, 1426 (2005).
13. Dose rates as measured by the RAD include particles originating from the MSL's power supply, a radioisotope thermoelectric generator that emits a steady background of neutrons and g rays. These contributions were measured during ground tests and were subtracted from the results presented here. More details about the background subtraction are given in the supplementary materials.
14. Before 27 January 2012, the RAD observed with a 465-s cadence and nearly 100% duty cycle. Subsequently, RAD observations were 929 s in duration, with a 50% duty cycle, reducing the data volume by a factor of 4 to accommodate steadily decreasing telemetry bandwidth. At the same time as the observing cadence was changed, the sensitivity of the plastic scintillator was increased, resulting in a slightly higher value of the GCR dose rate measured by that detector (~10%, visible in Fig. 1).
15. Simulations indicate that the average value of the ratio dE/dx in silicon and LET in water is 1.6 for GCRs, with an associated uncertainty of T15%. Proper calculation of the range of this ratio must account for the effects of straggling, which is a significant factor in thin silicon detectors such as those in the RAD. The LET conversion factor in turn yields a dose conversion factor of 1.45.
16. The spacecraft shielding was equal for both detectors, but the plastic scintillator is additionally shielded by 1.2 cm of plastic scintillator below and on the sides and 2.8 cm of cesium iodide on top. Proton energies required to penetrate these materials are about 35 and 95 MeV, respectively, as compared to about 10 MeV required for a particle in the telescope field of view to reach the silicon detector used for dosimetry.
17. T. Onsager et al., "Operational uses of the GOES energetic particle detectors," in Proceedings of SPIE 2812, GOES-8 and Beyond (SPIE, Bellingham, WA 1996), p. 281.
18. The P7 channel measures the proton flux between 165 and 500 MeV. It was chosen for comparison because the reported ratio of peak flux to quiet-time flux was similar to the ratio of peak dose rate to quiet-time dose rate seen in the RAD in the 27 January event. This comparison is not intended to suggest that the P7 channel and the RAD (under shielding) had similar sensitivities in terms of their energy thresholds or ranges.
19. The use of the quiet-time flux of GOES differential proton flux channels is problematic, especially for the higher-energy channels. The differential fluxes are obtained by subtracting fluxes measured in the various integral channels. As there are by definition no negative fluxes, the algorithm used to obtain differential fluxes assumes a background level that cannot be crossed, as discussed in (20). Despite this caveat, the dearth of higher-energy proton data from other spacecraft sources led us to arbitrarily scale the GOES data for comparison to the RAD data.
20. A. Posner, Space Weather 5, S05001 (2007).
21. E. N. Parker, Astrophys. J. 128, 664 (1958).
22. N. Schwadron et al., Space Weather 8, S00E04 (2010).
23. S. McKenna-Lawlor, P. Gonçalves, A. Keating, G. Reitz, D. Matthiä, Planet. Space Sci. 63-64, 123 (2012).
24. F. A. Cucinotta, L. Chappell, M. Y. Kim, Space Radiation Cancer Risk Projections and Uncertainties-2010 [NASA Technical Paper 2011-216155, NASA Scientific and Technical Information (STI) Program, Hampton, VA, 2011].
25. F. A. Cucinotta, L. Chappell, M. Y. Kim, Space Radiation Cancer Risk Projections and Uncertainties-2012 (NASA Technical Paper 2013-217375, NASA STI Program, Hampton, VA, 2013).
26. G. D. Badhwar, P. M. O'Neill, Nucl. Tracks Radiat. Meas. 20, 403 (1992).
27. P. M. O'Neill, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 57, 3148 (2010).
28. J. W. Wilson et al., HZETRN: Description of a Free-Space Ion and Nucleon Transport and Shielding Computer Program (NASA Technical Paper 3495, NASA STI Program, Hampton, VA, 1995).
29. F. A. Cucinotta et al., Radiat. Meas. 41, 1235 (2006).
30. T. Slaba, S. R. Blattnig, F. F. Badavi, J. Comput. Phys. 229, 9397 (2010).
31. T. Sato, A. Endo, L. Sihver, K. Niita, Radiat. Environ. Biophys. 50, 115 (2011).
32. S. K. Aghara, S. R. Blattnig, J. W. Norbury, R. C. Singleterry, Nucl. Instrum. Methods B264, 1115 (2009).
33. R. B. Norman, S. R. Blattnig, G. De Angelis, F. F. Badavi, J. W. Norbury, Adv. Space Res. 50, 146 (2012).
34. J. Köhler et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods B269, 2641 (2011).
35. F. A. Cucinotta, L. J. Chappell, Radiat. Res. 176, 102 (2011).
36. B. G. Drake, S. J. Hoffman, D. W. Beatty, "Human exploration of Mars, Design Reference Architecture 5.0," in Aerospace Conference, 2010 IEEE (IEEE, 2010), pp. 1-24.
37. For 2012, the average modulation potential derived from the Earth-based Oulu neutron monitor (38) was less than 700 MV, as compared to values of 1000 MV or greater seen in previous solar maximum periods. The full range of the modulation potential (F) during the cruise as measured by the Oulu neutron monitor is available at http://cosmicrays.oulu.fi/phi/Phi-mon.txt.
38. I. G. Usoskin, K. Alanko-Huotari, G. A. Kovaltsov, K. Mursula, J. Geophys. Res. 110, A12108 (2005).
39. A. I. Mrigakshi, D. Matthiä, T. Berger, G. Reitz, R. F. Wimmer-Schweingruber, J. Geophys. Res. 117, A08109 (2012).